5 ms·

> When a man being chased by police stops his car, gets out, takes cover behind the door and starts pointing something that looks remarkably like a gun at polic

> When a man being chased by police stops his car, gets out, takes cover behind the door and starts pointing something that looks remarkably like a gun at police, he should be shot. I disagree, especially in your outlined scenario, for a couple of reasons: 1) First and foremost: the police are professionals whose job should be to protect the public, even if that means they put themselves in harm's way. The person with the toy gun (or wallet, cell phone, etc) is still a member of the public. 2) After a car chase, the police have the ability to position themselves defensively until the situation becomes clearer (e.g. shots are actually fired at them). They also could be wearing unusual protective gear like body armor, which would further reduce their personal danger. Now, if the person was actively threatening an innocent third party with a realistic toy gun in some way, then I think it would be much more justifiable for the police to shoot. Ditto if a person brandishes something clearly gun-like at an officer at close range.

gozur88 11y ago
I don't think it's reasonable to expect cops to allow criminals to take the first shot in case the gun might be a toy. Even if you're "positioned defensively" you can still be killed by someone who's lucky or skilled.
- sliverstorm 11y ago
  There seems to be a cohort of people who believe that policemen's lives are essentially forfeit, and thus any level of mortal risk to them is reasonable.
  - gherkin0 11y ago
    I don't think that policemen's lives are "forfeit," but that it's their duty to not have self-defense as their very top priority, which entails taking risks in some situations that we wouldn't expect of other people.
    - gozur88 11y ago
      Clearly the cop doesn't have self-defense as his top priority, or he wouldn't be in that situation at all. He'd make sure he was somewhere else when the possibility of violence manifested itself. Like, say, I would. Police officers shouldn't be shooting people on the off chance that a suspicious bulge might be a gun, but it seems pretty unreasonable to expect police officers to put their self-defense as the very lowest priority and wait until bullets actually come out of a gun-like-object being pointed at them before shooting.
      - gherkin0 11y ago
        But what I'm saying isn't putting their self-defense at "the very lowest priority," it's just putting it after correctly determining the suspect is an imminent mortal threat before deciding to kill them. The police are after all are the ones with the experience and training: they shouldn't ever be killing kids with toy guns or people with wallets, which they in fact are. The thinking that enables that needs to change.
        gozur88 11y ago
        >...they shouldn't ever be killing kids with toy guns or people with wallets, which they in fact are. The thinking that enables that needs to change. I disagree. That's not an achievable standard without putting officers' lives at undue risk. Cops can not tell the difference between toy guns and real guns without a close inspection.
melted 11y ago
I take it you're not a cop, and don't have any cops in your family. The rule is very simple: unless you want to get shot, don't fuck with police. Pointing a toy weapon at an officer counts as fucking with police in my book.
- DanBC 11y ago
  It's not surprising when people describe the police as a fascistic brutal regime.
  - tptacek 11y ago
    I'm not sure how you can extrapolate that from one person's insensitive comment about the police.
    - DanBC 11y ago
      Because it's not just one person's insensitive comment, is it? It's a pattern of repeated behaviour. "I am the law, don't fuck with me".
      - tptacek 11y ago
        Clearly every police who believes "I'm the law don't fuck with me" fits the bill you describe, but I don't think we're close to establishing that every police believes that.
      - melted 11y ago
        Yes, that's how things are done in this country. You can fuck with them afterwards, in the court of law. When they're enforcing the law, fucking with police is the stupidest thing you can do. They have families to come back home to as well. I don't see what's so "insensitive" about that.
        DanBC 11y ago
        > When they're enforcing the law, fucking with police is the stupidest thing you can do ...in the US. In other countries you can fuck with the police and not get killed. And, for the sake of clarity here, "fucking with the police" is for example asking if you're being detained or if you're free to go, or asking what grounds they have for a stop and search. It's baffling to me why asking police to obey the law is described, by police, as fucking with them.
talmand 11y ago
So, we should just hope that innocent bystanders are not hit by that first shot at police as the they hide behind their defensive positions and superior equipment?
- gherkin0 11y ago
  > So, we should just hope that innocent bystanders are not hit by that first shot at police as the they hide behind their defensive positions and superior equipment? The scenario outlined did not involve an actual gun that could harm anyone. If a car chase ends the suspect hiding behind a door with a "gun" in their hand, there are actually many possible scenarios, for instance: 1. The "gun" is not actually a gun, and was misidentified. 2. The gun is fake or a toy. 3. The gun is a real gun and the suspect will not shoot at anyone. 4. The gun is a real gun and the suspect will shoot at the police or others. Some people say the suspect should be shot in all four scenarios (after all, he might shoot!). I disagree.
  - talmand 11y ago
    > The scenario outlined did not involve an actual gun that could harm anyone. It did not involve an actual gun in that particular instance. I would like you to explain exactly how the police may identify whether the object that appears to be a weapon is an actual weapon other than waiting for the suspect to fire first. Again, we should just hope that innocent bystanders are not hit by that first shot at police as they hide behind their defensive positions and superior equipment? Police officers and innocent bystanders don't always fare too well when the police are obligated to follow stupid rules of engagement. > Some people say the suspect should be shot in all four scenarios (after all, he might shoot!). I disagree. See, that's where I agree with you. Because none of the scenarios in your list is a reason for police officers to fire as you list them. But tack on the end of each item that the suspect acted in a threatening manner with an object that appeared to be a weapon then the police officer may choose to fire their weapon. To be fair, if the suspect tried to run down other people or cops during the chase to show that he was a threat then just getting out of the car with an object that appeared to be a weapon will get him shot. It's all about context.

gozur88 11y ago

I don't think it's reasonable to expect cops to allow criminals to take the first shot in case the gun might be a toy. Even if you're "positioned defensively" you can still be killed by someone who's lucky or skilled.

sliverstorm 11y ago
There seems to be a cohort of people who believe that policemen's lives are essentially forfeit, and thus any level of mortal risk to them is reasonable.
- gherkin0 11y ago
  I don't think that policemen's lives are "forfeit," but that it's their duty to not have self-defense as their very top priority, which entails taking risks in some situations that we wouldn't expect of other people.
  - gozur88 11y ago
    Clearly the cop doesn't have self-defense as his top priority, or he wouldn't be in that situation at all. He'd make sure he was somewhere else when the possibility of violence manifested itself. Like, say, I would. Police officers shouldn't be shooting people on the off chance that a suspicious bulge might be a gun, but it seems pretty unreasonable to expect police officers to put their self-defense as the very lowest priority and wait until bullets actually come out of a gun-like-object being pointed at them before shooting.
    - gherkin0 11y ago
      But what I'm saying isn't putting their self-defense at "the very lowest priority," it's just putting it after correctly determining the suspect is an imminent mortal threat before deciding to kill them. The police are after all are the ones with the experience and training: they shouldn't ever be killing kids with toy guns or people with wallets, which they in fact are. The thinking that enables that needs to change.
      - gozur88 11y ago
        >...they shouldn't ever be killing kids with toy guns or people with wallets, which they in fact are. The thinking that enables that needs to change. I disagree. That's not an achievable standard without putting officers' lives at undue risk. Cops can not tell the difference between toy guns and real guns without a close inspection.

melted 11y ago

I take it you're not a cop, and don't have any cops in your family. The rule is very simple: unless you want to get shot, don't fuck with police. Pointing a toy weapon at an officer counts as fucking with police in my book.

DanBC 11y ago
It's not surprising when people describe the police as a fascistic brutal regime.
- tptacek 11y ago
  I'm not sure how you can extrapolate that from one person's insensitive comment about the police.
  - DanBC 11y ago
    Because it's not just one person's insensitive comment, is it? It's a pattern of repeated behaviour. "I am the law, don't fuck with me".
    - tptacek 11y ago
      Clearly every police who believes "I'm the law don't fuck with me" fits the bill you describe, but I don't think we're close to establishing that every police believes that.
    - melted 11y ago
      Yes, that's how things are done in this country. You can fuck with them afterwards, in the court of law. When they're enforcing the law, fucking with police is the stupidest thing you can do. They have families to come back home to as well. I don't see what's so "insensitive" about that.
      - DanBC 11y ago
        > When they're enforcing the law, fucking with police is the stupidest thing you can do ...in the US. In other countries you can fuck with the police and not get killed. And, for the sake of clarity here, "fucking with the police" is for example asking if you're being detained or if you're free to go, or asking what grounds they have for a stop and search. It's baffling to me why asking police to obey the law is described, by police, as fucking with them.

talmand 11y ago

So, we should just hope that innocent bystanders are not hit by that first shot at police as the they hide behind their defensive positions and superior equipment?

gherkin0 11y ago
> So, we should just hope that innocent bystanders are not hit by that first shot at police as the they hide behind their defensive positions and superior equipment? The scenario outlined did not involve an actual gun that could harm anyone. If a car chase ends the suspect hiding behind a door with a "gun" in their hand, there are actually many possible scenarios, for instance: 1. The "gun" is not actually a gun, and was misidentified. 2. The gun is fake or a toy. 3. The gun is a real gun and the suspect will not shoot at anyone. 4. The gun is a real gun and the suspect will shoot at the police or others. Some people say the suspect should be shot in all four scenarios (after all, he might shoot!). I disagree.
- talmand 11y ago
  > The scenario outlined did not involve an actual gun that could harm anyone. It did not involve an actual gun in that particular instance. I would like you to explain exactly how the police may identify whether the object that appears to be a weapon is an actual weapon other than waiting for the suspect to fire first. Again, we should just hope that innocent bystanders are not hit by that first shot at police as they hide behind their defensive positions and superior equipment? Police officers and innocent bystanders don't always fare too well when the police are obligated to follow stupid rules of engagement. > Some people say the suspect should be shot in all four scenarios (after all, he might shoot!). I disagree. See, that's where I agree with you. Because none of the scenarios in your list is a reason for police officers to fire as you list them. But tack on the end of each item that the suspect acted in a threatening manner with an object that appeared to be a weapon then the police officer may choose to fire their weapon. To be fair, if the suspect tried to run down other people or cops during the chase to show that he was a threat then just getting out of the car with an object that appeared to be a weapon will get him shot. It's all about context.