Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

malthaussen

(18,626 posts)
6. Nope.
Fri Aug 29, 2014, 12:09 PM
Aug 2014

I'll put it this way: instinct is not subject to justification. In a firefight, one reacts, one doesn't cogitate. Where the question of justification comes in is in asking whether gunplay should be initiated to begin with. Once that decision has been made, however, it is a pretty vain hope to regulate it, especially when the persons involved are civilians who are rarely put in that position to begin with. And police are civilians. Gunplay is only a minor (albeit dramatic) part of their work, and it is not unheard of for a policeman to serve an entire career without ever having to fire a shot. Your really can't train for that kind of situation.

The question should not be: was firing 30 shots excessive? The question should be: was gunfire the only alternative?

-- Mal

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Many ask: Was 30 rounds t...»Reply #6