Out of focus...

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-26-2016, 12:00 PM)hollodero Wrote: Well, the second isn't focused on because that is their job. It's mainly dealing with said criminal individuals.
Most certainly a dangerous job, for sure. But that alone can not be the justification for fatal failure. But sure, in the end the question might as well be how can society build a better support system for officers so these tragic failures are adressed and fought against. 
But one thing I still find hard to dispute. When a policeman shoots an unarmed person (who doesn't act like he isn't or does something utterly stupid - and I know these cases exist as well), there have to be harsh consequences for said policeman. Tragic for said individual officer, maybe, but that comes with the job. It's about what's best for society, not just what's best for the police.
If there aren't harsh consequences, people lose faith in those protecting the law. The message seems to be - we protect the law, but by that we ourselves are above the law. No matter what happens, we always have attenuating circumstances because of what we do.

I think anyone engaging in this debate would agree that harsh penalties are deserved for those that kill unnecessarily, whether it be from lack of training or a bad decision. Tragic for both parties, certainly. 

Closer to my point though was, the scales aren't so much tipped in the direction of 'unjustified' as they have fallen completely over. 

"It's their job" isn't a catch-all in every instance. Bad weeds need to be pulled but you defeat the purpose when you pull flowers up with the weeds. Ok, pump the brakes rfaulk...i'm not trying to compare police with flowers in any way, just saying you can't throw one blanket over the whole issue when not all shoots are bad. The sad truth is, that is exactly what is happening.