suicide by cop...

uscitizen said:
right, but was surrounding the house with an armed presence the thing to do in the first place ?
Click to expand...

That is a hard call. Let's say though that you lived in the house behind his? Would you want the police to cover your yard? Now if this were a case where they just busted in the door, I'd agree with 'wrong tactics.'
 
I think not!

uscitizen said:
naah, he just did not have the balls to blow his own brains out , had to push the cops into doing it for him.
Click to expand...


If this were the case...well shit howdy...the insurgents in Iraq could have accomplished this...imho this jerk was on a vendetta...and no one could change his mind...his intent was to take out the police and whoever was in his sights...just food for thought!
 
Excuse me...

Runyon said:
Once again, I find myself in agreement with you, which was a lifesaver since I didn't want to be seconding BB. While I disagree with the comment about the war, it sounds like up until the man aiming at an officer, the cops had just 'sat there', planning on using tear gas soon. Unfortunately the prior shooting, then aiming at an officer precluded alternatives.

Perhaps I'm missing something in the story? Where did any officer get close enough to administer a taser? :confused: Would you expect officers to attempt to get that close to the man, when shots had already been fired?
Click to expand...



Look ya don't have to like me...but this comment smacks of prejudice...so I am a asshole in your opinion...okay I can live with that...but to dismiss what I say and attach anothers comment to avoid giving credit where credit is do...is as y'all love to say...disingenious:p
 
Battleborne said:
I just brought to your attention that SOP was followed... a true and proven response that is taught in all Police Acadamies...if you reread the original article over 14hrs of contact with the subject was done...There is no proff that the subject was suicidal only that his father said this was the issue...the subject never stated this as far as I can see from the article...but the article does state that the subject stated that he would shoot anyone who tried to enter the house...he also shot randomly at police vehicles outside...endangering the general public...it is a damned if you do and damned if you don't senario...what if the Sheriffs office pulled back and the subject committed suicide ...then they would be damned for lack of action...as it was, they responded using the most effective and taught action...surround,secure,and maintain contact...the subject was the one who fired on the police first...and the response was that as is required..protection of the general public...to serve and protect...it is sad that this person took this action ...why did he not just defect to Canada...rather than take a stand against the public and law enforcement...It appears as if he just wanted to punish the public rather than suicide...if this was his intent he would have just placed the weapon in his mouth and pulled the trigger!
Click to expand...
I understand the SOP. Once again we are talking of two different things. Did he do right by the SOP? Yes. Was this the best result that could possibly have come from this? Doubtful.

So, while you keep dwelling on whether the cop did the right thing by that SOP. I keep dwelling on the future. Is this the best result we could have hoped for? Is there a different way that may have produced a different result? The answer to the first is "no" the second I believe is "yes".

By the current standards and procedures he did the right thing, however the result is less than good. Basically the cops ended up helping a man kill himself, a man who was so weak he couldn't do it himself so they provided him recourse he otherwise wouldn't have had. Shoot, the result may even have been better if the cops never showed up to provide for him the tool he used in his suicide.

Basically, an after the fact look at a problem is not the same thing you are doing. Applying current strategy to this situation in the future is likely to end the same way, especially now that the desperate know that the cops will happily kill them if they just shoot a car and point a gun.

There must be a better way, so we seek a different solution, a different path to hopefully a more successful outcome than this.
 
Battleborne said:
Look ya don't have to like me...but this comment smacks of prejudice...so I am a asshole in your opinion...okay I can live with that...but to dismiss what I say and attach anothers comment to avoid giving credit where credit is do...is as y'all love to say...disingenious:p
Click to expand...

Prejudiced? Where? Guess you have a bit of a problem with inferences. I i*m*p*l*i*e*d I W*A*S a*g*r*e*e*i*n*g with YOU, at least in part.
 
I disagree...strongly..

Damocles said:
I understand the SOP. Once again we are talking of two different things. Did he do right by the SOP? Yes. Was this the best result that could possibly have come from this? Doubtful.

So, while you keep dwelling on whether the cop did the right thing by that SOP. I keep dwelling on the future. Is this the best result we could have hoped for? Is there a different way that may have produced a different result? The answer to the first is "no" the second I believe is "yes".

By the current standards and procedures he did the right thing, however the result is less than good. Basically the cops ended up helping a man kill himself, a man who was so weak he couldn't do it himself so they provided him recourse he otherwise wouldn't have had. Shoot, the result may even have been better if the cops never showed up to provide for him the tool he used in his suicide.

Basically, an after the fact look at a problem is not the same thing you are doing. Applying current strategy to this situation in the future is likely to end the same way, especially now that the desperate know that the cops will happily kill them if they just shoot a car and point a gun.

There must be a better way, so we seek a different solution, a different path to hopefully a more successful outcome than this.
Click to expand...



with your analysis...you being a volunteer fireman and all...would you fail to respond to a fire that had the potential to spread...to save a possible loss of life of another fireman...I think not....hey protical was followed to the cross the "t's' and dot the "I's"..the main function of police is to protect and serve the general public...a response was mandated..there in my opinion was nothing else to do but respond and set up a protective perimeter...this dude took the action regardless of what you perceive could or should have been done...it is a sorry ending...but not the only one with this result...this SOP was formulated with alot of prior experience in this type of response...end of story!
 
Battleborne said:
If this were the case...well shit howdy...the insurgents in Iraq could have accomplished this...imho this jerk was on a vendetta...and no one could change his mind...his intent was to take out the police and whoever was in his sights...just food for thought!
Click to expand...

And he would have likely endangered his fellow troops in his "death wish".
Just desert for thought.
 
Battleborne said:
with your analysis...you being a volunteer fireman and all...would you fail to respond to a fire that had the potential to spread...to save a possible loss of life of another fireman...I think not....hey protical was followed to the cross the "t's' and dot the "I's"..the main function of police is to protect and serve the general public...a response was mandated..there in my opinion was nothing else to do but respond and set up a protective perimeter...this dude took the action regardless of what you perceive could or should have been done...it is a sorry ending...but not the only one with this result...this SOP was formulated with alot of prior experience in this type of response...end of story!
Click to expand...
Rubbish. I have said nothing about not responding other than one sarcastic remark. I said to look for a better response.

You are being deliberately obtuse and missing my point purposefully so you can remain oblivious to a future rather than a past.
 
Naw...

Runyon said:
Prejudiced? Where? Guess you have a bit of a problem with inferences. I i*m*p*l*i*e*d I W*A*S a*g*r*e*e*i*n*g with YOU, at least in part.
Click to expand...



you took a cheap shot at me...it would have been better to just agree with maineman...and not mentioned...***BB**:rolleyes:
 
Once the scene is over with, that we deal with using SOP, we look at it and see if there could be a better response and what we can improve. We do this every time. They too are doing this as we type. I gaurantee it. They may find improvement, they may not.

All we are saying is that we do the same thing. Is this the best result we could hope for? Is there maybe a better way of coming at that situation other than overwhelming force? So on...

Those cops are doing this right now, saying that we are wrong to do it is simply disingenuous.
 
Look damo...

Damocles said:
Rubbish. I have said nothing about not responding other than one sarcastic remark. I said to look for a better response.

You are being deliberately obtuse and missing my point purposefully so you can remain oblivious to a future rather than a past.
Click to expand...


I like you but you are not getting the point...you asked for debate and I complied using past experience in this field...you can't save the world from all fools..anymore than all fires can be put out without the loss of life or property!
 
Battleborne said:
you took a cheap shot at me...it would have been better to just agree with maineman...and not mentioned...***BB**:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Then again, how often your posts would be improved by not mentioning your 'past experiences.' LOL! Then you wouldn't have a thing to post. :cool:
 
Battleborne said:
I like you but you are not getting the point...you asked for debate and I complied using past experience in this field...you can't save the world from all fools..anymore than all fires can be put out without the loss of life or property!
Click to expand...
You aren't getting the point, you clearly aren't. Whether or not fires can all be put out without destruction to private property or life still does not absolve us of a responsibility to seek improvement.

Results are very important in such introspection and discovery. Was this the best result possible? If we do not ask that question then we simply dehumanize ourselves and make ourselves into robots. No improvement can be sought because "this is the SOP"... That is not a valid argument against a search for improvement.
 
Okay then...

Runyon said:
Then again, how often your posts would be improved by not mentioning your 'past experiences.' LOL! Then you wouldn't have a thing to post. :cool:
Click to expand...



Just how does one debate then..should I just makeup BS??? I'm so sorry that I lived a real life...and try to pass on experience...maybe college professors can help you....after all those that can do...those that can't ...well as the old saying goes "TEACH"...lol
 
Battleborne said:
Just how does one debate then..should I just makeup BS??? I'm so sorry that I lived a real life...and try to pass on experience...maybe college professors can help you....after all those that can do...those that can't ...well as the old saying goes "TEACH"...lol
Click to expand...

Grand rejoiner. :rolleyes: You might try joining the 1990's, no doubt you have some catching up to do.
 
Well yeah...

Damocles said:
He would have been kicked out of the service. Suicidal tendencies will net you an RE-4 General Discharge that can later be changed to Honorable.
Click to expand...


But no one knew of this until this case met the end result...no one can read anothers mind!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top