Yes but my point was why did the police choose to put themselves in close quarters with a guy with a knife in the first place? paramedics called them in so they know its a mental health call, they also know the guy doesnt speak english, his kids are there, in my mind the first question they should ask is 'does he have a hostage or is anyone else at risk?' once the answer comes back 'no' then at that point they have all the time in the world to come up with a better plan then 'lets borrow a ladder and climb up onto the 2nd floor balcony where we cant retreat and have no alternative but to shoot the old guy when he freaks out and attacks us', I mean common sense tells you time is your ally
The downside is the person kills himself. Which probably isn't an outcome the family is OK with.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
There are 6500 different languages spoken in this world; the onus is on you to learn the most basic phrases used in the country you reside in. It really irks me when people fail to do this then blame the police for not communicating.
As a country we allow people to immigrate here without speaking english, at that point it becomes the Government's responsibility to have some method for dealing with language issues in all of their branches Police included.
The downside is the person kills himself. Which probably isn't an outcome the family is OK with.
But he hadn't done so yet, and you have to weigh that against what you think the likelihood is that going in yourself will increase the risk of him panicking and killing himself, or something happening like what actually did happen, particularly given that you know beforehand you're leaving yourself with no easy way out of the situation once you're on that balcony. Then you have to factor in the likelihood of intervention providing a benefit in the circumstances - particularly where you've been advised that the person in question is paranoid, is likely to respond poorly to being confronted by police, and doesn't speak the same language as the officers (and therefore can't communicate with them).
Hell may freeze over as I type this, but I agree with afc. I'm prepared to change my mind if the investigation provides further information than the limited amount available now, but from what I can see, it seems like this was just a bad plan.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
The downside is the person kills himself. Which probably isn't an outcome the family is OK with.
Well its easy enough to monitor them from outside the apartment, listen to them moving around, and it is hard to kill yourself with a knife, generally if someone stabs themselves the police would have a chunk of time between them passing out and going quite and actually dying
I'm just judging by the video but for the life of me I cannot see why anyone thought the balcony was a good idea, the shooting is 27 seconds in, at the very least take a riot shield with you so you know you can keep a barrier between you and the guy that doesnt speak english and so almost certainly wont respond to orders. That way at least you dont have to shoot the guy
Last edited by afc wimbledon; 06-22-2020 at 05:49 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to afc wimbledon For This Useful Post:
I am quite prepared to believe the cops were just doing what they have been taught and following procedure, and that it was a course of action that put them and the deceased in a position where they had to shoot him, I just think the procedure, the training was/is even crazier than the guy with the knife.
Without someone inside I’m not sure what the impetus to breach the door was. Again, I wasn’t there and don’t know the details but it’s not a good outcome at all. I do think attempts should be made to prevent someone from harming themselves via TASER etc, but this appears to me as a forced confrontation.
Without someone inside I’m not sure what the impetus to breach the door was. Again, I wasn’t there and don’t know the details but it’s not a good outcome at all. I do think attempts should be made to prevent someone from harming themselves via TASER etc, but this appears to me as a forced confrontation.
A question as you have better knowledge than I, how difficult or long would it take for them to have got a couple of riot shields to go in with ?
A question as you have better knowledge than I, how difficult or long would it take for them to have got a couple of riot shields to go in with ?
Keep in mind that they only had an unlimited amount of time to work with, and playing the soothing sounds of John Tesh out of the open doors of a cruiser was literally still an option.
__________________
"We don't even know who our best player is yet. It could be any one of us at this point." - Peter LaFleur, player/coach, Average Joe's Gymnasium
A question as you have better knowledge than I, how difficult or long would it take for them to have got a couple of riot shields to go in with ?
Totally depends where you are. I believe this was Peel region? They would have access to a public order unit and it’s kit. I believe that some of the members there were part of the tactical response unit, and they have access to “body bunkers” or ballistic shields. I’m really curious to know why the circumstances led them to believe that breaching the door to the unit off the deck was the best course of action. I can only assume they wanted “eyes” on the fellow, the ability to communicate directly and the ability to intervene. Unfortunately, this appears to have led to a forced confrontation where once the less lethal option failed, the police felt they had to resort to lethal force.
Keep in mind that they only had an unlimited amount of time to work with, and playing the soothing sounds of John Tesh out of the open doors of a cruiser was literally still an option.
They were trying to stop him from killing himself, I thought we were clear on that?
Does anyone remember like 10 years ago when Calgary Police breached a penthouse sweet from the roof and came in a window? It wasn't huge news for the actual incident as there was no injuries or anything from the arrest, but it sounded crazy, how they were hilcoptered in and, rappelled down and smashed in some huge window for entry.
Yes but my point was why did the police choose to put themselves in close quarters with a guy with a knife in the first place? paramedics called them in so they know its a mental health call, they also know the guy doesnt speak english, his kids are there, in my mind the first question they should ask is 'does he have a hostage or is anyone else at risk?' once the answer comes back 'no' then at that point they have all the time in the world to come up with a better plan then 'lets borrow a ladder and climb up onto the 2nd floor balcony where we cant retreat and have no alternative but to shoot the old guy when he freaks out and attacks us', I mean common sense tells you time is your ally
I understand what you're saying. I just don't think they went in there thinking they were going to kill the guy. I think they went in there thinking let's grab him - taze him if we have to - and things went south fast. In hindsight, they likely would have done things differently, but I don't expect them to throw tons of resources at every call. Maybe if there was a hostage you would bring in the negotiators to talk to him, but I don't know who we have in our system you send for in this type of situation. Also, do we even have the resources to increase the cost of every welfare check by adding more professionals into the mix?
A guy alone in an apartment that won't come out having an episode? It seems he needed medical care, but when that care arrived dude had a knife. Okay, it's definitely now a police situation. Why did they need to breach the apartment? Well, there's a guy in there threatening first responders with a knife. Their job is to go get him.
This couldn't be further from the George Floyd case. I look at this and I don't really see them acting maliciously. A bad situation turned lethal in the span of like three seconds. It's sad, but it's the guy flapping around with a knife that is the problem in this situation and less so the police.
Maybe the root of the problem goes further back to when he was first diagnosed with schizophrenia. Should we have someone checking in on those people weekly or monthly? A mental health crisis is probably more difficult to handle than mental health maintenance.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Sliver For This Useful Post:
Totally depends where you are. I believe this was Peel region? They would have access to a public order unit and it’s kit. I believe that some of the members there were part of the tactical response unit, and they have access to “body bunkers” or ballistic shields. I’m really curious to know why the circumstances led them to believe that breaching the door to the unit off the deck was the best course of action. I can only assume they wanted “eyes” on the fellow, the ability to communicate directly and the ability to intervene. Unfortunately, this appears to have led to a forced confrontation where once the less lethal option failed, the police felt they had to resort to lethal force.
Me I would have just stayed on the ladder and looked through the window
He's being a purposeful d***** to the discussion, pay no heed.
I erased my response to this.
I am not a health care professional, and as such I would rely on one trained to deal with situations such as this to give insight as to how this should have been handled. It should be common sense that the officers on site should also have asked for guidance on how to proceed.
To surprise a person in this state of mind, and create a state of panic, does not seem like the proper response. If they felt that they needed to breach, taking a moment to create a non-lethal plan should have been the first action taken.
Their presence escalated the situation, they could have set a perimeter and taken a step back. If they knew the medical history of the person in question, they could have asked for guidance. To not do so is simply rushing into an unknown situation in which they were not prepared.
I apologize for my previous glib comment.
They should have known immediately that they had barriers of language, medical knowledge and equipment that they needed to overcome, and I don't understand how immediate use of force was the selected course of action.
They were prepared for the possibility that immediate use of deadly force might be needed. If they thought that was a high percentage outcome, then simply stepping back while one officer spoke to the person (regardless of the language barrier, a soothing comforting voice can work wonders), and take a minute to reach out and ask for help.
__________________
"We don't even know who our best player is yet. It could be any one of us at this point." - Peter LaFleur, player/coach, Average Joe's Gymnasium
I am a little disappointing that while the case of George Floyd's death resonated so much in Canada and caused protests, there is very limited coverage or anger over the fact that a 62 year old man, apparently with schizophrenia, has been shot by the police.
One is a cold blooded murder over the course of 9 minutes while a man and bystanders begged for life.
The other... appears to not be that.
Not sure I'm fully onboard with every instance of police lethal force going forward automatically being deemed to be as comparably egregious as the murder of George Floyd.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Acey For This Useful Post:
Did the police have body cams for this? It looks like it was about 7 seconds from kicking the door in to firing the taser. I assume they must have seen something at that point that they felt extremely threatened by?
One is a cold blooded murder over the course of 9 minutes while a man and bystanders begged for life.
The other... appears to not be that.
Not sure I'm fully onboard with every instance of police lethal force going forward automatically being deemed to be as comparably egregious as the murder of George Floyd.
When you can cut Police caused deaths by 72% and reduce harm to officers just by implementing 8 simple steps at 8cantwait.org we should consider many deaths as preventable and unnecessary. Part of the problem is we have this idea that it is acceptable for Police to kill people. Reducing the situations that Police are put in situations where force is required needs to be part of the solution.
Is it as egregious? No, but it needs just as much focus if the goal is to reduce Police violence.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GGG For This Useful Post:
Just a quick thing, I'd like to see where the European police officers are taught or encouraged to shoot people in the leg or arm. Frankly pistols are not the most accurate things and there's a reason why people are trained to shoot to center mass.
Also in terms of sending in paramedics or social workers or whatever, the primary duty of the police is going to have to make sure its a safe environment, so in this case, and I would probably want to see a proper investigate, they talked about sending in paramedics and it not being safe.
Even if we change the process, its unlikely that a social worker is going to be sent into any situation without any kind of police escort, or a ensuring that the environment is safe before a health care worker is allowed anywhere near the situation.
If a guy has a knife, he's not a danger to you unless he's really close to you. No one is asking these guys to pull sniper shots to the leg from 100 metres away. If he's attacking other people or even you - then shoot for whatever target is easiest I agree with.
