General Discussion

Erich Bloodaxe BSN

(14,733 posts)

32. I would call knives and cars weapons.

Mon Sep 15, 2014, 01:37 PM

Sep 2014

I'd let 'brute strength' be evaluated by an agency independent of the police force, made of of civilians in the community in question as a possible 'weapon'. But if you want to claim you 'saw them reaching for a weapon', you didn't shoot them because you thought they were so big they were going to kill you with 'brute strength'. And it certainly doesn't apply to you shooting a bystander.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

40 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Should officers who discharge a firearm in the line of duty be PERMANENTLY relieved of duty? [View all] IdaBriggs Sep 2014 OP

I agree largely with your "Maybe" option. cali Sep 2014 #1

I am trying to "devil's advocate" for all sides to encourage discussion. IdaBriggs Sep 2014 #19

Maybe, each situation is different. Steroid use, however, should not be tolerated at all. KittyWampus Sep 2014 #2

Some medications definitely impact judgement, including pain medications. IdaBriggs Sep 2014 #33

They should be moved to a desk job. KittyWampus Sep 2014 #39

So you give a cop a gun with the expressed intent B2G Sep 2014 #3

That would be one option - it *used to be* that police officers could go decades IdaBriggs Sep 2014 #5

Maybe. Depends on the situation Scootaloo Sep 2014 #4

I went with "outside peer review" as opposed to "internal peer review." IdaBriggs Sep 2014 #7

So say a cop has a clear shot at an armed kidnapper who is holding hostages. Nye Bevan Sep 2014 #6

What do you think? IdaBriggs Sep 2014 #8

Call me old-fashioned, but I would want him to shoot the bad guy to save the hostages, Nye Bevan Sep 2014 #9

And what if he shoots the wrong person? IdaBriggs Sep 2014 #15

No YarnAddict Sep 2014 #10

Exactly. B2G Sep 2014 #12

"deadly force is absolutely necessary" -- this seems to be the crux of the matter. IdaBriggs Sep 2014 #22

With intensive and proper YarnAddict Sep 2014 #25

May I ask why you preferred the "no" option to the "maybe" option? tkmorris Sep 2014 #35

Because it is a "yes" or "no" question YarnAddict Sep 2014 #38

No because that would be idiotic... Oktober Sep 2014 #11

I asked it in another post, but it seems like you might have some insite into this issue also. IdaBriggs Sep 2014 #16

Same standard we use for everyone else... Oktober Sep 2014 #29

If it's clearly a good shoot that saves lives, why would geek tragedy Sep 2014 #13

"If its a bad shoot, they should go to prison." IdaBriggs Sep 2014 #18

There are varying degrees of criminal culpability geek tragedy Sep 2014 #27

I think the Canadians used to have a system that investigated any Mountie who fired their weapon jwirr Sep 2014 #14

Interesting. Any idea if the program still exists? IdaBriggs Sep 2014 #17

I do not know if it still exists. From what I understand it is based on the same idea as the one in jwirr Sep 2014 #20

I believe every city in the US B2G Sep 2014 #21

Good. However as we are seeing in Ferguson MO - it depends on who reviews the report. jwirr Sep 2014 #24

If that's the issue, then address that B2G Sep 2014 #26

Searching for black & white in a grey world ksoze Sep 2014 #23

Qualified maybe. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Sep 2014 #28

People can kill using other means B2G Sep 2014 #30

I would call knives and cars weapons. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Sep 2014 #32

Perception is a tricky thing... Oktober Sep 2014 #31

Not if the shooting was justified. KamaAina Sep 2014 #34

Two things: Pay cops a lot more, and at the same time demand a lot more of them. True Blue Door Sep 2014 #36

For unjustifiable shoots yes, justifiable ones no jmowreader Sep 2014 #37

No. Some shootings are necessary and justified. hack89 Sep 2014 #40