4 ms·
It seems like there's a point there somewhere but I don't get it. The recent Texas mall shooter was shot and killed by the police after he had shot 15 people. B
by suddenclarity 3y ago
It seems like there's a point there somewhere but I don't get it. The recent Texas mall shooter was shot and killed by the police after he had shot 15 people. Based on the stats, the police would be infinitely more likely to kill than be killed. Was it then wrong to shot him? Did the police not risk his life by running towards the perpetrator? It's obvious that people try to make a point, but I don't get it.
- autoexec 3y agoI just found the answer. I haven't really formed any solid opinion on it. I have no idea what a good K/D ratio for police would be, or how useful that information even is. I'd rather have stats for things like the number of innocent people that were killed, or how many people were killed unnecessarily innocent or not, or the number killed while in custody or while being restrained, etc. If the idea is to demonstrate that police work isn't as dangerous as many people think, the fact that police aren't killed on the job as often as grubhub drivers or crossing guards or garbage collectors should make that clear enough. For at least the first two years of the pandemic the number one killer of police was covid. Typically most police die on the job in car accidents. Police are called on to encounter dangerous or uncertain situations, but they are also (supposed to be) trained for exactly that. That's the job. Ideally, none of them would die on the job and they wouldn't kill anyone either.
- bombolo 3y agoIt's a bit hard to get data about how many innocent people were killed. The USA is the country that defines any adult male died in a drone strike as a terrorist. If the same criteria is applied to the police, the official number would have nothing to do with the real number.