Regarding all the rhetoric about police-involved shootings of people running away, what do you think would happen if police simply refrained from shooting people under most circumstances and let them get away? Would the police department heads tell them they should have used their guns? Would they reprimand the officers for not using them, possibly demoting them or firing them, especially in situations where no one was in immediate danger and the only problem was that the person was running away? Why shouldn’t police departments insist that no police officer use his gun unless there is a clear and present danger to himself or others and not because the cop got angry that the person ran away. What would happen then? In most of these cases the person under suspicion has been identified and can be found later. Cops could take it upon themselves to back off and never shoot at anyone running away,id they had a grain of sense. If police department heads object, they’d have a lot of explaining to do and there would be a media firestorm.
I remember there was a dangerous high speed chase in my area that resulted in a lot of people getting hit because the police were chasing a getaway car as if they couldn’t identify it and pursue it without endangering other motorists in a more reasonable manner. At that point, I began to think that cops must view “catching the guy” at all costs to be the priority oppose to making alternative decisions that would result in less destruction. Also, I can just imagine in my head a culture within police departments in which the cheif would come down heavy on a cop that let someone get away.
What’s the point of having a police department if they just let criminals get away? Also, the police don’t shoot many people as it is.
The point, MA, is to protect and serve the population. Killing unarmed people does not fulfill that mission statement.
I remember there was a dangerous high speed chase in my area that resulted in a lot of people getting hit because the police were chasing a getaway car as if they couldn't identify it and pursue it without endangering other motorists in a more reasonable manner. At that point, I began to think that cops must view "catching the guy" at all costs to be the priority oppose to making alternative decisions that would result in less destruction. Also, I can just imagine in my head a culture within police departments in which the cheif would come down heavy on a cop that let someone get away.I can't either.
What's the point of having a police department if they just let criminals get away? Also, the police don't shoot many people as it is.Many suspects get caught by other means than by shooting them. Nearly all suspects in Western Europe get caught by other means or get away only for a short time. If civilized countries can manage without shooting suspects, why can't the US? The police shoot too many people. In most of the recent publicised incidents in the US the suspect was not a danger to anyone and they had been identified. They did not deserve to be shot. If a police cannot get their man without shooting him, the police department is useless and so are the police. Lois
Only a small portion of our population are violent criminals. Just as only a small portion of our police forces engage in unwarranted violence against people.
The problem, as I see it, is that the police who engage in violence, have multiple advantages. 1) their brethren police officers steadfastly supporting their story 2) the benefit of their side of the story being the accepted version, unless there is video evidence that contradicts their story 3) a criminal justice system of which they are a key part being the same system that decides whether to even pursue a conviction.
IOW, if you want to engage in violence against people, and increase your odds of getting away with it, become a police officer.
Now, we certainly don’t want violent criminals to get away with violence, more than they already do, but is it wise to allow the small portion of policemen who engage in violence, to do so with impunity?
And perhaps more importantly, is it wise to allow a system to continue, as is, when there is a clear bias by law enforcement to engage in violence against BLACK people?
I think not.
Solid rules should be put into place for police to universally use body cameras when they engage with the public.
Grand juries that decide on police cases should be completely independent of the local criminal justice system.
Police officers should have a 4 year college degree. (Stats show that they are much less prone to be involved in alleged violence, than policemen who don’t have a college degree.
No localities should be allowed to use the police and justice system as a primary means of bringing in funds.
Police officers should be trained to understand that not every black male, who seems scary to them, is actually all that scary.
Many suspects get caught by other means than by shooting them. Nearly all suspects in Western Europe get caught by other means or get away only for a short time. If civilized countries can manage without shooting suspects, why can't the US?Western Europeans are docile little kittens and don't put up a fight. BTW, the browner it gets over there, police violence will increase.
The police shoot too many people. LoisStatistics?