7 ms·

> Coming in guns drawn is not that uncommon in that scenario. It really should be uncommon though.

by sosborn 6y ago

giantg2 6y ago
Why do you say that?
- dsr_ 6y ago
  Because you never have "accidental" shootings when there are no guns involved?
  - giantg2 6y ago
    How do you tell the difference between the ones without guns? (And knives, other weapons, bare hands)
    - tptacek 6y ago
      What situation can't you say that about? Should the cop handing you a city sticker ticket also have a gun drawn on you?
      - giantg2 6y ago
        So you're clearing house as part of a warrant and you know what threats are in it? Police would love a psychic like you. Maybe we should let you go in first all the time.
        tptacek 6y ago
        If it was an option? And I didn't have to travel? And I could review the warrant application and just "go in first" for houses like this woman's, and Breonna Taylor's? Ok? Being a police officer isn't close to one of the most dangerous jobs in America, but being in contact with an adversarial police officer is one of the most dangerous situations to be in. I'd be more afraid of the police, like many people.
        giantg2 6y ago
        You would have to go in for all of them because it's your job, not pick and choose. "Being a police officer isn't close to one of the most dangerous jobs in America, but being in contact with an adversarial police officer is one of the most dangerous situations to be in." This is a logical fallacy. It can be dangerous to be at the hands of an hostile officer, but then an equal comparison would be to say that being a police officer I'm the presence of an armed violent criminal is dangerous. But like you said, being an officer is not the most dangerous profession. Just like being in the presence of a police officer is not that dangerous.
        tptacek 6y ago
        No, your statement is not equivalent to mine. George Floyd wasn't an "armed violent criminal". Neither was Eric Garner. Neither was Breonna Taylor. Neither was Daniel Shaver.
        giantg2 6y ago
        Just cheery picking examples, huh? Each scenario would need to be evaluated individually and would likely have different issues. For example, the cops in Floyd's death ignored PATH training and the one's in the Taylor death lied to the judge to get the warrant.
- aspaceman 6y ago
  Do not point a gun at something you do not intend to shoot. There is no reason to draw your weapon in this context. Danger should be determined from context clues, not defaulted to the highest priority. There is no reason in hell you can ever justify pointing a weapon at a child. Period. That goes beyond bad policing and into disrespecting guns and plain stupidity. This is someone’s home not a war zone.
  - giantg2 6y ago
    How about gang members under the age of 18? It would be great if we had good video of how the gun was pointed and where the people were. It was likely only pointed up the stairs in a "low-ready" manner and not aimed. But we will never know. How about defiantly refusing to open the door and a past conviction for assaulting an officer as context clues?
    - yibg 6y ago
      I honest would like to know, from your perspective when should a police officer NOT have gun drawn? Seems like you think there is danger lurking every where, so should cops just go around with assault rifles at the ready all the damn time?
      - giantg2 6y ago
        I didn't say guns should be drawn all the time. Someone's overly emotional and absolute statement incorrectly stated that guns should never be pointed a children. The scenario we are discussing is building searches, which are high risk and the behavior was appropriate in this example. Not to mention there is no evidence showing the guns being pointed directly at anyone.
    - fredophile 6y ago
      We have a video its at the very top of the link. At least three pistols were drawn by officers entering the home. The first officer doesn't draw his weapon until after interacting with the suspect, being told her husband and children are home, and then entering the home. If she has a previous conviction for assaulting an officer that wouldn't matter since she was already removed from the situation at this point. The first and third pistols I saw were pointed at the floor the whole time. The second officer has his pistol aimed at the top of the stairs as he is walking towards the bottom of the stairway.
- fredophile 6y ago
  If the expectation is that the cops will come in with weapons drawn any time they execute a warrant then we have to realize that this will result in people accidentally being killed. Does the standard for evidence for obtaining a search warrant justify the increased risk of someone innocent dying? Some people would argue that not having guns drawn in this type of case would result in more police deaths. I agree but don't view this as a deal breaker. How many civilians will die with guns drawn vs how many police officers die without? Should we count civilian and police lives the same in this situation? Police officers are compensated for the risks they take and have protective gear like body armour to reduce this risk. In the linked video I don't see the police using any head covering other than ball caps. If they thought there was a risk why didn't they put on helmets? I'm sure the Tallahassee police have access to that kind of PPE. The fact that they chose not to wear full PPE suggests to me that they didn't believe there was a substantial threat in the home.
  - giantg2 6y ago
    If she was compliant, they would typically ask everyone to exit the house before they enter to clear it. This scenario specifically took a different approach. I don't see a higher risk of innocent people being killed, so maybe you can gather some statistics on that since the scenario is really a counter example to that. Every building search is considered high risk. It's not an extreme risk, which is why they didn't execute it as a no-knock with SWAT, but there is still risk. The actions taken appear to consistent with that level of risk.
    - fredophile 6y ago
      > so maybe you can gather some statistics on that Here's what a quick google search turned up. This link [0] shows that US police kill over three times as many people, per capita, than Canadian police. However, I think there are other issues, like easy access to guns, that affect this stat so this isn't really a very useful stat for our discussion. This group [1] has been collecting info on arrest related deaths but a quick look only showed me links to how they collect data and not the actual data. It also looks like they stopped their surveys in 2012. This paper [2] has some of the most relevant stats I've found for our discussion and covers use of lethal force by police between 2009-2012. From their numbers, 83% of victims were armed or believed to be armed (this includes toy guns, etc) and over 93% of the deaths were from firearms. If we assume that the 7% of deaths were the police didn't shoot all apply to unarmed victims then 10% of the people killed by police were unarmed and shot. Their stats also show LEOs being killed in less than 2% of these incidents. Their numbers do show 9% of these cases resulting in an injury to LEOs but we don't have numbers on non-fatal police caused injuries so I don't want to compare apples to oranges. [0] https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2020/06/05/policekillings/ https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2020/06/05/policekillings/ [1] https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=82 https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=82 [2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6080222/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6080222/

> Coming in guns drawn is not that uncommon in that scenario. It really should be uncommon though.

giantg2 6y ago

Why do you say that?

dsr_ 6y ago
Because you never have "accidental" shootings when there are no guns involved?
- giantg2 6y ago
  How do you tell the difference between the ones without guns? (And knives, other weapons, bare hands)
  - tptacek 6y ago
    What situation can't you say that about? Should the cop handing you a city sticker ticket also have a gun drawn on you?
    - giantg2 6y ago
      So you're clearing house as part of a warrant and you know what threats are in it? Police would love a psychic like you. Maybe we should let you go in first all the time.
      - tptacek 6y ago
        If it was an option? And I didn't have to travel? And I could review the warrant application and just "go in first" for houses like this woman's, and Breonna Taylor's? Ok? Being a police officer isn't close to one of the most dangerous jobs in America, but being in contact with an adversarial police officer is one of the most dangerous situations to be in. I'd be more afraid of the police, like many people.
        giantg2 6y ago
        You would have to go in for all of them because it's your job, not pick and choose. "Being a police officer isn't close to one of the most dangerous jobs in America, but being in contact with an adversarial police officer is one of the most dangerous situations to be in." This is a logical fallacy. It can be dangerous to be at the hands of an hostile officer, but then an equal comparison would be to say that being a police officer I'm the presence of an armed violent criminal is dangerous. But like you said, being an officer is not the most dangerous profession. Just like being in the presence of a police officer is not that dangerous.
        tptacek 6y ago
        No, your statement is not equivalent to mine. George Floyd wasn't an "armed violent criminal". Neither was Eric Garner. Neither was Breonna Taylor. Neither was Daniel Shaver.
        giantg2 6y ago
        Just cheery picking examples, huh? Each scenario would need to be evaluated individually and would likely have different issues. For example, the cops in Floyd's death ignored PATH training and the one's in the Taylor death lied to the judge to get the warrant.
aspaceman 6y ago
Do not point a gun at something you do not intend to shoot. There is no reason to draw your weapon in this context. Danger should be determined from context clues, not defaulted to the highest priority. There is no reason in hell you can ever justify pointing a weapon at a child. Period. That goes beyond bad policing and into disrespecting guns and plain stupidity. This is someone’s home not a war zone.
- giantg2 6y ago
  How about gang members under the age of 18? It would be great if we had good video of how the gun was pointed and where the people were. It was likely only pointed up the stairs in a "low-ready" manner and not aimed. But we will never know. How about defiantly refusing to open the door and a past conviction for assaulting an officer as context clues?
  - yibg 6y ago
    I honest would like to know, from your perspective when should a police officer NOT have gun drawn? Seems like you think there is danger lurking every where, so should cops just go around with assault rifles at the ready all the damn time?
    - giantg2 6y ago
      I didn't say guns should be drawn all the time. Someone's overly emotional and absolute statement incorrectly stated that guns should never be pointed a children. The scenario we are discussing is building searches, which are high risk and the behavior was appropriate in this example. Not to mention there is no evidence showing the guns being pointed directly at anyone.
  - fredophile 6y ago
    We have a video its at the very top of the link. At least three pistols were drawn by officers entering the home. The first officer doesn't draw his weapon until after interacting with the suspect, being told her husband and children are home, and then entering the home. If she has a previous conviction for assaulting an officer that wouldn't matter since she was already removed from the situation at this point. The first and third pistols I saw were pointed at the floor the whole time. The second officer has his pistol aimed at the top of the stairs as he is walking towards the bottom of the stairway.
fredophile 6y ago
If the expectation is that the cops will come in with weapons drawn any time they execute a warrant then we have to realize that this will result in people accidentally being killed. Does the standard for evidence for obtaining a search warrant justify the increased risk of someone innocent dying? Some people would argue that not having guns drawn in this type of case would result in more police deaths. I agree but don't view this as a deal breaker. How many civilians will die with guns drawn vs how many police officers die without? Should we count civilian and police lives the same in this situation? Police officers are compensated for the risks they take and have protective gear like body armour to reduce this risk. In the linked video I don't see the police using any head covering other than ball caps. If they thought there was a risk why didn't they put on helmets? I'm sure the Tallahassee police have access to that kind of PPE. The fact that they chose not to wear full PPE suggests to me that they didn't believe there was a substantial threat in the home.
- giantg2 6y ago
  If she was compliant, they would typically ask everyone to exit the house before they enter to clear it. This scenario specifically took a different approach. I don't see a higher risk of innocent people being killed, so maybe you can gather some statistics on that since the scenario is really a counter example to that. Every building search is considered high risk. It's not an extreme risk, which is why they didn't execute it as a no-knock with SWAT, but there is still risk. The actions taken appear to consistent with that level of risk.
  - fredophile 6y ago
    > so maybe you can gather some statistics on that Here's what a quick google search turned up. This link [0] shows that US police kill over three times as many people, per capita, than Canadian police. However, I think there are other issues, like easy access to guns, that affect this stat so this isn't really a very useful stat for our discussion. This group [1] has been collecting info on arrest related deaths but a quick look only showed me links to how they collect data and not the actual data. It also looks like they stopped their surveys in 2012. This paper [2] has some of the most relevant stats I've found for our discussion and covers use of lethal force by police between 2009-2012. From their numbers, 83% of victims were armed or believed to be armed (this includes toy guns, etc) and over 93% of the deaths were from firearms. If we assume that the 7% of deaths were the police didn't shoot all apply to unarmed victims then 10% of the people killed by police were unarmed and shot. Their stats also show LEOs being killed in less than 2% of these incidents. Their numbers do show 9% of these cases resulting in an injury to LEOs but we don't have numbers on non-fatal police caused injuries so I don't want to compare apples to oranges. [0] https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2020/06/05/policekillings/ https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2020/06/05/policekillings/ [1] https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=82 https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=82 [2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6080222/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6080222/