Bad Boys II

[Dill]

(06-24-2020, 01:49 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Dill Wrote: I have never used the IDF as a paragon of constraint. However could you get there when I make a point IDF soldiers and their command know full well they can hit people behind their initial targets? They use lethal weapons for non-lethal purposes. They are mentioned as evidence that your "aim-for-body-mass" mantra is simply not universal, and to introduce an external point of ROE comparison.

Yes, you did, at least in comparison to US LEO's.  I explained, in detail, why aiming for something other than center mass is bad policy and, additionally, why aiming for the thigh (trying to hit the shin/calf is exponentially more difficult than the thigh, which is difficult on its own) is only slightly less lethal than aiming center mass. 

Perhaps in an excited state, you de-contextualize statements to "refute" them. You saw mention of the IDF which established that "shoot for center mass" is not a universal prescription, nor a matter of "ignorance about guns." But you ignored the accompanying statement:

"But US police are only supposed to be using deadly force when there is an immediate and direct threat to their lives or others. Like a 250 Lb man running straight at you with an ax. We only get into these muddled discussions of whether to go for "body mass" because there are so many times when police kill people who are not such a threat."

"But" implies a contrast. My focus is still on police shootings (with handguns) in the US. Yet off you went, citing IDF rifle calibers and guessing (errantly) about their deployment.  You even decided that I presented data about police shootings in the US to justify an IDF policy I don't consider justifiable, and spun up yet another caliber-heavy "refutation."

But there is another possibility: a more self conscious deflection of central arguments and issues. I have made clear in post after post that I am addressing the problem of a police culture which enables police shooters to circumvent existing law, especially by not holding them accountable for breaking that law.

Though no one is disputing that large targets are easier to hit that smaller ones, and though I am not advocating that police reduce the current bar for use of lethal force, you nevetheless keep "refuting" what no one has claimed, explaining "in detail why aiming for something other than center mass is bad policy," then celebrating the victory of your expert knowledge over others' ignorance in post after post.