Quote:
Originally Posted by Winnie
So as a matter of process the police should go into every situation assuming the subject is unarmed, instead of armed? Are you sure you don't want to keep your paper bag?
|
No, I think police should be trained well enough to access each situation as a separate and completely different set of circumstances and act in accordance with that specific set of circumstances.
Nutjob with a loaded gun waving it around and threatening to shoot at people--damn right the police need to go into that situation on high alert.
A guy walking through Walmart with a bb gun he picked up on the shelf--walk in and observe him, assess that he isn't a threat, move on with your life.
An idiot wanting to be cute and dancing around an officer--roll your eyes, chuckle at him and walk away.
Every single situation is dramatically different. An officer should never approach two separate circumstances with one blanket reaction. They should be trained well enough to use their skills of observation and deduction to determine the level of threat and react accordingly.
Why is this so hard to understand? No one wants to disarm the police entirely. No one wants to disband all police forces. No one wants police to die unnecessarily.
But I also don't want civilians to die unnecessarily. I don't want officers abusing their power. I want a system in place where there is some way to ensure that officers are using their power properly. None of this is radical thinking, I don't understand all the arguments.