3 ms·

Lets take a situation where someone reports something like a shootout inside a house. What would you have the cops do in that situation? If this is a real even

Lets take a situation where someone reports something like a shootout inside a house. What would you have the cops do in that situation? If this is a real event, they don't go in quickly in order to confirm the situation and someone dies because of it would you blame the cops?

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
6nf 5y ago
If your ONLY source is a single, anonymous phone call, you need to verify the situation before sending armed men to a random address. For example convince the anonymous caller to give up their anonymity or call the house you're concerned about and try to speak to people who live there
- _-david-_ 5y ago
  It is probably best to verify the situation on an anonymous call, but my point is people will absolutely blame the cops if they assess the situation and that extra time results in people dying. The cops seems to be in a lose lose situation. If they go quickly without fully validating the situation they will be blamed for any death. If they take additional time to confirm the situation and that results in somebody dying they will be blamed. There needs to be validation, but there also needs to be quickness. It is impossible to get the right mix of the two in a consistent manner.
matz1 5y ago
>Lets take a situation where someone reports something like a shootout inside a house. What would you have the cops do in that situation? How do they handle it in other countries? >If this is a real event, they don't go in quickly in order to confirm the situation and someone dies because of it would you blame the cops? Yes i would blame the cops, its the police job to handle the situation without causing someone to dies. How exactly they should do is for the police to figure out. You can't expect general public to figure out the solution.
- _-david-_ 5y ago
  >How do they handle it in other countries? No clue. That is why I am asking for alternatives. >Yes i would blame the cops, its the police job to handle the situation without causing someone to dies. So if the cops go in too fast and it results in a death it is their fault? If they try to validate the information and somebody dies because of the slowness it is their fault? That is just not practical. We can't just blame cops no matter what they do. We need to decide if going fast and risking lives in that way is preferable or if more fully assessing thr situation and risking lives in that way is better. Just blaming the cops no matter what is wrong. >How exactly they should do is for the police to figure out. >You can't expect general public to figure out the solution. The police have a solution. People don't seem to like it since they go in without fully assessing the situation. Since we live in a democratic republic (at least if you live in the US) the general public should decide on the solution.
  - matz1 5y ago
    >The police have a solution. Then the solution is not good enough, they should figure out a better way. >People don't seem to like it since they go in without fully assessing the situation. bottom line what the general public want: the cop to handle the situation without causing death >Since we live in a democratic republic (at least if you live in the US) the general public should decide on the solution. The general public pay these police from tax to do certain job. The general public should force whoever in charge of the police to be replaced if they don't do good enough job.
    - _-david-_ 5y ago
      I think every one agrees that a cop killing an innocent during a swatting incident is bad, but like I said I am not sure if there is a better solution. You will either get cops going in without fully assessing the situation or taking too long assessing the situation. Both of these ways will result in deaths. Cops can maybe assess the situation more then they currently do, but not fully as a middle ground but since cops are not perfect they will make mistakes. The problem is it will never be perfect, but it seems like you are suggesting there is a way to make it perfect. That is holding cops to an impossible solution.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

6nf 5y ago

If your ONLY source is a single, anonymous phone call, you need to verify the situation before sending armed men to a random address. For example convince the anonymous caller to give up their anonymity or call the house you're concerned about and try to speak to people who live there

_-david-_ 5y ago
It is probably best to verify the situation on an anonymous call, but my point is people will absolutely blame the cops if they assess the situation and that extra time results in people dying. The cops seems to be in a lose lose situation. If they go quickly without fully validating the situation they will be blamed for any death. If they take additional time to confirm the situation and that results in somebody dying they will be blamed. There needs to be validation, but there also needs to be quickness. It is impossible to get the right mix of the two in a consistent manner.

matz1 5y ago

>Lets take a situation where someone reports something like a shootout inside a house. What would you have the cops do in that situation? How do they handle it in other countries? >If this is a real event, they don't go in quickly in order to confirm the situation and someone dies because of it would you blame the cops? Yes i would blame the cops, its the police job to handle the situation without causing someone to dies. How exactly they should do is for the police to figure out. You can't expect general public to figure out the solution.

_-david-_ 5y ago
>How do they handle it in other countries? No clue. That is why I am asking for alternatives. >Yes i would blame the cops, its the police job to handle the situation without causing someone to dies. So if the cops go in too fast and it results in a death it is their fault? If they try to validate the information and somebody dies because of the slowness it is their fault? That is just not practical. We can't just blame cops no matter what they do. We need to decide if going fast and risking lives in that way is preferable or if more fully assessing thr situation and risking lives in that way is better. Just blaming the cops no matter what is wrong. >How exactly they should do is for the police to figure out. >You can't expect general public to figure out the solution. The police have a solution. People don't seem to like it since they go in without fully assessing the situation. Since we live in a democratic republic (at least if you live in the US) the general public should decide on the solution.
- matz1 5y ago
  >The police have a solution. Then the solution is not good enough, they should figure out a better way. >People don't seem to like it since they go in without fully assessing the situation. bottom line what the general public want: the cop to handle the situation without causing death >Since we live in a democratic republic (at least if you live in the US) the general public should decide on the solution. The general public pay these police from tax to do certain job. The general public should force whoever in charge of the police to be replaced if they don't do good enough job.
  - _-david-_ 5y ago
    I think every one agrees that a cop killing an innocent during a swatting incident is bad, but like I said I am not sure if there is a better solution. You will either get cops going in without fully assessing the situation or taking too long assessing the situation. Both of these ways will result in deaths. Cops can maybe assess the situation more then they currently do, but not fully as a middle ground but since cops are not perfect they will make mistakes. The problem is it will never be perfect, but it seems like you are suggesting there is a way to make it perfect. That is holding cops to an impossible solution.