5 ms·

> If you are a police officer in the United States and you've been told you are going into a situation where your opposition is armed and has already killed at

> If you are a police officer in the United States and you've been told you are going into a situation where your opposition is armed and has already killed at least one person you will be very nervous. If your trigger finger is itching because you're nervous, then you have absolutely zero business being a police officer in the field - much less a SWAT member.

jacquesm 8y ago
By that standard you could disqualify all of the human race. Going into an active shooter situation would definitely cause almost anybody except for those that are totally apathetic to experience some degree of nervousness. It's not ideal but it's human nature. I agree that the degree to which US police is 'trigger happy' is super problematic but in the case of a SWAT team called in on someone that has (1) already killed and (2) indicated he wants to kill more people in his environment some degree of apprehension is understandable. If you're so ice-cold that you would not be nervous under those circumstances then maybe you should join a SWAT team?
- abiox 8y ago
  given that the person who died had nothing to do with anything, it's almost certainly the case that there was ZERO corroborating on-site evidence that a highly dangerous situation was actually unfolding.
  - jacquesm 8y ago
    Yes, this is absolutely true, right up to the point where the SWAT team showed up and then it was a highly dangerous situation anyway.
- nitwit005 8y ago
  > By that standard you could disqualify all of the human race. This obviously isn't the case given that most of these incidents don't result in gunfire.
- baddox 8y ago
  > Going into an active shooter situation would definitely cause almost anybody except for those that are totally apathetic to experience some degree of nervousness. But you've just equivocated on "an active shooter situation" and "a reported active shooter situation." Swatting has been well-known for long enough that there needs to be more evidence than an anonymous untracked phone call before police approach a home under the assumption that there is in fact an active shooter on the premises.

jacquesm 8y ago

By that standard you could disqualify all of the human race. Going into an active shooter situation would definitely cause almost anybody except for those that are totally apathetic to experience some degree of nervousness. It's not ideal but it's human nature. I agree that the degree to which US police is 'trigger happy' is super problematic but in the case of a SWAT team called in on someone that has (1) already killed and (2) indicated he wants to kill more people in his environment some degree of apprehension is understandable. If you're so ice-cold that you would not be nervous under those circumstances then maybe you should join a SWAT team?

abiox 8y ago
given that the person who died had nothing to do with anything, it's almost certainly the case that there was ZERO corroborating on-site evidence that a highly dangerous situation was actually unfolding.
- jacquesm 8y ago
  Yes, this is absolutely true, right up to the point where the SWAT team showed up and then it was a highly dangerous situation anyway.
nitwit005 8y ago
> By that standard you could disqualify all of the human race. This obviously isn't the case given that most of these incidents don't result in gunfire.
baddox 8y ago
> Going into an active shooter situation would definitely cause almost anybody except for those that are totally apathetic to experience some degree of nervousness. But you've just equivocated on "an active shooter situation" and "a reported active shooter situation." Swatting has been well-known for long enough that there needs to be more evidence than an anonymous untracked phone call before police approach a home under the assumption that there is in fact an active shooter on the premises.