Cop in America doing a bad job, again

On this one I agree with the cops...they were literally being shot at on a public road. I'm not sure what else the cop was supposed to do.
 
berbatrick said:
On this one I agree with the cops...they were literally being shot at on a public road. I'm not sure what else the cop was supposed to do.
Click to expand...
You wouldn't be agreeing if you or someone you knew caught a stray bullet. It's a tough one, I'd say maybe drop back and set something up ahead in a less dangerous area. I'm no cop tho...
 
I am surprised police don't play a bigger role in gun control advocacy. Imagine being an officer in a country armed to the teeth?
I'm not defending the cnuts, but the prevalence of guns can't be helping.
 
Adisa said:
I am surprised police don't play a bigger role in gun control advocacy. Imagine being an officer in a country armed to the teeth?
I'm not defending the cnuts, but the prevalence of guns can't be helping.
Click to expand...
It’s usually split between upper level brass supporting gun control and street level patrolmen not supporting it.
 
Some of these are hard to completely blame on cops imo. It's real fecking easy to criticize people going after armed murderers from our desk chair.

This is one thing where gun control would improve things massively. Cops in The Netherlands don't reach for their gun right away, because they know not everyone here is carrying one. In the video with the perp reaching for his gun what the feck else are you going to do beside shoot him? Wait for him to shoot you and die with the knowledge that at least you won't be remembered as an over zealous cop?

There's plenty of video's in that thread that show racist, cnut dipshits that should never be wearing any sort of uniform, but some of these latest are acking more to self defense.
 
I can't believe anybody is trained to send rounds down a residential street like that. The chase ended up at an elementary school FFS. Police have ways of tracking vehicles so a running gun battle in the street doesn't seem like a good idea to me.
 
Grinner said:
I can't believe anybody is trained to send rounds down a residential street like that. The chase ended up at an elementary school FFS. Police have ways of tracking vehicles so a running gun battle in the street doesn't seem like a good idea to me.
Click to expand...

Not just those bat shit mental police shots.

Their presence in the pursuit is what’s causing the suspects to shoot aimlessly from their car, not to mention the dangerous nature of driving in attempts to get away from police.

Potential for a bystander or vehicle to get mowed down or caught in the crossfire is way way way too high to continue the pursuit.

Totally appreciate they’re chasing gun toting suspected murderers but responsibility lies with the police to see a bigger picture. There’s plenty of ways to track and stop vehicles.

Single officer patrol, shooting through your own windscreen whilst balancing the wheel under your gun at speed! Madness.
 
It seems the chief is supportive of the officers' actions and their shooting policy backs them up. Many departments, including mine, do not allow shooting at moving vehicles or even from moving vehicles. Even if I was allowed to, I personally would not have taken those shots only because I'm not confident in taking accurate shots while SAFELY maneuvering my own vehicle. If I was a partner in the passenger seat, then yea that's different and I'd be more comfortable in shooting at the suspects.

He did have the sense to close distance before he shot to lower the risk of stray bullets.
Common practice, as someone mentioned above, is to track and coordinate with an airship unit. But it really is a judgment call. The scum pieces of shits were driving very dangerously and firing away endangering officers and the public. And if it was known at the time that they were murder suspects, then you have a violent fleeing felon situation where immediate apprehension is paramount.

At the end of the day, officers weren't hurt and got to go home. 1 piece of shit dead to make the world a better place. The other piece of shit will die in prison hopefully. Overall result was good.
 
I'm curious why they don't have better radio tech. The cop is seen having to use one hand to radio while driving at high speeds. Surely they can have some sort of hands-free bluetooth set-up in the car.
 
Grinner said:
I'm curious why they don't have better radio tech. The cop is seen having to use one hand to radio while driving at high speeds. Surely they can have some sort of hands-free bluetooth set-up in the car.
Click to expand...

Hands-free guns too. If this whole gun fight while driving at speed thing is part of police procedure they might as well mount a feck off minigun on the roof with a wee thumb joystick to control it on the steering wheel. Light those fcukers up, good and proper.
 
choiboyx012 said:
It seems the chief is supportive of the officers' actions and their shooting policy backs them up. Many departments, including mine, do not allow shooting at moving vehicles or even from moving vehicles. Even if I was allowed to, I personally would not have taken those shots only because I'm not confident in taking accurate shots while SAFELY maneuvering my own vehicle. If I was a partner in the passenger seat, then yea that's different and I'd be more comfortable in shooting at the suspects.

He did have the sense to close distance before he shot to lower the risk of stray bullets.
Common practice, as someone mentioned above, is to track and coordinate with an airship unit. But it really is a judgment call. The scum pieces of shits were driving very dangerously and firing away endangering officers and the public. And if it was known at the time that they were murder suspects, then you have a violent fleeing felon situation where immediate apprehension is paramount.

At the end of the day, officers weren't hurt and got to go home. 1 piece of shit dead to make the world a better place. The other piece of shit will die in prison hopefully. Overall result was good.
Click to expand...

Just because no innocent people died as a result of their raging idiocy this time doesn't make it ok.
 
There was an incident in New Brunswick, Canada where three or four RCMP officers were killed by a gunman. One of them died while driving his patrol vehicle at the guy (who was stationery and armed with a rifle) at about 70km/h while shooting at him through the windshield with his service pistol.

Perhaps not surprisingly, this officer got shot in the head. Too many people in this world think they're John McClane.
 
I'm curious to see this LVPD policy manual that sanctions shooting at a fleeing car through your windscreen with no hands on the wheel at high speed.
 
Grinner said:
I'm curious to see this LVPD policy manual that sanctions shooting at a fleeing car through your windscreen with no hands on the wheel at high speed.
Click to expand...
Was talking to a cop friend. Here, a cop can't even reach for his fire arm unless he feels his life is threatened. If I walk up to a cop in the street, knee him in the balls, then punch him in the face and shit in his boots. He has to try and overpower me without using his gun and only if he can't and fears that I will threaten his life (which I obviously would, being the bad arse that I am) is he allowed to even point his gun at me, let alone shoot me.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Hands-free guns too. If this whole gun fight while driving at speed thing is part of police procedure they might as well mount a feck off minigun on the roof with a wee thumb joystick to control it on the steering wheel. Light those fcukers up, good and proper.
Click to expand...
They probably would if they could afford it.
Grinner said:
I'm curious to see this LVPD policy manual that sanctions shooting at a fleeing car through your windscreen with no hands on the wheel at high speed.
Click to expand...
Doubt there is one, but at the same time wouldn't be surprised if you posted one in response.
 
KirkDuyt said:
Was talking to a cop friend. Here, a cop can't even reach for his fire arm unless he feels his life is threatened. If I walk up to a cop in the street, knee him in the balls, then punch him in the face and shit in his boots. He has to try and overpower me without using his gun and only if he can't and fears that I will threaten his life (which I obviously would, being the bad arse that I am) is he allowed to even point his gun at me, let alone shoot me.
Click to expand...
The cop in question was being shot at by the people in the vehicle he was pursuing.
 
Carolina Red said:
The cop in question was being shot at by the people in the vehicle he was pursuing.
Click to expand...
Ah, no I was speaking in general terms, as I said a few posts before I feel unqualified to criticize cops who shoot back when being fired upon. Untill being fired upon yourself and truly fearing for your life I think one should refrain from such criticism. Or to speak in caf terms they should shut the feck up.
 
berbatrick said:
On this one I agree with the cops...they were literally being shot at on a public road. I'm not sure what else the cop was supposed to do.
Click to expand...
Yes, they're being shot at on a public road. The sane thing to do would be to disengage, not add more stray bullets to the mix.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Hands-free guns too. If this whole gun fight while driving at speed thing is part of police procedure they might as well mount a feck off minigun on the roof with a wee thumb joystick to control it on the steering wheel. Light those fcukers up, good and proper.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you're being sarcastic, but this isn't actually a terrible concept. In fact, I'm pretty certain that if police cruisers were armored, and had say a gyro stabilized weapon system mounted on the vehicle, the number of shootings would drop dramatically, and the outcomes would be a lot safer for all parties, and much more surgical in incidents that did have to escalate.

The reason for this I think is pretty obvious. A mounted weapon system with a gyro is going to be about as laser accurate as it gets, an armored police cruiser is going to give the cops the peace of mind to know that not every stop is a life and death situation, which is the cause of many escalations that didn't need to happen. Sitting in your A/C'd armored car, with a remotely controlled weapon system, ordering a suspect to exit the vehicle and lay on the ground takes virtually all risk to the officer out of the situation.

Of course this is only something to consider due to the state of the country regarding weapons in the system, but given that this is the system we have, and very rich powerful people are against changing it, addressing the situation the police are in, in attempting to police a populace that is often armed at least as heavily as the police and in some cases far more so. Yea. I'm not sure cooling things off with armor and remote weapon to limit the risk to police officers and to promote cooler heads is a bad idea.

Look at the San Bernardino shooting. Look how the situation and the police behavior changed once the armored vehicles came into the equation. They didn't know that both suspects were dead, but everything slowed down, and became methodical, which is what you want I think in a situation where the surroundings are populated by civilians.
 
He was reported as having already shot dead one other person and then shot at the police. What if he had driven to the next school, concert etc. How would disengaging have looked?

I'm fairly critical of the police in general but this cop displayed an amount of courage I don't think i'd have.
 
Abizzz said:
He was reported as having already shot dead one other person and then shot at the police. What if he had driven to the next school, concert etc. How would disengaging have looked?

I'm fairly critical of the police in general but this cop displayed an amount of courage I don't think i'd have.
Click to expand...

He's damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. If he backs off, people will criticize him for leaving two armed and deranged suspects on the loose, even if a heli is watching. What good is a helicopter at 5k feet if suddenly they stop and shoot more people? Then if he doesn't back off, he's criticized for being reckless. It was reckless, but I'm not sure what he was supposed to do.
 
Nucks said:
He's damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. If he backs off, people will criticize him for leaving two armed and deranged suspects on the loose, even if a heli is watching. What good is a helicopter at 5k feet if suddenly they stop and shoot more people? Then if he doesn't back off, he's criticized for being reckless. It was reckless, but I'm not sure what he was supposed to do.
Click to expand...

Agree. It was an extreme response to an extreme situation. Again, I would not have done what the officer did, however, I don't necessarily think he was completely wrong in doing so either. He had the confidence in himself and the determination to stop the threat then and there so kudos to him. When all is said and done there will always be the anti-cop brigade more concerned in faulting the officer, instead of appreciating the fact that both scumbags were taken out and the officers and public were unhurt.
 
choiboyx012 said:
Agree. It was an extreme response to an extreme situation. Again, I would not have done what the officer did, however, I don't necessarily think he was completely wrong in doing so either. He had the confidence in himself and the determination to stop the threat then and there so kudos to him. When all is said and done there will always be the anti-cop brigade more concerned in faulting the officer, instead of appreciating the fact that both scumbags were taken out and the officers and public were unhurt.
Click to expand...


I find myself siding with the officer in this case 60-40.
 
choiboyx012 said:
Agree. It was an extreme response to an extreme situation. Again, I would not have done what the officer did, however, I don't necessarily think he was completely wrong in doing so either. He had the confidence in himself and the determination to stop the threat then and there so kudos to him. When all is said and done there will always be the anti-cop brigade more concerned in faulting the officer, instead of appreciating the fact that both scumbags were taken out and the officers and public were unhurt.
Click to expand...


Such a bullshit post. It's all black and white to you, isn't it? That wasn't the only way to stop the threat. Just because some people don't agree that a gunfight in the streets at high speed was the correct solution doesn't mean they are anti-cop.
 
Shooting at a car on a busy residential street through your own windscreen while driving at high speeds just doesn't seem like a good idea.
 
choiboyx012 said:
Agree. It was an extreme response to an extreme situation. Again, I would not have done what the officer did, however, I don't necessarily think he was completely wrong in doing so either. He had the confidence in himself and the determination to stop the threat then and there so kudos to him. When all is said and done there will always be the anti-cop brigade more concerned in faulting the officer, instead of appreciating the fact that both scumbags were taken out and the officers and public were unhurt.
Click to expand...

Given that he received something like 35 rounds from the assailants, I think he was more than justified to return fire.
 
Grinner said:
Such a bullshit post. It's all black and white to you, isn't it? That wasn't the only way to stop the threat. Just because some people don't agree that a gunfight in the streets at high speed was the correct solution doesn't mean they are anti-cop.
Click to expand...

Black and white? You're barking up the wrong tree.

Grinner said:
That cop was amped up. Look at him fumbling his reload.
Click to expand...
Yea and what cop or person wouldn't be? I thought he did well in being mindful of his ammo management which is surprisingly very difficult even when shooting in a range, let alone in a high stress shootout.
 
choiboyx012 said:
When all is said and done there will always be the anti-cop brigade more concerned in faulting the officer, instead of appreciating the fact that both scumbags were taken out and the officers and public were unhurt.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:

You stated that you wouldn't do it, same as us. Does that make you anti-cop too? Or maybe, we aren't anti-cop, just anti-accident?
 
choiboyx012 said:
Agree. It was an extreme response to an extreme situation. Again, I would not have done what the officer did, however, I don't necessarily think he was completely wrong in doing so either. He had the confidence in himself and the determination to stop the threat then and there so kudos to him. When all is said and done there will always be the anti-cop brigade more concerned in faulting the officer, instead of appreciating the fact that both scumbags were taken out and the officers and public were unhurt.
Click to expand...
No thanks to the officer. He did lierally nothing to try and avoid civilian casualties, what with not breaking off when the suspects opened fire from a moving vehicle on a public street in broad daylight. Nah, he instead decided to pop off a few poorly aimed shots of his own. He's a fecking idiot that put the lives of innocent bystanders at risk through his terrible decisions.
 
Thinking that shooting through your windscreen whilst driving at speed in a residential area is a stupid idea makes you "anti-cop" now?

And people wonder why there's a divide between police and communities in America.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.