4 ms·

Yes American cops don't miss an opportunity to amaze the world... (and make people believe that USA is the less secure place in the world to behave like this).

yholio 6y ago
American gun culture has little to do with this case. Cops behave like this because behind door number one there could be a guy with an assault rifle ready to take them down. In 99% of the cases there isn't, but if you do 100 of these raids without taking risks, it becomes more likely than not that your own children will become orphans. It's hypocritical to attack the cops that (literally) fight to stay alive without saying anything about the root cause.
- rootlocus 6y ago
  > Cops behave like this because behind door number one there could be a guy with an assault rifle ready to take them down. > American gun culture has little to do with this case. non sequitur.
- GordonS 6y ago
  I'm wondering if this is meant to be satire, but I'll assume not. The cops were sent to the house of a middle-aged scientist who was reporting on COVID data. The idea that you need to charge in with guns is far beyond ludicrous.
  - XorNot 6y ago
    The best part is how, if we accept literally all the unjustified precepts of why they went in guns drawn, you then can look at the reasoning and question why, if it's that dangerous, did they go to the house at all? What, this was so time-sensitive that we couldn't pick her up with a traffic stop when she was out of the house? At every conceivable junction, the police create dangerous situations and then use the danger to justify escalating them to violence.
    - yholio 6y ago
      > What, this was so time-sensitive that we couldn't pick her up with a traffic stop when she was out of the house? It is standard operating procedure to catch online criminals in the act, with the computers booted, terminals unlocked and drives unencrypted. In general, your premise that police should avoid confrontations with (allegedly) very dangerous individuals, and leave them wiggle room to destroy evidence, is untenable. Clearly, this case is an outlier, but the fault lays with whomever ordered the raid without reason, not with police officers themselves, that performed the raid as any raid should be done in a trigger happy country.
      - XorNot 6y ago
        That's garbage: almost no crime is so time-sensitive and so unique that this is a problem. Heck look at the take down of Silk Road for example of doing it right: they clearly took their time (despite the impact being obviously greater), and no one had to pull any weapons because the situation was executed in a known safe environment. Police deserve no leeway for this: the evidence points to repeatedly creating a dangerous situation (by them) and then shooting the person they've decided is dangerous (because they created a situation they thought was dangerous). If there is not immediate danger to other citizen's lives, it can wait. And most of the time, it should wait because amongst other thing that lets you actually make a plan. The only difference in this case is "could be dangerous" is being used as pathetically thin cover for ensuring the lives of a political opponent and their family were threatened.
        yholio 6y ago
        > the evidence points to repeatedly creating a dangerous situation (by them) What evidence is that? Have you gathered the data, performed a statistically significant analysis or can you point to one? Or perhaps you are inferring your conclusions from media anecdotes and select those cases that best fit your world view?
        XorNot 6y ago
        Have you gathered data? Not seeing a lot of citations there, whereas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_police_violence_incidents_during_George_Floyd_protests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_police_violence_incide... Which is obviously a limited sample, should I continue or are videos of actual incidents, leading to actual casualties, really just "anecdotes"? I mean we could go with just this: https://www.criminallegalnews.org/news/2018/jun/16/doj-police-shooting-family-dogs-has-become-epidemic/ https://www.criminallegalnews.org/news/2018/jun/16/doj-polic... and ask how the hell is this a thing since the starting point is "discharging a firearm in a populated area" and is reported by the DoJ itself as an incredible problem. But I suspect you can't point to anything. The null-hypothesis here is definitely not "police procedure is absolutely correct". You know, seeing how the literal subject of this comment chain is "police raid on data scientist's house where guns were pointed at her children as part of a politically motivated shakedown for a crime which is by definition non-violent".
- kristjankalm 6y ago
  > American gun culture has little to do with this case. Cops behave like this because behind door number one there could be a guy with an assault rifle ready to take them down i'm struggling to understand this -- are you saying there is no link between 'American gun culture' and the probability of 'there could be a guy with an assault rifle ready to take them down'? in what other 1st world country would the said probability be even close?
- andyjohnson0 6y ago
  Policing in the US is undoubtedly risky - but thats not the issue here. It is very likely that they were sent to intimidate and terrify a scientist who has done nothing except cause embarrassment to a politician. It is legitimate to criticise the police for allowing themselves to be used in this way.
  - studius 6y ago
    Do you know this for a fact, or is it what you read or were told? I don't know anything about this incident other than what I'm reading here, which puts me at a disadvantage to discuss it, as I'm sure is the case for most if not all others here.
- DeusExMachina 6y ago
  That could apply if they were raiding the house of some violent gang member, not a scientist from which they only wanted some electronics.
- pietrovismara 6y ago
  You just said american gun culture has little to do with this and then you contradict yourself the next sentence. In Europe the risk of having someone greet you with an assault rifle is non-existent, because people just can't buy them. It's also weird that you speak as if being a cop is the most dangerous job when it's not even in the first 10 most dangerous jobs[0]. I never see people that worry about cops lives worry about logging workers' safety, yet they risk much more than a cop. - [0] https://www.cnbc.com/2019/12/27/the-10-most-dangerous-jobs-in-america-according-to-bls-data.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/12/27/the-10-most-dangerous-jobs-i...
  - forest_dweller 6y ago
    > In Europe the risk of having someone greet you with an assault rifle is non-existent, because people just can't buy them. Are you stupid enough to actually believe this? My uncle was put in prison for over a decade for robbing banks in the UK. He slept with a shotgun under his pillow (the police found it there when they arrested him). Believe it or not criminals do have guns in the UK (police confiscate guns all the time), as well as as other weapons which are illegal (swords, machetes, nun-jucks). Recently police raided a warehouse (near where I live) where they were making firearms. Also I am pretty sure guns were illegal in Northern Ireland as well and plenty of terrorists and criminals had them at the time. It really annoys me when people try to claim the opposite (or gaslight me) by saying "well they banned all the guns that means that there isn't any" because I know it isn't true.
    - Veen 6y ago
      In the last three years four police officers were killed in the line of duty in the UK. Two by motor vehicles, one by stabbing, and one by gunshot (inside a police station). The gunshot death was the first in eight years and one of seven in the last 20 years. It happens, but it is rare. In contrast, 44 police officers were shot and killed in 2019 in the US. (Also, including phrases like "are you stupid" in comments just makes you look foolish)
      - forest_dweller 6y ago
- XorNot 6y ago
  List of professions more dangerous then being a police officer in 2018 [1]: supervisor of mechanics or repairers, construction, agricultural work, grounds maintenance, electrical line-workers, landscaping supervisors, construction supervisors, steel workers, agricultural managers, sales workers, truck drivers, garbage man, roofers, aircraft pilot, fisherman, logging. [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-06-23/how-dangerous-is-police-work https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-06-23/how-da... And straight BS on the whole "going into dangerous situations" thing - plenty of professions get required to do that (paramedics, firemen) and manage to be both unarmed and not shoot people all the time.
  - yholio 6y ago
    > "going into dangerous situations" thing - plenty of professions get required to do that (paramedics, firemen) and manage to be both unarmed and not shoot people all the time. Firemen, in fact, take every precaution they can before going into a blaze, such as flame retardant suits and breathing masks. A gun does not stop fire and fire does not shoot back at you, nor has any intelligence to work around predictable defenses. A human has that intelligence, so the only way to safely handle an armed man that does not want to cooperate is with extreme, overpowering violence.

yholio 6y ago

American gun culture has little to do with this case. Cops behave like this because behind door number one there could be a guy with an assault rifle ready to take them down. In 99% of the cases there isn't, but if you do 100 of these raids without taking risks, it becomes more likely than not that your own children will become orphans. It's hypocritical to attack the cops that (literally) fight to stay alive without saying anything about the root cause.

rootlocus 6y ago
> Cops behave like this because behind door number one there could be a guy with an assault rifle ready to take them down. > American gun culture has little to do with this case. non sequitur.
GordonS 6y ago
I'm wondering if this is meant to be satire, but I'll assume not. The cops were sent to the house of a middle-aged scientist who was reporting on COVID data. The idea that you need to charge in with guns is far beyond ludicrous.
- XorNot 6y ago
  The best part is how, if we accept literally all the unjustified precepts of why they went in guns drawn, you then can look at the reasoning and question why, if it's that dangerous, did they go to the house at all? What, this was so time-sensitive that we couldn't pick her up with a traffic stop when she was out of the house? At every conceivable junction, the police create dangerous situations and then use the danger to justify escalating them to violence.
  - yholio 6y ago
    > What, this was so time-sensitive that we couldn't pick her up with a traffic stop when she was out of the house? It is standard operating procedure to catch online criminals in the act, with the computers booted, terminals unlocked and drives unencrypted. In general, your premise that police should avoid confrontations with (allegedly) very dangerous individuals, and leave them wiggle room to destroy evidence, is untenable. Clearly, this case is an outlier, but the fault lays with whomever ordered the raid without reason, not with police officers themselves, that performed the raid as any raid should be done in a trigger happy country.
    - XorNot 6y ago
      That's garbage: almost no crime is so time-sensitive and so unique that this is a problem. Heck look at the take down of Silk Road for example of doing it right: they clearly took their time (despite the impact being obviously greater), and no one had to pull any weapons because the situation was executed in a known safe environment. Police deserve no leeway for this: the evidence points to repeatedly creating a dangerous situation (by them) and then shooting the person they've decided is dangerous (because they created a situation they thought was dangerous). If there is not immediate danger to other citizen's lives, it can wait. And most of the time, it should wait because amongst other thing that lets you actually make a plan. The only difference in this case is "could be dangerous" is being used as pathetically thin cover for ensuring the lives of a political opponent and their family were threatened.
      - yholio 6y ago
        > the evidence points to repeatedly creating a dangerous situation (by them) What evidence is that? Have you gathered the data, performed a statistically significant analysis or can you point to one? Or perhaps you are inferring your conclusions from media anecdotes and select those cases that best fit your world view?
        XorNot 6y ago
        Have you gathered data? Not seeing a lot of citations there, whereas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_police_violence_incidents_during_George_Floyd_protests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_police_violence_incide... Which is obviously a limited sample, should I continue or are videos of actual incidents, leading to actual casualties, really just "anecdotes"? I mean we could go with just this: https://www.criminallegalnews.org/news/2018/jun/16/doj-police-shooting-family-dogs-has-become-epidemic/ https://www.criminallegalnews.org/news/2018/jun/16/doj-polic... and ask how the hell is this a thing since the starting point is "discharging a firearm in a populated area" and is reported by the DoJ itself as an incredible problem. But I suspect you can't point to anything. The null-hypothesis here is definitely not "police procedure is absolutely correct". You know, seeing how the literal subject of this comment chain is "police raid on data scientist's house where guns were pointed at her children as part of a politically motivated shakedown for a crime which is by definition non-violent".
kristjankalm 6y ago
> American gun culture has little to do with this case. Cops behave like this because behind door number one there could be a guy with an assault rifle ready to take them down i'm struggling to understand this -- are you saying there is no link between 'American gun culture' and the probability of 'there could be a guy with an assault rifle ready to take them down'? in what other 1st world country would the said probability be even close?
andyjohnson0 6y ago
Policing in the US is undoubtedly risky - but thats not the issue here. It is very likely that they were sent to intimidate and terrify a scientist who has done nothing except cause embarrassment to a politician. It is legitimate to criticise the police for allowing themselves to be used in this way.
- studius 6y ago
  Do you know this for a fact, or is it what you read or were told? I don't know anything about this incident other than what I'm reading here, which puts me at a disadvantage to discuss it, as I'm sure is the case for most if not all others here.
DeusExMachina 6y ago
That could apply if they were raiding the house of some violent gang member, not a scientist from which they only wanted some electronics.
pietrovismara 6y ago
You just said american gun culture has little to do with this and then you contradict yourself the next sentence. In Europe the risk of having someone greet you with an assault rifle is non-existent, because people just can't buy them. It's also weird that you speak as if being a cop is the most dangerous job when it's not even in the first 10 most dangerous jobs[0]. I never see people that worry about cops lives worry about logging workers' safety, yet they risk much more than a cop. - [0] https://www.cnbc.com/2019/12/27/the-10-most-dangerous-jobs-in-america-according-to-bls-data.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/12/27/the-10-most-dangerous-jobs-i...
- forest_dweller 6y ago
  > In Europe the risk of having someone greet you with an assault rifle is non-existent, because people just can't buy them. Are you stupid enough to actually believe this? My uncle was put in prison for over a decade for robbing banks in the UK. He slept with a shotgun under his pillow (the police found it there when they arrested him). Believe it or not criminals do have guns in the UK (police confiscate guns all the time), as well as as other weapons which are illegal (swords, machetes, nun-jucks). Recently police raided a warehouse (near where I live) where they were making firearms. Also I am pretty sure guns were illegal in Northern Ireland as well and plenty of terrorists and criminals had them at the time. It really annoys me when people try to claim the opposite (or gaslight me) by saying "well they banned all the guns that means that there isn't any" because I know it isn't true.
  - Veen 6y ago
    In the last three years four police officers were killed in the line of duty in the UK. Two by motor vehicles, one by stabbing, and one by gunshot (inside a police station). The gunshot death was the first in eight years and one of seven in the last 20 years. It happens, but it is rare. In contrast, 44 police officers were shot and killed in 2019 in the US. (Also, including phrases like "are you stupid" in comments just makes you look foolish)
    - forest_dweller 6y ago
XorNot 6y ago
List of professions more dangerous then being a police officer in 2018 [1]: supervisor of mechanics or repairers, construction, agricultural work, grounds maintenance, electrical line-workers, landscaping supervisors, construction supervisors, steel workers, agricultural managers, sales workers, truck drivers, garbage man, roofers, aircraft pilot, fisherman, logging. [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-06-23/how-dangerous-is-police-work https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-06-23/how-da... And straight BS on the whole "going into dangerous situations" thing - plenty of professions get required to do that (paramedics, firemen) and manage to be both unarmed and not shoot people all the time.
- yholio 6y ago
  > "going into dangerous situations" thing - plenty of professions get required to do that (paramedics, firemen) and manage to be both unarmed and not shoot people all the time. Firemen, in fact, take every precaution they can before going into a blaze, such as flame retardant suits and breathing masks. A gun does not stop fire and fire does not shoot back at you, nor has any intelligence to work around predictable defenses. A human has that intelligence, so the only way to safely handle an armed man that does not want to cooperate is with extreme, overpowering violence.