26 y.o. New Brunswick woman shot and killed by Police

[metallicat]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

If you want to kill a cop you pick up a gun, if you want to be killed by a cop you pick up a knife, its really pretty simple, knife wielding suspects don't kill cops, pretty much ever in any jurisdiction, as a statistical threat it is all but non existent, cars are massively more of a threat to a cop.

I wonder how many cops haven't been killed by people wielding knives because they did use lethal force. Knife = deadly weapon = cops are using guns.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

If you are doing a wellness check where you knock on a door, how do you maintain distance when someone opens the door.

Sure that is your experience but the problem is that the longer you interact with people, the increase in the odds that you will encounter someone who does want to harm someone else.

Plus I still think that the missing aspect in these situations is drugs, they can make someone act incredibly irrational and erratically.

she was apparently on the balcony, not running at him out of the door for no apparent reason, which makes sense because if a suspect is close enough to stab a policeman they are actually too close for the gun to be much use 9 times out of 10, in those situations the policeman has to fight to get enough distance in order to draw and fire, and it doesn't appear that's what happened here at all.

Typically when the cops shot someone with a knife it is because they refuse to drop the knife, and that is always bull#### in my opinion

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by metallicat

I wonder how many cops haven't been killed by people wielding knives because they did use lethal force. Knife = deadly weapon = cops are using guns.

as the figures for the UK where they don't kill people are about the same for police deaths it is irrelevant, which makes sense, most people with knives aren't trying to kill anyone, they are messed up

[Zulu29]

Nm

[speede5]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

What are you talking about?

You find it hard to aim a gun at the range, so cops shouldn’t be expected to be better? That’s your response to Finnish police actually being better?

You’re missing the point on lethal force. If police are taught strict rules for use, those rules are too relaxed in Canada and (especially) the US, that’s the point people are making.

As far as the 911 call, it was for a welfare check, not someone running around with a knife. If that’s not the situation to bring in people actually trained to help, what is?

I agree that people are making some pretty strong assumptions about a situation we don’t know everything about (and never will). But some people are also relying on the false narrative that cops did what’s right, or what they had to do, or the only thing they could do, while many of us are trying to point out that North America’s version of “right, necessary, the only option” isn’t any of those things. If you want to gloss over how Finnish police do it, or U.K. police, or one of the many other police forces that do it better, that’s fine. But it CAN be done better, and the resources are there, they’re just used to make the police tougher and stronger, not better at protecting life.

I was trying to explain what its like to shoot a handgun, your eyes can't focus on the sights and the target. It's not about me having a hard time, which I don't. It's just a different type of shooting.

Handguns are not a sharpshooting tool, especially in a stressful situation.

I actually have no problem with most of what you say, and sure it would be nice if forces worked on their use of force policies.

Originally Posted by Itse

And thank you for getting it so wrong, so I can give a perfect counter-example. (It's kinda funny that you didn't even read the article )

This guy was a literal crazy person running around stabbing people in the city center. The Finnish police caught him alive. Yes they used a gun, they shot him, but they didn't kill him. They didn't put five bullets at center mass, they shot once, in the leg.

Again, funny how that goes. In one place the emphasis is on the police not dying. In another the emphasis is on the police avoiding killing anyone, even a crazy dangerous POC, even when it might be justified.

This is BTW one of the best known cases in Finnish recent history, as the whole thing was huge at the time. The picture below also won the extremely prestigious "news picture of the year" award in Finland.



This quote is from the awarding committee:

"The winning picture condenses the years most important news event directly and without aestheticization. The picture is peaceful and speaks of how the police work in an unusual situation."

The person shot was BTW a muslim refugee. It's one of the main reasons why this became huge news. And I would agree with the awarding committee. That picture says a hell of a lot about the Finnish police.

The cop in the picture looks more like a father-figure taking care of someone than a cop keeping an eye on crazed presumed terrorist. The Finnish police force is far from perfect, but in that moment it was really easy to be proud of what we have. It was just phenomenal work. They were on the scene really fast and brought the stabber down really quickly, without killing him. One well-placed shot, nothing more.

If our police can be like this, why can't yours?

Disregard.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

My point was, you said it doesn't happen in Finland as a means to push your point. And it obviously does.

I could find you a similar picture of a cop here rendering aid.

I get it. You guys have a narrative. Push it all you want. It is a message board. I just find it funny that you cherry pick stats and videos and use the "in my experience" line to support your argument without actually knowing much of anything.

We literally know nothing about the case - very little has been released. Yet it's the same people spouting off as if they have some insider information. Posting videos of UK cops swarming a knife wielding assailant like thats an option form NA police. At one point, watching police get attacked by a kniofe wielding man, one of you yes, "oh it just scratched him on the neck, he could have killed him bu didn't". Seriously? That's your defense?

You guys have lost the narrative completely and gone so far to the side of hang 'em all that any sort of discourse is completely impossible.

Man AFC, you need to step away from the keyboard.

Why? I have just pointed out that reality is almost no police ever get killed by knives, and yet as a society, and you lot on here in particular think it is perfectly fine to allow hundreds of civilians to be killed by the police in 'self defence' when in truth the police are facing a threat so negligible as to be statistically irrelevant.

All I'm saying is a policeman (or woman) should not be allowed to shoot someone just because they have a knife, and in particular shouldn't be allowed to because the person doesn't drop the knife when ordered, as that is neither a real threat to the police and is also where most of these poor sad schmoes get killed, surrounded by 5 or 6 policeman, all pointing their weapons at them from 20 or 25 feet away.

I'm not even blaming the cops I'm just saying the system has to change, cops have to be told clearly a guy with a knife isn't a threat in and of itself, and you cant shoot someone just because they wont drop the knife and you don't know what to do after that

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Why? I have just pointed out that reality is almost no police ever get killed by knives, and yet as a society, and you lot on here in particular think it is perfectly fine to allow hundreds of civilians to be killed by the police in 'self defence' when in truth the police are facing a threat so negligible as to be statistically irrelevant.

All I'm saying is a policeman (or woman) should not be allowed to shoot someone just because they have a knife, and in particular shouldn't be allowed to because the person doesn't drop the knife when ordered, as that is neither a real threat to the police and is also where most of these poor sad schmoes get killed, surrounded by 5 or 6 policeman, all pointing their weapons at them from 20 or 25 feet away.

I'm not even blaming the cops I'm just saying the system has to change, cops have to be told clearly a guy with a knife isn't a threat in and of itself, and you cant shoot someone just because they wont drop the knife and you don't know what to do after that

Disregard

[WhiteTiger]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

As far as the 911 call, it was for a welfare check, not someone running around with a knife. If that’s not the situation to bring in people actually trained to help, what is?

I think that part of the problem is with definitions here. A wellness check (or in CPS parlance, a "Check on the Welfare") type call is a very broad and open ended type of call.

It's not quite the "I have no idea what is going on, police should go check it out" (That's Misc/Misc) but it's a single step above that. Honestly, the only real difference between Misc/Misc and Check on the Welfare is that with CotW there is usually a person involved while Misc/Misc is property based.

Generalized examples of CotW calls:
I drove by on Deerfoot and saw someone sitting underneath the overpass bridge. Can you check on them?
I saw someone sleeping in the shade under a tree. I thought someone should check on them.
I saw someone laying face down. I'm worried they may be hurt. Can you check on them?
I was talking to my friend on the telephone, and they stopped responding to me. It sounds like the phone is still off the hook! Can you go see what happened?
I haven't talked to my friend in a week, and we usually talk every day. Can you pop by and make sure everything is alright?
The last time I talked to my friend, they said some worrying things. Can you go make sure they are ok?
My friend and I got in a fight, and he drove off really angry at me. Can you find him?
I saw two people fighting in a car as we were stopped for the light. Can you find them and make sure she's not hurt?
Someone's running around the street, waving their arms and shouting at the sky. Can you come and tell them to be quiet, I'm trying to sleep.
Someone's sitting on the park bench, and has been there for the last 6 hours. Can you move them out of my park?
There's a tent with 2-3 homeless people in it by the river. They really shouldn't be doing that, we have a Drop In Center for a reason. Can you take them there?

I would imagine it's much the same for most PD's. Most PD's kind of look at Wellness checks like a box of chocolates...you never know what you are gonna get until you get there and start dealing with it.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

Two points:

That's the problem. You pull up stats that police aren't killed by knives and then use that as your rationale for the fact that it's not a lethal force encounter for a cop. That's a real jump in logic. Could there be another explanation as to why this isn't as common beyond just offender behavior? Could it be maybe police actually do diffuse the majority of situations involving a knife? But some just aren't solvable in such a method.

Police aren't just randomly allowed to shoot someone with a knife. No one is saying that. Every situation is different. If someone has a knife and can't physically get to a cop holding a gun, it's not lethal force - other forms of control, deescalation, non-lethal are looked at. Why? because cops have time and space at that point. Now if that knife wielding person is with a certain distance and clearly making a motion to proceed towards the cop, maybe raising his arm with the knife and jabbing it like a sword, you're going to likely get shot.

It's simply not as simplistic as you are making it out to be.

Cops aren't killed by knives here or the UK to any great degree, it is incredibly rare in both jurisdictions and yet the police in the UK respond wholly differently to these situations, truth is we just assume the police are at risk when the statistics say they aren't, and then use this instinctive response to justify a massive amount of police shootings each year that I suspect are mostly (not all clearly) but mostly unneccersary.

If the police in the UK were dying in their droves, or even being mortally wounded here 2 or 3 times a year then the way the police currently respond would be fair enough, I'm not arguing police should be asked to die, its just in truth we are asking the public to die in high numbers for no justifiable reason.

Massively more policemen are killed in car accidents, not even on purpose, just plain accidents, than are killed by knives and yet we still ask policemen to chase people at high speed, we don't say 'well he might be killed so we'd better not let the police use cars', I am just asking why we accept the police killing 15 or 20 Canadians a year where we know, by looking at international statistics, most are avoidable because at best 1 policemen is killed a decade which is also the amount that are killed in non armed forces.

Its just bloody pointless

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Cops aren't killed by knives here or the UK to any great degree, it is incredibly rare in both jurisdictions and yet the police in the UK respond wholly differently to these situations, truth is we just assume the police are at risk when the statistics say they aren't, and then use this instinctive response to justify a massive amount of police shootings each year that I suspect are mostly (not all clearly) but mostly unneccersary.



If the police in the UK were dying in their droves, or even being mortally wounded here 2 or 3 times a year then the way the police currently respond would be fair enough, I'm not arguing police should be asked to die, its just in truth we are asking the public to die in high numbers for no justifiable reason.



Massively more policemen are killed in car accidents, not even on purpose, just plain accidents, than are killed by knives and yet we still ask policemen to chase people at high speed, we don't say 'well he might be killed so we'd better not let the police use cars', I am just asking why we accept the police killing 15 or 20 Canadians a year where we know, by looking at international statistics, most are avoidable because at best 1 policemen is killed a decade which is also the amount that are killed in non armed forces.



Its just bloody pointless

Disregard

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

Just out of curiosity, can u paraphrase my post? I feel there's a complete disconnect and I'm trying to figure out what that is.

Sent from my HD1905 using Tapatalk

I believe you are saying that the police don't shoot everyone with a knife and clearly at times try to diffuse the situation, therefore there must be a reason they shoot people when they do

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I believe you are saying that the police don't shoot everyone with a knife and clearly at times try to diffuse the situation, therefore there must be a reason they shoot people when they do

Disregard

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

Police aren't just randomly allowed to shoot someone with a knife. No one is saying that. Every situation is different. If someone has a knife and can't physically get to a cop holding a gun, it's not lethal force - other forms of control, deescalation, non-lethal are looked at. Why? because cops have time and space at that point. Now if that knife wielding person is with a certain distance and clearly making a motion to proceed towards the cop, maybe raising his arm with the knife and jabbing it like a sword, you're going to likely get shot.

It's simply not as simplistic as you are making it out to be.

News report from globe and mail reads
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/amp/...across-canada/

Municipal police in the city of about 16,500 said the shooting was in self-defence, saying the officer was “confronted at the scene by a woman holding a knife who made threats.”


As I understand, the woman was standing on a balcony holding a knife and making some verbal threats. There is no report, let alone evidence, about Moore being close to the officer. There is also no indication of a combat of any kind. As per policeman words, she was allegedly holding knife and shouting off something like "go away or I stab you". That doesn't justify killing.

And there's no evidence that she even hadva knife at the first place. We all post like it's proven and only argue whether shots were justified. For all we know, she may have never had a knife at all.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

And further, that the stats you provide, that not many cops are killed by knives are misleading, that simply it doesn't happen because cops do a good job using other tactics before going to lethal force. You have to acknowledge that that is, at the very least, a possibility.

Being honest though, there are a ton of American cops who shouldn't be cops. There are over 18000 police services in the US! That's crazy and likely a major contributor to bad cops, poor hiring habits, poor training and zero accountability.

Sent from my HD1905 using Tapatalk

That's where the stats from other countries make the difference though, if the UK has about the same level of police killed by knives as Canada but kill suspects with knives massively less then you have to surely acknowledge our police are generally over responding to a perceived threat that really doesn't exist, the threat in all jurisdictions is statistically the same, the only thing that is changing is the number of people the cops are killing

[QUOTE=Pointman;7475059]Report reads



Municipal police in the city of about 16,500 said the shooting was in self-defence, saying the officer was “confronted at the scene by a woman holding a knife who made threats.”





As I understand, the woman was standing on a balcony holding a knife and making some verbal threats. There is no report, let alone evidence, about Moore being close to the officer. There is also no indication of a combat of any kind. As per policeman words, she was allegedly holding knife and shouting off something like "go away or I stab you". That doesn't justify killing.



And there's no evidence that she even hadva knife at the first place. We all post like it's proven and only argue whether shots were justified. For all we know, she may have never had a knife at all.[/QUOTE

Disregard.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by metallicat

It all depends on the situation.

https://www.cleo.on.ca/en/publicatio...-enter-my-home

Thank you.

Based on what I read there, if officer is sent for a wellness check and he is being told by apartment inhabitant to go away, he should go away. Officer had no right to enter against Moore's will.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

You have access to the actual police report and the subsequent investigative report?

Sent from my HD1905 using Tapatalk

Nope, I meant news report, but it does directly quote officer. I edited my post to make it clearer.

While we are at it, do you know whether 5 years old daughter wss on the scene? No news seem to mention it.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Pointman

Thank you.

Based on what I read there, if officer is sent for a wellness check and he is being told by apartment inhabitant to go away, he should go away. Officer had no right to enter against Moore's will.

Actually what you do, as I have done it, is you tell the person 'I cant leave you alone because I am worried you will hurt yourself, but I won't come in if you keep talking to me and I know you are ok, but you have to stay calm and talk to me so I know you are ok' while you are saying that if you think the person is at risk of suicide, as at no point is this person a risk to you unless you do something incredibly obtuse, you are desperately calling for help as time and increased numbers are your ally in this situation.

Originally Posted by Pointman

Thank you.



Based on what I read there, if officer is sent for a wellness check and he is being told by apartment inhabitant to go away, he should go away. Officer had no right to enter against Moore's will.

Disregard.