Scout Schultz and Our Current Society

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

This whole ordeal has now gotten absolutely ridiculous. There were violent protests last night that resulted in two police officers being injured and a police vehicle being burned over this.

http://www.ajc.com/news/three-arrested-violent-georgia-tech-protests-after-police-shoot-student/CVfX0KeBUlTPzYLCf3KnwO/

I really don't see how this could have gotten any clear cut. There's video, with sound, of the person advancing on police with a knife and refusing to drop it after multiple prompts while shouting "shoot me". A person who's tried to kill themselves before, and left THREE suicide notes and called the police on themselves reporting that someone was walking around with a knife and a gun.

Yet apparently we need "justice" against "murderous" police and need to burn things and attack police officers (who did absolutely nothing wrong). We went seriously wrong at some point in our society where police can't even do their job anymore, and suicidal people are being turned into martyrs who were "gunned down" by police.

[GMDino]

(09-19-2017, 12:29 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: This whole ordeal has now gotten absolutely ridiculous. There were violent protests last night that resulted in two police officers being injured and a police vehicle being burned over this.

http://www.ajc.com/news/three-arrested-violent-georgia-tech-protests-after-police-shoot-student/CVfX0KeBUlTPzYLCf3KnwO/

I really don't see how this could have gotten any clear cut. There's video, with sound, of the person advancing on police with a knife and refusing to drop it after multiple prompts while shouting "shoot me". A person who's tried to kill themselves before, and left THREE suicide notes and called the police on themselves reporting that someone was walking around with a knife and a gun.

Yet apparently we need "justice" against "murderous" police and need to burn things and attack police officers (who did absolutely nothing wrong). We went seriously wrong at some point in our society where police can't even do their job anymore, and suicidal people are being turned into martyrs who were "gunned down" by police.

People get upset (overly so in some cases) because of the cases where something similar happens (someone threatens police with knife or gun/is trying for suicide by cop) and the officers who handle it manage to arrest the suspect without killing them.

Every situation is different.  But when someone dies (whether they seemed to want to or not) it causes more emotions.  And writing a suicide note and saying "shoot me" isn't justification to actually shoot them.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(09-19-2017, 12:53 PM)GMDino Wrote: People get upset (overly so in some cases) because of the cases where something similar happens (someone threatens police with knife or gun/is trying for suicide by cop) and the officers who handle it manage to arrest the suspect without killing them.

Every situation is different.  But when someone dies (whether they seemed to want to or not) it causes more emotions.  And writing a suicide note and saying "shoot me" isn't justification to actually shoot them.

But it is if they also call the police on themselves saying they have a gun, and then refuse to drop a weapon while advancing on the police. Police aren't required to let themselves be potentially stabbed just because you want to suicide-by-cop.

What it ISN'T a justification for is to attack and injury police and burn things because you decided that a suicidal person's life is worth more than a police officer's.

People have watched WAY too much TV. There's all kinds of "why didn't they shoot them in the leg?" and such going around. Those people also are the types who probably wonder why police don't shoot out the tires in high speed pursuits. Just way too much TV, not enough reality.

Heck, as it is tasers have been removed from use by a lot of police because of lawsuits where they have opted for the less-lethal (much like there's no real "bullet-proof" vest, there's no such thing as "non-lethal" weapons that will reliably incapacitate someone) and tazed someone, only for them to have a heart attack and die. Bam. Wrongful death lawsuit settlement of millions of dollars. So some just stopped carrying it. Mace won't stop anyone either determined enough, or doped up enough.

So instead a police officer was forced to take someone's life (which Fs up most of them), two more police officers were injured, with one having to go to the hospital for treatment, and property was burned... because some asshole decided they wanted to die and contrived a situation where they'd make someone else do it for them. But they're special, so other assholes decided that the person who was forced to take another's life, will have to live with that, and now will have their life put under scruntiny of investigation was the one in the wrong. So they'll attack people and break/burn shit.

[Dill]

(09-19-2017, 01:40 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: But it is if they also call the police on themselves saying they have a gun, and then refuse to drop a weapon while advancing on the police. Police aren't required to let themselves be potentially stabbed just because you want to suicide-by-cop.

When I was in college in 1969, I remember local police disarming PTSD-stressed veteran who had drawn knife after a traffic stop. I am not sure how they did it. I think they surrounded him and two grabbed him from behind and brought him to the ground. This was a large, powerful man too.

Is it your view that police should abandon riskier but less lethal tactics when dealing with the mentally ill or otherwise incapacitated who may be armed? Is a cop who kills someone with a gun less likely to trigger a lawsuit than one who accidentally kills with a taser?

I'm not sure why shooting Scout in the leg would be as ridiculous as shooting the tire of a speeding car, especially if he were approaching slow the police slowly.  It doesn't appear there was any attempt to use mace or maybe club the guy. How big was that knife? Some say the blade was not out.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(09-22-2017, 11:07 PM)Dill Wrote: When I was in college in 1969, I remember local police disarming PTSD-stressed veteran who had drawn knife after a traffic stop. I am not sure how they did it. I think they surrounded him and two grabbed him from behind and brought him to the ground. This was a large, powerful man too.

Is it your view that police should abandon riskier but less lethal tactics when dealing with the mentally ill or otherwise incapacitated who may be armed? Is a cop who kills someone with a gun less likely to trigger a lawsuit than one who accidentally kills with a taser?

I'm not sure why shooting Scout in the leg would be as ridiculous as shooting the tire of a speeding car, especially if he were approaching slow the police slowly.  It doesn't appear there was any attempt to use mace or maybe club the guy. How big was that knife? Some say the blade was not out.

And good for those police officers, they personally felt that risking their lives was worth it in that case. That said, it wasn't their obligation to do so. A police officer with a newborn at home might have a different threshold of how much they're willing to risk their lives than a single middle aged officer with no children.

My view is that giving a person opportunities to put down a knife peacefully while they continue to advance on you is the threshold a police officer has to reach. After that, it is up to them how much danger they're willing to put themselves into in order to subdue a uncooperative person coming at them with a weapon. Maybe those two guys get stabbed taking him down, or maybe it all happens safely. You'll never know how it will turn out until AFTER the fact. There's no sign hanging on each person that says "mentally ill, needs help" or "high on drugs, will rush through mace and stab you a lot" or anywhere in between. Not to mention just because someone is mentally ill doesn't mean they're not dangerous.

A police officer who kills someone with a gun will have the standard investigation and if they're cleared, it's generally because there was reason enough for the shooting, thus a lawsuit is pretty much doomed to fail.

A police officer who shoots someone with a taser has made the decision that a gun (and thus death) was not the correct response to that situation, thus if someone dies from it, they're 100% getting sued and going to have to settle for multi-millions.

As for the leg stuff, police are trained to aim for center mass. The same reason why they don't try shooting guns out of people's hands or anything. They train over and over for shooting center mass. It's the easiest place to hit, and it's the most likely to keep the bullet from going elsewhere. What people forget about bullets is they don't just magically stop or vanish if you miss. They go elsewhere. So if you shoot at someone's leg and miss (keep in mind it's dark, they're walking, your adrenaline is pumping from a dangerous situation) that bullet is still going to go somewhere. Bricks are not bullet proof. Drywall is not bullet proof. Cars are not bullet proof. You shoot, miss, and that bullet could hit an innocent bystander who's just driving past, or sitting in their apartment eating their dinner, because you wanted to shoot someone in the leg rather than the chest. Meanwhile you missed the person you were shooting at and they're still closing in on you.

Not to mention that the whole "shooting in the leg is safe" thing is total bullshit. The second largest vein (the femoral artery) is in your leg. You nick that and the person's going to bleed out fast regardless. Even if you were an expert marksman, there's not really any magic spot where you can reliably shoot someone that is guaranteed to disable them as a threat, but not threaten their life. Hence, people have watched too much TV.

[Benton]

We need to go back to funding mental health programs. It wouldn't magically fix all if there issues, but it would help in a lot of cases where untreated mental illness leads to some sort of violence.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(09-24-2017, 09:24 AM)Benton Wrote: We need to go back to funding mental health programs. It wouldn't magically fix all if there issues, but it would help in a lot of cases where untreated mental illness leads to some sort of violence.

Perhaps so.

[Dill]

(09-24-2017, 12:05 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: And good for those police officers, they personally felt that risking their lives was worth it in that case. That said, it wasn't their obligation to do so. A police officer with a newborn at home might have a different threshold of how much they're willing to risk their lives than a single middle aged officer with no children.

My view is that giving a person opportunities to put down a knife peacefully while they continue to advance on you is the threshold a police officer has to reach. After that, it is up to them how much danger they're willing to put themselves into in order to subdue a uncooperative person coming at them with a weapon. Maybe those two guys get stabbed taking him down, or maybe it all happens safely. You'll never know how it will turn out until AFTER the fact. There's no sign hanging on each person that says "mentally ill, needs help" or "high on drugs, will rush through mace and stab you a lot" or anywhere in between. Not to mention just because someone is mentally ill doesn't mean they're not dangerous.

A police officer who kills someone with a gun will have the standard investigation and if they're cleared, it's generally because there was reason enough for the shooting, thus a lawsuit is pretty much doomed to fail.

A police officer who shoots someone with a taser has made the decision that a gun (and thus death) was not the correct response to that situation, thus if someone dies from it, they're 100% getting sued and going to have to settle for multi-millions.

As for the leg stuff, police are trained to aim for center mass. The same reason why they don't try shooting guns out of people's hands or anything. They train over and over for shooting center mass. It's the easiest place to hit, and it's the most likely to keep the bullet from going elsewhere. What people forget about bullets is they don't just magically stop or vanish if you miss. They go elsewhere. So if you shoot at someone's leg and miss (keep in mind it's dark, they're walking, your adrenaline is pumping from a dangerous situation) that bullet is still going to go somewhere. Bricks are not bullet proof. Drywall is not bullet proof. Cars are not bullet proof. You shoot, miss, and that bullet could hit an innocent bystander who's just driving past, or sitting in their apartment eating their dinner, because you wanted to shoot someone in the leg rather than the chest. Meanwhile you missed the person you were shooting at and they're still closing in on you.

Not to mention that the whole "shooting in the leg is safe" thing is total bullshit. The second largest vein (the femoral artery) is in your leg. You nick that and the person's going to bleed out fast regardless. Even if you were an expert marksman, there's not really any magic spot where you can reliably shoot someone that is guaranteed to disable them as a threat, but not threaten their life. Hence, people have watched too much TV.

A good answer, Leonard. I am just concerned that we may be witnessing a shift in what people consider acceptable escalation of force.  A policeman is not a soldier fighting an enemy, but someone engaged to protect people, sometimes from themselves.  That crazy looking guy with a knife might be somebody's kid who needs rehab. Maybe another cop's kid.
If one chooses to be a police officer, then one chooses to face these risks. That doesn't mean police officers have to take unnecessary risks, but I am hoping they have more of a plan than "shoot if he doesn't stop when ordered."  Police killings often become political if people think there could/should have been more intermediate steps between the first order to desist and the kill shot.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(09-25-2017, 01:47 AM)Dill Wrote: A good answer, Leonard. I am just concerned that we may be witnessing a shift in what people consider acceptable escalation of force.  A policeman is not a soldier fighting an enemy, but someone engaged to protect people, sometimes from themselves.  That crazy looking guy with a knife might be somebody's kid who needs rehab. Maybe another cop's kid.
If one chooses to be a police officer, then one chooses to face these risks. That doesn't mean police officers have to take unnecessary risks, but I am hoping they have more of a plan than "shoot if he doesn't stop when ordered."  Police killings often become political if people think there could/should have been more intermediate steps between the first order to desist and the kill shot.

I am more concerned we are becoming a society where people are no longer being held responsible for their own actions because there's a convenient scapegoat that everyone can blame.

I saw some article online recently by the Enquirer about following the heroin epidemic for one week and how many people OD'd and died and such and the comments over the part where they mentioned how many people were arrested were things like... "Must be nice to have the privilege of not having your family torn apart over an addiction they have no control over." ... making it both a racial thing, and a not-their-fault thing. My first thought was "They chose to use the drug, didn't they? That was the control they had over the addiction." because I am fairly certain that outside of some crazy exceptions, people who choose to not do heroin, don't get addicted to heroin. I know I have never used heroin, and surprisingly enough don't have a heroin addiction. That was my control over it.

Yet that responsibility for their own actions has gone away, because now everyone is a victim, and there is always someone else to blame for it.

The parents of this person who is a KNOWN suicide risk and mental health crisis, what is their reaction when their child writes three suicide notes, calls the police on themselves telling them they have a gun, and then walks at the police who respond with a knife while screaming "shoot me"? Oh, it's not their child's fault ("child", the person was 21) and it's certainly not THEIR fault for failing to get their known suicidal child the help they needed.

No, of course not. It is somehow the police officer's fault for responding to a call that someone had a gun and a knife, responding, and when faced with a person with a knife (and potentially a gun, according to the call) choosing to shoot a person who's coming at them with a knife despite multiple attempts to get them to stop.

Take some freaking personal responsibility for your actions, or in the case of the parents inactions, people. If you love someone and they have mental health problems, get them some help, don't ignore the problem and then blame other people when they flip out. Don't just riot, break, and burn things in response to their bad choices and your failings to act.

[Dill]

(09-26-2017, 12:53 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: I am more concerned we are becoming a society where people are no longer being held responsible for their own actions because there's a convenient scapegoat that everyone can blame.

I saw some article online recently by the Enquirer about following the heroin epidemic for one week and how many people OD'd and died and such and the comments over the part where they mentioned how many people were arrested were things like... "Must be nice to have the privilege of not having your family torn apart over an addiction they have no control over." ... making it both a racial thing, and a not-their-fault thing. My first thought was "They chose to use the drug, didn't they? That was the control they had over the addiction." because I am fairly certain that outside of some crazy exceptions, people who choose to not do heroin, don't get addicted to heroin. I know I have never used heroin, and surprisingly enough don't have a heroin addiction. That was my control over it.

Yet that responsibility for their own actions has gone away, because now everyone is a victim, and there is always someone else to blame for it.

The parents of this person who is a KNOWN suicide risk and mental health crisis, what is their reaction when their child writes three suicide notes, calls the police on themselves telling them they have a gun, and then walks at the police who respond with a knife while screaming "shoot me"? Oh, it's not their child's fault ("child", the person was 21) and it's certainly not THEIR fault for failing to get their known suicidal child the help they needed.

No, of course not. It is somehow the police officer's fault for responding to a call that someone had a gun and a knife, responding, and when faced with a person with a knife (and potentially a gun, according to the call) choosing to shoot a person who's coming at them with a knife despite multiple attempts to get them to stop.

Take some freaking personal responsibility for your actions, or in the case of the parents inactions, people. If you love someone and they have mental health problems, get them some help, don't ignore the problem and then blame other people when they flip out. Don't just riot, break, and burn things in response to their bad choices and your failings to act.

Well I agree with you that it is important for people to assume responsibility for their actions. But in conflicts between people, even police and criminals, there might be situations in which both parties do not take responsibility and claim victimhood.

I am never surprised if parents expect police to exhaust every possibility before shooting their (21-year-old) child. If someone is screaming "shoot me," then I think that removes some ambiguity from the situation.