3 ms·

I have a friend who works in the cardiothoracic step down unit at a hospital. She constantly thinks she has developed some sort of heart condition to the point

by lojack 10y ago

I have a friend who works in the cardiothoracic step down unit at a hospital. She constantly thinks she has developed some sort of heart condition to the point where she is for all intents and purposes is paranoid of this. It's a bias because she's around people with heart conditions day in day out, so it seems more common than reality. Your friend has developed a bias because they're constantly around people who have been (or at least claim to be) wronged by the police. They see these people at a significantly higher rate than the people who have been saved by the police, or have otherwise been on the other side of the crime. There simply isn't a need to defend the other side of the fence.

sedachv 10y ago
> Your friend has developed a bias because they're constantly around people who have been (or at least claim to be) wronged by the police. Absolutely. Which is why I am glad he pointed these risks out to me - no one else who is unbiased does or is even aware of the worst-case outcomes. If there is a way to resolve a situation without calling the police, why would you take the risk? Another thing my friend likes to do is post news reports of police abuse to social media. One of these is very relevant to the original post. In 2013 a father called the police on his son, after the latter drove off in the father's automobile without permission, to "teach him a lesson." The police response was to murder his son: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/tyler-comstock-killing-iowa-police-shoot-unarmed-19-year-old-after-father-calls-authorities-to-report-the-teen-stole-his-truck/ http://www.cbsnews.com/news/tyler-comstock-killing-iowa-poli... Threatening your kids, family, neighbors etc with the police is not only distasteful but can end up in tragedy.
- plttn 10y ago
  Vehicles are considered "deadly weapons" as far as application of force goes. As soon as he backed into the cruiser on dashcam, I really don't see any way that ending well. I saw at least two moving violations in the span of 15 seconds. Backing that trailer into the cruiser would generally be counted as assault with a deadly weapon, so application of force is "end the situation" at that point.
  - nitrogen 10y ago
    That sounds utterly ridiculous, and adds to the list of reasons not to call the police except in dire situations.
  - DanBC 10y ago
    "That guy's getting shot." "Yeah, he's getting shot." Scots Police Teach US Cops How to Avoid Gun Use: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8qa5Wk_f7U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8qa5Wk_f7U
  - sammydavis 10y ago
    Police shouldn't be able to shoot someone merely because they "felt threatened" (as shooting someone in the back who wasn't armed who was running away), or if someone backs their car into a police car. The problem with these cases is the police have attempted to carve out large categories where they can do anything ("they feel threatened") and that's unacceptable. They are licensed to carry guns, they need to use discretion. Driving your car at high speed into a police car in an attempt to hit them is different than a fender bender at 5 miles an hour in the real world. When I have a fender bender and the car in front of me stops too suddenly and I hit them (happens 1000s of times per day), you don't get to shoot the person who hit you because it was "textbook vehicular assault". And it shouldn't be different if the other car was driven by a policeman.
- lojack 10y ago
  I mean, there's always a cost/benefit to calling the police. Wouldn't personally waste a call on many things. If I feel threatened, the benefit usually far outweighs the cost (personally, but I understand that this isn't the case for everyone). Closer to the original point though, if my kids felt threatened, I'd absolutely want them to call the police.

by lojack 10y ago

sedachv 10y ago

> Your friend has developed a bias because they're constantly around people who have been (or at least claim to be) wronged by the police. Absolutely. Which is why I am glad he pointed these risks out to me - no one else who is unbiased does or is even aware of the worst-case outcomes. If there is a way to resolve a situation without calling the police, why would you take the risk? Another thing my friend likes to do is post news reports of police abuse to social media. One of these is very relevant to the original post. In 2013 a father called the police on his son, after the latter drove off in the father's automobile without permission, to "teach him a lesson." The police response was to murder his son: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/tyler-comstock-killing-iowa-police-shoot-unarmed-19-year-old-after-father-calls-authorities-to-report-the-teen-stole-his-truck/ http://www.cbsnews.com/news/tyler-comstock-killing-iowa-poli... Threatening your kids, family, neighbors etc with the police is not only distasteful but can end up in tragedy.

plttn 10y ago
Vehicles are considered "deadly weapons" as far as application of force goes. As soon as he backed into the cruiser on dashcam, I really don't see any way that ending well. I saw at least two moving violations in the span of 15 seconds. Backing that trailer into the cruiser would generally be counted as assault with a deadly weapon, so application of force is "end the situation" at that point.
- nitrogen 10y ago
  That sounds utterly ridiculous, and adds to the list of reasons not to call the police except in dire situations.
- DanBC 10y ago
  "That guy's getting shot." "Yeah, he's getting shot." Scots Police Teach US Cops How to Avoid Gun Use: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8qa5Wk_f7U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8qa5Wk_f7U
- sammydavis 10y ago
  Police shouldn't be able to shoot someone merely because they "felt threatened" (as shooting someone in the back who wasn't armed who was running away), or if someone backs their car into a police car. The problem with these cases is the police have attempted to carve out large categories where they can do anything ("they feel threatened") and that's unacceptable. They are licensed to carry guns, they need to use discretion. Driving your car at high speed into a police car in an attempt to hit them is different than a fender bender at 5 miles an hour in the real world. When I have a fender bender and the car in front of me stops too suddenly and I hit them (happens 1000s of times per day), you don't get to shoot the person who hit you because it was "textbook vehicular assault". And it shouldn't be different if the other car was driven by a policeman.
lojack 10y ago
I mean, there's always a cost/benefit to calling the police. Wouldn't personally waste a call on many things. If I feel threatened, the benefit usually far outweighs the cost (personally, but I understand that this isn't the case for everyone). Closer to the original point though, if my kids felt threatened, I'd absolutely want them to call the police.