Police Commission Wants Cops To Run From Armed Suspects

[CMartel]

LA Police Union: Police Commission Wants Cops To Run From Armed Suspects
Kerry Picket
8:26 PM 09/22/2016
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/22/la...#ixzz4LNn0GKrw


The Los Angeles Police Commission wants LAPD police officers to run away when a suspect confronts them with a weapon, warns the Los Angeles Police Protective League, the labor union of the city’s police officers.

The organization posted a blog post critical of the commission’s recent decision to find that fault lay upon an LAPD officer who used deadly force when a female suspect, Norma Guzman, came at him and his partner swinging a large knife.

“The key facts in this case are not in dispute. A female suspect, armed with an 8 to 9-inch knife, charged at officers, repeatedly ignored commands to stop, and was recorded yelling ‘shoot me’ as she swung her knife from side to side,” the LAPPL Board of Directors wrote in a blog post.

The armed suspect immediately closed the space between her knife and the police officers from 70 feet to no more than 5 feet in less 10 seconds. At this point, the first officer shot from his service weapon.


The second officer (Officer C) involved in the incident only had three seconds to react to the forthcoming threat. The Commission stated, “It was reasonable for Officer C to believe, in the moment when the use of force occurred, that the subject would imminently assault him with the knife.”

So why did the commission have a problem with the officers’ reaction?

The commission stated that the first officer’s “position initially provided Officer C with a position of tactical advantage” but lost the advantage as the suspect came at him. They wrote, “this advantage rapidly diminished as the Subject continued her advance, leaving him with neither distance nor effective cover as the Subject approached the space between two parked vehicles by which Officer C was located.”

“Suspect charging from the front. Vehicles on either side. Where do you ‘redeploy?’ Run backwards. This is absurd and it’s dangerous. What happens if the officer loses his footing with a charging suspect? What happens if the suspect runs into a nearby home or store and confronts its occupants with her weapon?” LAPPL asks.


The LAPPL continues, “What if the suspect also had a concealed gun? What is created when an officer turns tail and runs away is a large target. It’s called a back. The officer would put their lives in further jeopardy by running away if the suspect had a gun. At this close range, running away would create a self-caused danger to the officers and the public.”

The commission — composed of five mayoral appointees and city council-confirmed civilians who broke ranks with Police Chief Charlie Beck — claimed the LAPD Officer violated deadly force rules, in the case which happened last year. Despite support from Beck, Guzman’s family and local activists want the officer to be charged criminally, the Los Angeles Times reported.


The last three appointees have been on more the activist side against law enforcement, a source told The Daily Caller. It was a 4-1 vote.

In a statement to TheDC, The Board Of Directors of The LAPPL said, “When officers are attacked, they must be able to protect themselves. It’s appalling that four commissioners with zero law enforcement experience can so easily cast aside the Chief of Police’s conclusion that our officers acted within policy.”

The statement continues, “The Commission’s finding that an officer being charged at with a weapon should run away is absurd. The commission just made every police officer’s job more dangerous. They are telling officers you can save your life or save your job, but you cannot do both.”


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/22/la...#ixzz4LNnRspbw

[Azadina]

What good will running away do when people are loaded with firearms? Nothing. It's suicidal, nothing more.

[Unkempt]

Probably because it stops cops from shooting at people who didn't even attack them.

This is just a crazy question, but isn't the job of the police force to protect the public from those armed people? If all the cops are going to do is run from armed suspects, what good are they other than a revenue generating source for the state? (And I'd argue that is one of the biggest reasons there is a spotlight on cops, there are far too many interactions within non-criminals for reasons that have no importance on public safety, but instead on writing tickets).

So, are the public citizens supposed to hire private security now to protect themselves from armed individuals that pose a risk?

[CParker1987]

Probably because it stops cops from shooting at people who didn't even attack them.

oh you poor lost puppet of the media

- - - Updated - - -

This is just a crazy question, but isn't the job of the police force to protect the public from those armed people? If all the cops are going to do is run from armed suspects, what good are they other than a revenue generating source for the state? (And I'd argue that is one of the biggest reasons there is a spotlight on cops, there are far too many interactions within non-criminals for reasons that have no importance on public safety, but instead on writing tickets).

So, are the public citizens supposed to hire private security now to protect themselves from armed individuals that pose a risk?

If the public citizens would quit being sheep and stand up for themselves... I bet the crime rate would drop. You know how you protect yourself? Get a gun and learn how to use it properly and accurately. Train under pressure so when your faced with that criminal you can react and end the threat accurately. It's easy to be a target when your weak and don't fight back.

All this talk about cops shooting innocent people are getting on my nerves. Majority of the time, deadly force is used when it was called for. The small percentage that the media decides to blow up and cause racial tension about is what you all see. If you are committing a crime and you are armed then expect to be faced with force. If the cop tells you to drop the weapon and you don't, expect to be shot. point blank period. Criminals want to break the law and then get away with it... what kind of crap is that?

[Allybeboba]

Does this mean all I have to do is run at a police officer with my pocket knife now and I can get Scott free?

[ParanoiD84]

Most retarded thing I've heard all day, that will never happen.

[Korlok]

oh you poor lost puppet of the media

- - - Updated - - -



If the public citizens would quit being sheep and stand up for themselves... I bet the crime rate would drop. You know how you protect yourself? Get a gun and learn how to use it properly and accurately. Train under pressure so when your faced with that criminal you can react and end the threat accurately. It's easy to be a target when your weak and don't fight back.

All this talk about cops shooting innocent people are getting on my nerves. Majority of the time, deadly force is used when it was called for. The small percentage that the media decides to blow up and cause racial tension about is what you all see. If you are committing a crime and you are armed then expect to be faced with force. If the cop tells you to drop the weapon and you don't, expect to be shot. point blank period. Criminals want to break the law and then get away with it... what kind of crap is that?

For the bolded - Aren't crime rates already dropping steadily in most western nations?

[Noxx79]

For the bolded - Aren't crime rates already dropping steadily in most western nations?

Yes.

Also if you read the source, it basically says that officers should have moved further away from a suspect with a knife.

Why is that controversial? Or are we allowed to exaggerate like the daily caller and say that cops should actually run chest first into knife welders?

[Forgettable]

It really shows how messed up the legal system is when the stupid / life threatening option is the recommended one.

[zenkai]

I think in protested areas, any time someone resist arrest, or runs the cops should just let them go and walk the other way. This is what the people in that area want.

[Daelak]

I think in protested areas, any time someone resist arrest, or runs the cops should just let them go and walk the other way. This is what the people in that area want.

Are you a spokesperson for BLM now?

[zenkai]

Are you a spokesperson for BLM now?

Sure, why not, they're not organized, if you have twitter you speak for BLM

[Endus]

This is just a crazy question, but isn't the job of the police force to protect the public from those armed people?

More specifically, the job of the police force is to protect the public, including those armed people.

Lethal force needs to be an absolute last resort, only used when A> the officer is under immediate lethal threat (which means "they're lifting that gun to shoot at me", not "I see a gun"), or B> a civilian is being so threatened. In the US, there's a third exception, for those who committed a violent felony and are fleeing the scene, and the officer cannot stop them from doing so without lethal force. Which means something like "I was shot in the leg and couldn't chase after him", not "I didn't want to chase him because he might be faster than me anyway".

A woman running at you with a knife? Depending on the distance, not an immediate threat. If you've drawn your service weapon, that range is something like 20 feet, if I recall the training. Within that range, if she's refusing to stop, your hand's being forced. Outside of that range? Use other means. That may mean redeploying back behind better cover.


What needs to stop is shooting people for not obeying police orders (even "drop that gun", if they're just holding it, pointed at the ground), or for doing stuff like reaching into their car or opening a door. Those aren't immediate threats. They may shortly BECOME such, and that changes things, but in that moment, they do not justify lethal force as a response.

[Belize]

Probably because it stops cops from shooting at people who didn't even attack them.

93 unarmed people shot by Police in 2015. And how many of those actually actually didn't attack them (remember you can assault someone without a weapon).

Yeah, ok, keep pushing the narrative that the evil po-po go around shooting poor defenseless citizens for kicks and giggles.

[Dextroden]

More specifically, the job of the police force is to protect the public, including those armed people.

Lethal force needs to be an absolute last resort, only used when A> the officer is under immediate lethal threat (which means "they're lifting that gun to shoot at me", not "I see a gun"), or B> a civilian is being so threatened. In the US, there's a third exception, for those who committed a violent felony and are fleeing the scene, and the officer cannot stop them from doing so without lethal force. Which means something like "I was shot in the leg and couldn't chase after him", not "I didn't want to chase him because he might be faster than me anyway".

A woman running at you with a knife? Depending on the distance, not an immediate threat. If you've drawn your service weapon, that range is something like 20 feet, if I recall the training. Within that range, if she's refusing to stop, your hand's being forced. Outside of that range? Use other means. That may mean redeploying back behind better cover.


What needs to stop is shooting people for not obeying police orders (even "drop that gun", if they're just holding it, pointed at the ground), or for doing stuff like reaching into their car or opening a door. Those aren't immediate threats. They may shortly BECOME such, and that changes things, but in that moment, they do not justify lethal force as a response.

Weren't you in the thread about the kid committing armed robbery with a bb gun and then pulling it on the cop saying that kid shouldn't have been shot? Because that is at complete odds with what you are saying here.

[Daelak]

93 unarmed people shot by Police in 2015. And how many of those actually actually didn't attack them (remember you can assault someone without a weapon).

Yeah, ok, keep pushing the narrative that the evil po-po go around shooting poor defenseless citizens for kicks and giggles.

It's more along the lines of police (including minority race police officers) are not paid nor trained enough, so they end up escalating situations that could easily be extinguished in alternative ways, like waiting, or through inundation of non-lethal forms. Couple that with the over-policing of segregated neighborhoods that have been deliberately excluded from prosperity and growth because racist whites of all stripes didn't want the 'coloreds' bleeding into their society. This creates a sub-humanity where human cops are not immune from.

[Endus]

Weren't you in the thread about the kid committing armed robbery with a bb gun and then pulling it on the cop saying that kid shouldn't have been shot? Because that is at complete odds with what you are saying here.

If I was, that would've been before it was known that the "BB gun" looked exactly like an actual firearm. Cops aren't superhuman.

If it had looked like a NERF gun, by comparison, I'd stand by statements that it doesn't warrant lethal force.

[Dextroden]

If I was, that would've been before it was known that the "BB gun" looked exactly like an actual firearm. Cops aren't superhuman.

If it had looked like a NERF gun, by comparison, I'd stand by statements that it doesn't warrant lethal force.

No, no. The picture of the extremely realistic bb gun had been posted at that point. So, it was just the usual anti-cop things, then.

[Endus]

No, no. The picture of the extremely realistic bb gun had been posted at that point. So, it was just the usual anti-cop things, then.

Wait, you're thinking of this thread, right? http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/2070859

Well, then you're literally making stuff up, because I never posted in that thread. I honestly didn't remember if I had or not, but you convinced me to double-check and be sure you're misrepresenting me.

[Allybeboba]

That's only people that died, not those who got unnecessarily brutalized or barely survived etc.

Also those stats are given by the police, not really a trustworthy source.

So what you are stating is that you don't trust the police?
Who are you going to call when you need help? The local drug dealer? Local gangs perhaps. Maybe an activist group will run to your aid!
Better yet... call ghostbusters!!