06-23-2020, 09:24 PM
(06-18-2020, 12:56 PM)Dill Wrote: Still some loose ends to tie up here:
LOL you mean congrats to my friend's "stupid" command for telling soldiers to "make a more difficult shot attempt." IDF soliders know very well they can "miss the target and hit something behind." They make a good reference point for understanding the difference between using police to police civilians of one's own community and using military to police civilians who are not of one's own community, resulting in different calculations of applicable force.
I am simply in awe of your using the IDF as a paragon of restraint given the near daily condemnation of their violent responses to Palestinian protest. Honestly, in that context the rest of this paragraph is absolutely laughable.
Quote:Except for the bolded, which is just bad guesswork, "ignorant" IDF commanders (not to mention 80% of the people on this message board) are already familiar with the above information. I'll wager most still don't see legs shots as only "slightly" less lethal.
Except it is only slightly less lethal. Having zero expertise in this area, absolutely zero, you'll have to bow to superior knowledge in this instance. I clearly delineated why it is only slightly less lethal, you countered with absolutely nothing of substance. Maybe you started to slip when I took my break from this place? You normally do a better job.
Quote:The point of the last two statements is that police officers aren't supposed to use a weapon of "deadly force" for anything but saving their own lives or bystanders'. If an unarmed person is resisting arrest, police can use their baton, pepper spray and tasers to manage that. But they can't just shoot a guy in the leg to settle him down. Even police reformers don't encourage limb shots on those who attack police, for fear it will loosen restrictions on when and where lethal weapons may be used.
No police reformers don't encourage leg shots, the IDF does that. You might want to check with the Fulton County DA, he considers tasers to be a deadly weapon. Oops.
Quote:The paragraph as a whole addresses the question many have when comparing police-caused deaths between countries. E.g., British police are also frequently attacked by people wielding knives and pipes and other potentially deadly weapons, but somehow neutralize them without killing them. In the US, many see "no-choice" but to simply shoot the knife and pipe-wielders. Those who raise questions about this normality are typically scolded for "monday-morning quarterbacking" from their armchairs about an officer who had to make a "split second decision." It is this bland acceptance of no other alternative that puzzles our friends from countries with high levels of police accountability.
The state of UK policing is so tragically comic that using them as an example only proves how little you have in your arsenal on this topic. Violent crime is soaring in the UK and the police are largely impotent in dealing with it. The UK model of policing is dying, it has to, or its law abiding citizens will continue to pay the price.
Quote:Hoping you won't continue claiming you HAVE to post rationales for aiming "center-mass" because "ignorance" is the only reason people don't accept your take on appropriate force.
The take of the uneducated amateurs here do not concern me. If I can educate one or two people not blinded by their political ideology then the effort is worth it.
Quote:Time to consider more closely why we have so many "regrettable accidents" and shootings of unarmed people, including those fleeing the scene.
Do we? Considering the millions of LEO citizen interactions that occur on a daily basis I'd say the number of "regrettable accidents", as you state, is infinitesimally small. Of course, that doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to reduce that already small number.
