3 ms·

easy. the kid was pinned down, face down, from the very start of the video. officer 1 advances to cuff, officer 2 covers. so fucking simple.

golergka 9y ago
See, here's the difference - I'm talking about a pattern, and you're talking about the exact situation. You can't train most people to act according to each individual situation in an intelligent manner, especially when situation is very scary, and those rare people who can be trained to do this are usually in special ops, not in regular police. So, when considering a police or military response to a situation, consider a typical situation with these data points. Oh, and I completely forgot the fact that a decision like this should be taken in a VERY short span of time - you can't turn on intelligence for this, it HAS to be trained. For me, algorithm adds "possible weapon", "suspect understands that we're pointing guns at him" and "arm reaching down" and automatically goes to "open fire" is the only possible one.
- gareim 9y ago
  Very short span of time? He had minutes of saying things like "you disobey me again and there is a strong possibility you end up dead" "shut up" and "you do that again we're shooting you". And your excuse is that they're too dumb to not shoot?
- gtirloni 9y ago
  The officer said he was afraid for his life and "terrified". You know who would be terrified in a situation like that? Me. I have never even held a gun and I have no training whatsoever. A police officer shouldn't be terrified in a situation like that. He had a suspect with hands in the air clearly willing to comply. This is such bullshit.
- filoeleven 9y ago
  > You can't train most people to act according to each individual situation in an intelligent manner, especially when situation is very scary How does this not apply more to the guy who was killed? He had guns pointed at him, at least one of them an assault rifle, was drunk and surprised. There were at least 3 cops there who certainly had more training than the civilian in being in that situation. The blame lies squarely with them.

golergka 9y ago

See, here's the difference - I'm talking about a pattern, and you're talking about the exact situation. You can't train most people to act according to each individual situation in an intelligent manner, especially when situation is very scary, and those rare people who can be trained to do this are usually in special ops, not in regular police. So, when considering a police or military response to a situation, consider a typical situation with these data points. Oh, and I completely forgot the fact that a decision like this should be taken in a VERY short span of time - you can't turn on intelligence for this, it HAS to be trained. For me, algorithm adds "possible weapon", "suspect understands that we're pointing guns at him" and "arm reaching down" and automatically goes to "open fire" is the only possible one.

gareim 9y ago
Very short span of time? He had minutes of saying things like "you disobey me again and there is a strong possibility you end up dead" "shut up" and "you do that again we're shooting you". And your excuse is that they're too dumb to not shoot?
gtirloni 9y ago
The officer said he was afraid for his life and "terrified". You know who would be terrified in a situation like that? Me. I have never even held a gun and I have no training whatsoever. A police officer shouldn't be terrified in a situation like that. He had a suspect with hands in the air clearly willing to comply. This is such bullshit.
filoeleven 9y ago
> You can't train most people to act according to each individual situation in an intelligent manner, especially when situation is very scary How does this not apply more to the guy who was killed? He had guns pointed at him, at least one of them an assault rifle, was drunk and surprised. There were at least 3 cops there who certainly had more training than the civilian in being in that situation. The blame lies squarely with them.