Quote:
Originally Posted by Bent Wookie
Ya sure. Training. I asked. Tell me. PM me if you desire. Wiki-training doesn't count.
|
Let's have a look at your mistakes so far...
Quote:
|
Police can't shoot someone based on what the individual has done in the past (even recent past)
|
Patently false.
Quote:
|
In your original video link, I don't think lethal force could have been justified at any point in that video
|
Obviously false. You really only needed to see about ten sceonds without sound to know that.
Quote:
|
All I saw was a double homicide suspect advancing on a cop. And that's not enough to shoot.
|
Similar, but even more obviously false because the answer is in your statement.
Quote:
|
To answer your question, all that is needed is a cops belief and subsequent articulation that GBH or death is imminent
|
You did back up on this one. But as it is written, utterly and patently false.
Quote:
|
Trust me, that's different for everyone based on an infinite number of factors.
|
Wrong again. What is a reasonable fear for one person is reasonable for the next person. And what is execesive force is the same for everyone whether they are scared for their life or not.
Quote:
|
It seems to me that you feel 5 different cops can go into the same encounter and it should be resolved in the same way each time
|
Yes. It should be, IF the story is factually accurate and you don't have 5 cops telling 5 different stories. That is the goal of legislation. Like I said, 5 cops shooting a misdemeanor suspect in the back at 20 paces will be wrong 5 times out of 5 unless there is no bystander video and the only witnesses are other cops. Then the "feared for my life" standard operating procedure in cop police reports works great.
Training? I suspect your gritty, real world experience is going to trump whatever I got going on. So you win that one.