Rancher shot by police.

[Kellhound]

What military equipment are you refering to? My department routinely take rifles (ak, m16, ar 15) and other weapons that will go through our ballistic vests like butter off criminals. As do most city police in our area. Police need to have the equipment to respond and handle things they get sent to. Depending on the day, time it could take over an hour to mobilize, eqiup and deploy the swat team. Other than riot duty and swat, most cops do only wear the sam Browne belt with their uniform. Not sure what youre referring to

In 2011, ~88% of all firearm violence in the US was linked to a handgun. You may find rifles, but they are not used very often. I also highly doubt your department has taken many, if any, M16s from criminals (or actual AK-47/AKM for that matter). I have yet to see a case where the police needed anything more than a bolt action rifle, shotgun, or handgun to handle a criminal encounter. Most of the police departments here, even the small ones of ~5 officers, have gone to load bearing vests and tactical rigs for their handguns. They look more prepared for combat than most soldiers.

[stabetha]

Criticising poor training of some police officers in a nation, is neither cop hating nor nation bashing.

no but calling them "legal death squads" certainly is

[triplesdsu]

Except they all do.

It's a known and proven systemic problem, where they are all specifically trained and instructed to act like thugs.

I must have missed that particular training class. I think you mean to say there is an opinion that there is a systemic problem as nothing has been "proven".

- - - Updated - - -

In 2011, ~88% of all firearm violence in the US was linked to a handgun. You may find rifles, but they are not used very often. I also highly doubt your department has taken many, if any, M16s from criminals (or actual AK-47/AKM for that matter). I have yet to see a case where the police needed anything more than a bolt action rifle, shotgun, or handgun to handle a criminal encounter. Most of the police departments here, even the small ones of ~5 officers, have gone to load bearing vests and tactical rigs for their handguns. They look more prepared for combat than most soldiers.

So youre saying that cops only need vests and handguns and complain about vests and handguns. Safety equipment is safety equipment. We don't care about what happens 99 times out of 100 because it only takes that one time for a life to be taken. The fact that it might seem scary or agressive couldnt matter less. Whether they are actual m16, ar15s etc. I cant say with certainty. I see what's booked but dont inspect them myself so ill say they are of that style to be on the safe side.

Theres been very few occassions where ive had to take the AR out of the car, but its better to have something uou dont need vs needing something and not having it. We dont aim for tactical equalness with the bad guys. We want to have the advantage whenever possible.

[Kellhound]

I must have missed that particular training class. I think you mean to say there is an opinion that there is a systemic problem as nothing has been "proven".

- - - Updated - - -



So youre saying that cops only need vests and handguns and complain about vests and handguns. Safety equipment is safety equipment. We don't care about what happens 99 times out of 100 because it only takes that one time for a life to be taken. The fact that it might seem scary or agressive couldnt matter less. Whether they are actual m16, ar15s etc. I cant say with certainty. I see what's booked but dont inspect them myself so ill say they are of that style to be on the safe side.

Theres been very few occassions where ive had to take the AR out of the car, but its better to have something uou dont need vs needing something and not having it. We dont aim for tactical equalness with the bad guys. We want to have the advantage whenever possible.

If you cannot see the difference between a load bearing vest/tactical carry rig and a Sam Browne belt, you are part of the problem. Yes I know 99.99% of the police cant tell an AR-15 from an M-16, so they call it an M-16 to make it "scarier". That you have an AR-15 in your car says you are not wanting to be better equipped, you just want to "look intimidating with my military style rifle". If you wanted to be superior you would have a rifle in .308, not one chambered with a varmint cartridge that isn't even legal to use on a 90lbs deer. I am also willing to bet your handgun is a Glock in either 9mm or .40 S&W, and not in .45ACP, 10mm, or .357 Sig....

[Tuesdays]

I suppose that would be a valid statement if cops were actually killing innocent people every day.

Happens enough that the people they protect fear them.

[Mistame]

Except they all do.

No, they don't.

It's a known and proven systemic problem, where they are all specifically trained and instructed to act like thugs.

No, it's not.

They look more prepared for combat than most soldiers.

Clearly you're just knee-jerking to the drivel the media spews. Rare is the case when officers are running around in more than standard attire. And even if they were packing 80 lbs of "combat gear", at no point does the petty "feels" and opinions of paranoid lemmings trump the life of an officer.

Happens enough that the people they protect fear them.

With the right media exposure, a single instance could cause the same effect. Panty-waist idiots will be panty-waist idiots.

[Venant]

Happens enough that the people they protect fear them.

Well, in part that is because of the media. Its like how the media worked to make black people seem very scary back in the day. The truth is, in a country this large, it is unlikely that the vast majority of people will ever personally know somebody who is killed by the police, let alone wrongfully killed. McDonalds probably causes several times the number of deaths in this country that violent crime causes. The number of violent deaths from guns is comparable to the number of violent deaths from driving while under the influence of alcohol.

People in this country are paranoid, and certain people attempt to dishonestly portray the streets of the US as if they are the streets of Syria.

[Kellhound]

No, they don't.



No, it's not.



Clearly you're just knee-jerking to the drivel the media spews. Rare is the case when officers are running around in more than standard attire. And even if they were packing 80 lbs of "combat gear", at no point does the petty "feels" and opinions of paranoid lemmings trump the life of an officer.



With the right media exposure, a single instance could cause the same effect. Panty-waist idiots will be panty-waist idiots.

I have eyeballs, I see what they are wearing, that is why I say they look more prepared for combat than most soldiers. And actually, the perception that the police give off directly contributes to how they interact with the public.

[triplesdsu]

If you cannot see the difference between a load bearing vest/tactical carry rig and a Sam Browne belt, you are part of the problem. Yes I know 99.99% of the police cant tell an AR-15 from an M-16, so they call it an M-16 to make it "scarier". That you have an AR-15 in your car says you are not wanting to be better equipped, you just want to "look intimidating with my military style rifle". If you wanted to be superior you would have a rifle in .308, not one chambered with a varmint cartridge that isn't even legal to use on a 90lbs deer. I am also willing to bet your handgun is a Glock in either 9mm or .40 S&W, and not in .45ACP, 10mm, or .357 Sig....

Not sure why you think a patrol officer gets to decide what weapons the city chooses to purchase and issue. Duty belts are still the most common issue for officers but there has been an increase in tactical vests. Contrary to what you believe, its not for you to look at, its because its easier on the back than having all the gear weighed down on the hip. It also has the advantage of being easily removed so if the officers go back to the station, their office, etc, you can take it off and not have to wear it while typing reports, doing follow-up etc. Its comfort, not intimidation. Vests get uncomfortable after a while, especially if its warm and it feels quite nice to take it off when you can. You might be self-centered enough to think that officers are driving around hoping to impress you but in reality we just want to get the job done and not be any more uncomfortable or have back pain if it is avoidable. The rifles and shotguns (generally) stay in the car when needed.

You can bitch about you may know more about guns than many cops. Congratulations, you'll do well at trivia. Case law is much more meaningful to my job than reading Guns and Ammo. The bottom line however is that there are varying levels of firepower out there among the criminal element and whether you agree or not, police need to be equipped to deal with them. Incidents can escalate fast and end quicker. There isn't always time to call swat, let alone back up at times. As long as they are trained on how to handle and when to deploy said devices, that's all that really matters. Don't like. Fine. Everyone's entitled to an opinion. Just don't take it personal when others don't think it has much value in their decision making.

On a side note, im not sure how we even got off on this tangent when this incident doesnt seem to involve more than the officers handgun.

[I Push Buttons]

Same as any other police thread, would like to wait for the facts before I pass judgment.

The wife's story seems pretty obtuse.

According to her version of events: The police have a shooting gallery at the bull, then they allow the husband to walk into their crime scene with a rifle without stopping him, they allow him to walk up to the bull and point the gun at it, then just as he is about to shoot, one of them pulls his shoulder back and spins him around...

The story gets really off the charts at this point, they (the family) claim the rifle might have gone off as he spun around... They claim it might have gone off as the officer grabbed the gun by the scope, they claim it might have gone of after he was hit by police, literally three different what if's given... All of this also apparently occurred while an officer was within literal arms reach of the husband (since they claim he literally grabbed the husband and spun him around)... So apparently all of these cops opened up on the husband while another officer was standing on top of him, somehow not hitting him (doubt...)

And all of it apparently happened out of the blue without the police saying anything, once again, after allowing the guy to walk into their shooting scene with gun without stopping him...

---

I will wait for the trial. The article already points out that the family has hired several lawyers and intends to sue... So what possible reason could they have for lying and/or exaggerating...

[Mayhem]

Not really sure how the American people stand having legal death squads wander about the country.

Standard reply 101:
If you do what they tell you and comply you will not get shot. Except in the cases when the person complied and still got shot, but these are very rare.

[Tuesdays]

Well, in part that is because of the media. Its like how the media worked to make black people seem very scary back in the day. The truth is, in a country this large, it is unlikely that the vast majority of people will ever personally know somebody who is killed by the police, let alone wrongfully killed. McDonalds probably causes several times the number of deaths in this country that violent crime causes. The number of violent deaths from guns is comparable to the number of violent deaths from driving while under the influence of alcohol.

People in this country are paranoid, and certain people attempt to dishonestly portray the streets of the US as if they are the streets of Syria.

My grandfather was a police man, I don't disrespect the law. I still found my self looking down the barrel of a police officers gun when I was a teen, being randomly questioned about a some stolen VCR, I guess because I had friends I was a threat huh?

[Kalis]

no but calling them "legal death squads" certainly is

What part of that is nation bashing? What they meant is unknown, as the post ambiguous, it could mean some cops or all cops.

[Deleted]

no but calling them "legal death squads" certainly is

That's not "nation-bashing", any more than your docile support of the police when they murdered a us citizen is.

[Kellhound]

Not sure why you think a patrol officer gets to decide what weapons the city chooses to purchase and issue. Duty belts are still the most common issue for officers but there has been an increase in tactical vests. Contrary to what you believe, its not for you to look at, its because its easier on the back than having all the gear weighed down on the hip. It also has the advantage of being easily removed so if the officers go back to the station, their office, etc, you can take it off and not have to wear it while typing reports, doing follow-up etc. Its comfort, not intimidation. Vests get uncomfortable after a while, especially if its warm and it feels quite nice to take it off when you can. You might be self-centered enough to think that officers are driving around hoping to impress you but in reality we just want to get the job done and not be any more uncomfortable or have back pain if it is avoidable. The rifles and shotguns (generally) stay in the car when needed.

You can bitch about you may know more about guns than many cops. Congratulations, you'll do well at trivia. Case law is much more meaningful to my job than reading Guns and Ammo. The bottom line however is that there are varying levels of firepower out there among the criminal element and whether you agree or not, police need to be equipped to deal with them. Incidents can escalate fast and end quicker. There isn't always time to call swat, let alone back up at times. As long as they are trained on how to handle and when to deploy said devices, that's all that really matters. Don't like. Fine. Everyone's entitled to an opinion. Just don't take it personal when others don't think it has much value in their decision making.

On a side note, im not sure how we even got off on this tangent when this incident doesnt seem to involve more than the officers handgun.

Intimidation is very much a part of modern US policing, and "the look" is very much a part of that. Its something a local sheriff even admitted to a few years back when justifying the change in uniform. Police have generally traded respect for intimidation.

The last numbers I saw said this about police training: number of shots fired has gone up and number of hits has gone down with the introduction of high capacity handguns to the police (the number of accidental discharges seems to have gone up as well). The numbers also show that the average shooting distance has not changed very much over the decades, the vast vast majority still being under 20 feet.

Im sorry you do not understand the tools of your trade, or the tools of the opposition. Hence the comment that US police are poorly trained. Case law just backs the poor training up by giving police free passes when they screw up: "I was poorly trained!".

[Verdugo]

Jim Carey shoots a dying bovine multiple times without successfully killing it.

Bovine which is shown to be alive post-credits.

[Collegeguy]

The police have adopted a more aggressive attitude to accommodate for more aggressive criminals. The increase is military-style equipment is primarily so that older military equipment is actually getting used here rather than shipped overseas. As far as uniforms being "in line with combat troops", part of the responsibility of a police department is to keep their officers safe. It's a job like any job and if there's a risk of injury or death, they should do everything they can to keep the officers safe. Especially when the wages of those officers are shit. I sure as hell wouldn't put my life at risk for 30k/year. I wouldn't even do it for 100k.

Where are these more aggressive criminals that we need a military for? Life at risk? The garbage man statistically has a higher chance to die on the job than a cop.

[Dug]

Where are these more aggressive criminals that we need a military for? Life at risk? The garbage man statistically has a higher chance to die on the job than a cop.

He's probably talking about inner city and even then we created that shitshow to begin with. But fuckit some just want to bomb them from orbit