Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[lineygoblue]

I heard that the killer had on body armor and had put himself in a spot where a rush by officers could have resulted in more deaths to the officers.

I can't muster up any sympathy for the killer's demise, or how he may have died. He took up arms and declared war on the cops. He lost. As he should have.

[Mike]

I have no problem with it. Sure the police have been militarized... but so have the criminals.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Seems to me that what this boils down to is another crazy shooting people that happend to be cops. While there are strong racial overtones, it's still just another mass shooting. So, for me, using what ever means necessary to take the guy out that is shooting people is appropriate.

There is certainly a lack of leadership coming from the White House. Very disappointed. While this is another gun issue and those with that agenda are going to advance their anti gun agendas, the larger issue, the one that needs to be addressed, is the unrest in the African American community. There are some legitimate beefs from this community about policing. I can't list them all but I'm pretty sure there is some decent local corrective actions underway that aren't getting enough press.

The information being floated out there to the public should be as much about cops versus blacks as it is about policing in general. I don't think most Americans know as much as they need to know about law enforcement and the problems and dangers associated with it. There needs to be more information about what community police forces are doing to try to keep neighborhoods safe and the difficulties they face in doing that. There are some very smart police officers out there running big city police departments. They're not getting the coverage or the credit for the good that they are doing. What they get plenty of, though, is when people of color get in trouble with the law, typically flee from or resist police intervention and end up getting injured or being killed. Enough of that.

[Wild Hoss]

I can't muster up any sympathy for the killer's demise, or how he may have died. He took up arms and declared war on the cops. He lost. As he should have.

I don't think its an issue of "mustering up sympathy" so much as questioning whether we are comfortable assigning this kind of power to law enforcement. This is really no different than if SWAT hod tossed fragmentation grenades into the room...other costing tens of thousands of dollars more. Maybe Dallas PD wanted a new robot.

One one hand, I kind of like the message that it sends. As a nutcase, you cannot just assume you get go out like Dillinger, in some twisted, blaze of glory. You might just go out as a smear.

OTOH....its asking for a lot of trust in application from organizations who's judgement and record is already under increasing scrutiny.

[AlabamAlum]

Officers were authorized to shoot him with a riflle, but couldn't because of his position. Once lethal force was authorized, whether it was with a robot, rifle, grenade, or whatever, to me, is irrelevant.


If we should relegate cops to less-than-lethal means or not is the argument, imo. Not the tool they use.

[Wild Hoss]

Popular conservative narratives of some mass shootings:

Dallas: racism
Orlando: Islam
Sandy Hook: mental health

One of these things is not like the other.

Personally, I see all of them as being a nexus between mental health and access to high-capacity weapons.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Popular conservative narratives of some mass shootings:

Dallas: racism
Orlando: Islam
Sandy Hook: mental health

One of these things is not like the other.

Personally, I see all of them as being a nexus between mental health and access to high-capacity weapons.

So does the Hiltron.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Officers were authorized to shoot him with a riflle, but couldn't because of his position. Once lethal force was authorized, whether it was with a robot, rifle, grenade, or whatever, to me, is irrelevant.


If we should relegate cops to less-than-lethal means or not is the argument, imo. Not the tool they use.

Mostly agree with you but it's possible certain tools will make cops choose lethal force more quickly than they otherwise might. If the only option was three cops storming his bunker and at least one of them was sure to die, the cops might try negotiating an end a lot longer than when lethal force involves no physical risk to the officers.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Mostly agree with you but it's possible certain tools will make cops choose lethal force more quickly than they otherwise might. If the only option was three cops storming his bunker and at least one of them was sure to die, the cops might try negotiating an end a lot longer than when lethal force involves no physical risk to the officers.

Hair splitting ....... You have an active shooter, eliminate the threat and the quickest and most certain way to do that without endangering more lives is by killing him.

Responses like the one the Dallas police force used appear to be better than what the Orlando cops did - basically fail to make a quick decision to intervene with lethal force, tried to negotiate and then deal with the shooter killing 50 and injuring dozens more.

Responses to this kind of thing, when it comes to law enforcement, has to be a simple step wise evaluation that takes seconds and a well defined decision point for lethal response that can be implemented just as quickly.

[SeattleLionsFan]

I'm ok with blowing up and active shooter.

I'm less ok with them flat out murdering folks who pose no threat to them.

[AlabamAlum]

DSL,

I think you know I have issues with police overstepping. But cases should be evaluated individually. And when that case involves an ensconced, murderous madmad with a sniper rifle, and a STK order has been issued, then the safest method (to cops and pedestrians) should be used, imo.

[AlabamAlum]

In a way, it reminds me of Truman's decision to nuke Japan. Few argue that the bombs resulted in more deaths (on both sides) than if the Allies had decided to invade and occupy Japan conventionally. So, the use of the nukes was logical in that case. It certainly doesn't mean we need to use nukes all the time. Likewise, oversight on when a robot can be used is necessary, too. This case was justified, imo.

[Wild Hoss]

So does the Hiltron.

She is correct.

[Wild Hoss]

In a way, it reminds me of Truman's decision to nuke Japan. Few argue that the bombs resulted in more deaths (on both sides) than if the Allies had decided to invade and occupy Japan conventionally. So, the use of the nukes was logical in that case. It certainly doesn't mean we need to use nukes all the time. Likewise, oversight on when a robot can be used is necessary, too. This case was justified, imo.

Not sure that analogy fits...this would be more akin to Truman waiting longer to use the bomb. And even then, you have the weight of ongoing combat and the resulting death and carnage weighing on the choice.

Here, they had the snake cornered, and in fact negotiated for several hours. Could they have waited longer? It seems likely.

And again, this isn't out of concern for this particular douchebag, but rather, as DSL states, a governor on LE decisonmaking.

[AlabamAlum]

Well, we certainly had Japan cornered and could have waited longer. We tried negotiation, too.

The argument to me is whether police can authorize lethal force in such situations and less on the tool.

Your mileage, as always, can vary.