First  Prev  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  Next  Last
Post Reply Police should not fire unless fired upon
20208 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 8/20/17 , edited 8/20/17

Foxpower93 wrote:


This study boost the statistic of countries with a high level of citizens, naturally that the usa would have less killing by citizen but it doesn't change the fact it have lot of killing.


Keep rationalizing.

2nd amendment in the constitution predates back to English Bill of Rights of 1689. The right to bear arms in the English Bill of Rights of 1689 was put there because King James II had attempted to disarm many Protestants while trying to maintain Catholic control of the state.

History knows that anytime you remove the armaments of its people you are prone and can be subjected to a tyrannical government.

When people say why does history repeat itself is because stupid shit like taking laws that prevented history from repeating itself.
13330 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 8/20/17 , edited 8/20/17

riverjustice wrote:


Foxpower93 wrote:


This study boost the statistic of countries with a high level of citizens, naturally that the usa would have less killing by citizen but it doesn't change the fact it have lot of killing.


Keep rationalizing.

2nd amendment in the constitution predates back to English Bill of Rights of 1689. The right to bear arms in the English Bill of Rights of 1689 was put there because King James II had attempted to disarm many Protestants while trying to maintain Catholic control of the state.

History knows that anytime you remove the armaments of its people you are prone and can be subjected to a tyrannical government.

When people say why does history repeat itself is because stupid shit like taking laws that prevented history from repeating itself.


I know that whatever I say will not change your mind, but I still believe that keeping a law that is 328 years old without questioning it or changing it is kind of simple minded. There is no kings anymore (at least in civilized countries) neither is there need for militia.

But like I said, I had this talk with many other people and whatever I say most people will just disregard it, so I will stop now.

I just can't believe some Americans are still baffled by the fact that universal right to own a lethal weapon cause police force to be trigger happy.
20208 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 8/20/17 , edited 8/20/17

Foxpower93 wrote:


I know that whatever I say will not change your mind, but I still believe that keeping a law that is 328 years old without questioning it or changing it is kind of simple minded. There is no kings anymore (at least in civilized countries) neither is there need for militia.

But like I said, I had this talk with many other people and whatever I say most people will just disregard it, so I will stop now.

I just can't believe some Americans are still baffled by the fact that universal right to own a lethal weapon cause police force to be trigger happy.



Change my mind?

No, I rather use history as a teacher and prefer not to repeat it. The 2nd amendment wasn't something that was drafted out of air. It was from prior history. Human nature hasn't changed 328 years ago.

To believe it has changed is just pure naivety.
Posted 8/20/17 , edited 8/20/17
They should be able to shoot someone ready to kill someone , I disagree, but here I would draw the line is they need to see a weapon and not shoot someone unarmed.
5008 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / BuBbLeS!
Offline
Posted 8/20/17 , edited 8/20/17
in theory if someone throws a knife at a cop, then the cop does what, stand there and take the knife (brick, stick, etc)? yes some cops are trigger happy, others are bad, and then there are those who have to be on edge because of the accounts of so many dumbasses in the area. in my opinion police need more training, they should attend training once a year, they should be taught how to act in certain situations, use the taser more and lastly get paid more. they don't get paid enough to put up with our crap. in the states alone they get paid less than teachers do.

note: pepper spray, tasers and billy clubs (not to excess) can avoid the gun situation. but once that gun is fried they have so much red tape and hoops they have to jump threw before they can return to active duty, it's even worse when they shot someone and/or kill them.
26 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M
Offline
Posted 8/21/17 , edited 8/21/17

niotabunny wrote:

in theory if someone throws a knife at a cop, then the cop does what, stand there and take the knife (brick, stick, etc)? yes some cops are trigger happy, others are bad, and then there are those who have to be on edge because of the accounts of so many dumbasses in the area. in my opinion police need more training, they should attend training once a year, they should be taught how to act in certain situations, use the taser more and lastly get paid more. they don't get paid enough to put up with our crap. in the states alone they get paid less than teachers do.

note: pepper spray, tasers and billy clubs (not to excess) can avoid the gun situation. but once that gun is fried they have so much red tape and hoops they have to jump threw before they can return to active duty, it's even worse when they shot someone and/or kill them.


Police have to attend training constantly because of the constant change in how they work. Most PDs don't carry tasers due to the cost of having to spread them out among the department. Every law enforcement officer I've met has never had their hand near their handgun during traffic stops. This is especially true since I carry a handgun concealed and it is among the first pieces of information I give them. I don't agree with the use of less lethal means and would prefer the law enforcement officer shot them if they were threatened. Mind you, this doesn't mean empty the magazine into them, more of two or three shots to ensure the criminal is down and not going to continue the attack.
3704 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 8/27/17 , edited 8/27/17

niotabunny wrote:
note: pepper spray, tasers and billy clubs (not to excess) can avoid the gun situation. but once that gun is fried they have so much red tape and hoops they have to jump threw before they can return to active duty, it's even worse when they shot someone and/or kill them.
an extra note on that:
Pepper spray, tasers and more would most likely not always avoid it and maybe more so open up to a firefight? (really depends on the situation) Also if they work or not?

From those being affected by it and those who are not, either it being a taser or pepper spray as well with the time you either gained or lost over the situation.
That tasers is a less lethal of an weapon, but still can be lethal when used. Also if it's efficient enough to deal with the situation at hand?
1601 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 9/3/17 , edited 9/4/17

Unjinian wrote:

Police have to attend training constantly because of the constant change in how they work. Most PDs don't carry tasers due to the cost of having to spread them out among the department. Every law enforcement officer I've met has never had their hand near their handgun during traffic stops. This is especially true since I carry a handgun concealed and it is among the first pieces of information I give them. I don't agree with the use of less lethal means and would prefer the law enforcement officer shot them if they were threatened. Mind you, this doesn't mean empty the magazine into them, more of two or three shots to ensure the criminal is down and not going to continue the attack.


Here is the thing, realistically it is not going to be two-three shots. Assuming you've gone through training I've always been told it is going to be a mix of two things.

1. You shoot to stop the threat
2. You are not going to stop shooting before you've expended over 3 rounds.

Since by point 1, unless you fatally shoot someone to the point you either cause over 40% blood loss, instant fatality, or somehow induce shock you are not going to "stop the threat" likely in three shots. As people can still function and fight wounded, not always but is a case.

By all training, you shoot center of mass, which by default is aiming to fatally injure them so to return to above point, and then put in the fact you are shooting till they become non-issue revolves to point you are shooting to kill.

Likewise to build upon that, how do you determine they are non-threat? You shoot three times, and then wait? Even fuel for thought to this is that in FBI Study and other research average gun fight accuracy reported was anywhere between 18 to 30%. Which puts you not even hitting the target statistically with 1 out of 3 shots. Even with a 15 round handgun, you are guaranteed at best 4 shots out of 15 hitting.

Sounds terrible right? But lets be honest, I dunno how much you have been trained or how often you shoot, but like I'd say most, nobody is truly ready to slam head onto a fight out of nowhere, especially with trading fire with some nutcase. Just too much happens all at once you gotta process, especially when being either a cop or a civilian. Cause y'know you gotta actually care where you put rounds traveling

Don't take me wrong I am pro carry and love having my CCW, but its just one of those accuracy is something that you should expect to drop to absolute terrible levels in high stress. So I'd just say it is not a thing that should be defined by "only shoot so much" it should stick to "stop the threat" which is to the point that they are incapable of fighting.

First  Prev  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.