09-16-2016, 10:05 AM
(09-15-2016, 10:02 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Given that I've already said I don't know enough to make a firm decision on this guy's termination I can absolutely frame an argument for his being censured over this incident. Basically the guy put his life on the line by not reacting to provocation with a firearm by a man the officer believed was in crisis and wanted the police to shoot him. Essentially, the officer was gambling with his life that he was correct about the suspect. That being said it's one thing to gamble with your own life, it is entirely another to gamble with the lives of others. The minute the suspect put the lives of anyone other than himself in jeopardy he is obligated to respond with deadly force. Failure to do so would be a terminatable offense.
Yes, but action (or inaction) that allows for discipline "up to and including termination" does not require termination. (Similarly, when the force continuum allows you to escalate the level of force, it does not require it.) So, termination still seems extreme.
And, as we have both noted, we don't have all the facts. And, we almost certainly never will. This highlights the absurdity of news coverage. Citizens never know what really happened, and yet they engage in analysis like this, which is kind of a waste of time when you think about it. On the other hand, we have to do something to pass the time. Still, it makes me happy I don't read the paper much or watch the news shows much. People end up getting worked up about things they don't really know much about.
JOHN ROBERTS: From time to time in the years to come, I hope you will be treated unfairly so that you will come to know the value of justice... I wish you bad luck, again, from time to time so that you will be conscious of the role of chance in life and understand that your success is not completely deserved and that the failure of others is not completely deserved either.
