Security, Police Training, and perceptions...

[Tgace]

I tend to look at Australia and texas. As they are about the same population wise.

Of course cops shoot more guys in a year over there than have ever been shot here.

The vast amount of which were lawful and necessary at the time if you are talking about Police shootings.....

 

[Tgace]

Trigger happy Britain? How police shootings compare

The wider picture

It is difficult to separate the number of police shootings from the use of firearms in the society that they’re operating in: in a country where gun crime is rife and gun ownership laws more relaxed, police are more likely to be called to use their own firearms.

In the US for example, 410 people were killed by police officers in 2012: that’s about 0.00013 per cent of the US population, compared to 0.0000035 per cent in the UK.

But the US has over four times as many homicides as the UK, according to the latest UN statistics, and there is a far stronger culture of gun ownership across the Atlantic.

Another country where police have been criticised for fatal shootings is South Africa, which is notorious for high rates of murder, assault and murder. Just last year, over 30 people died when police opened fire on miners who were on strike – an incident now known as the Marikana massacre.

A much-cited report from the Institute for Security Studies in Pretoria found that police had shot dead 556 people in 2008/2009, the highest number in 12 years, and double the numbers four years ago.

That is 0.001 per cent of the population – far higher than the UK and the US.

To put this in context, the homicide rate in South Africa is also startling: 30.9 per 100,000 of population, compared to one, for the same number of people in England, and 4.7 in the US.

For a perhaps fairer comparison with the UK, Sweden has a more similar rate of homicide to the UK – 0.9 per 100,000 of the population. And its rate of police shooting is around the same: in the 18 years to July 2013, 18 people were shot dead by Swedish police.

 

[Juany118]

You mentioned Baltimore.
What are your thoughts on Michael Wood, Jr.? Whistle blower from Baltimore.

The anecdotal experience of one person can be powerful but can't be used logically to indict and entire system.

Every bodycam video showing an officer killing an unarmed man, many times while they are obeying orders, causes me great sorrow.

Can you please provide me a link to said footage, where a compliant suspect is shot on body cam video?

I have enough money that I do not need to steal for survival, I live in a calm area of town where the police are closer to customer service than law enforcement, I am not afraid for my own safety.

So you live in a place where you are isolated from the violence. This is part of the problem I think. Most people don't want to acknowledge how violent our country is. We have become numb to the point that unless it involves a gun or a fatality you don't see aggravated assaults on the news, unless it's in cloistered suburbia. The only way to address a problem properly is to acknowledge it exists and society for the most part has engaged in willful blindness in terms of the plight of those living in impoverished inner city neighborhoods. We say "violent crime is down" and ignore we still have the highest per capita violent crime rates in the Western world, and actually beat the developing and third world Nations in some categories.

Now I don't pretend to be an expert on the complicated dynamics that have brought this about but there is one thing that is clear, why LE use of force statistically occurs. The majority of the crime in the US is, for lack of a better term, segregated into impoverished inner city neighborhoods. Due to modern policing methods using crime mapping police resources are diverted to these neighborhoods. So when you have more street violence in a particular area, with targeted proactive patrolling, you will inevitably have more UoF by LE.

 

[Juany118]

Well, I did say I wouldn't write a Well Sourced article. These are top hits from google.

Where do you find the best statistics?

Well that is the problem, the statistics are very hard to compile because there is no uniformed reporting for every possible type of incident where an officer may be involved in a death. Even if you had a universal repository of all numbers you would likely have to read the entire report to see if it was justified or not. Let's just look at shootings and not deaths related to "simple" accidents, high speed pursuits etc. I'll even narrow it down to times when an officer is authorized to shoot an "unarmed suspect". Note in many of these scenarios civilians would be authorized to use deadly force. I will note these with a (C) before them. Also note a suspect performing criminal acts, such as driving directly at officers with a motor vehicle is technically considered "armed".

1. (C) an unarmed subject who has a dominant position and is beating you so bad you risk losing consciousness and/or suffering serious bodily injury.
2. (C) a suspect with a "facsimile" weapon, such a pellet gun who is committing a felony crime and or threatening serious injury. Some sources would identify this suspect as "unarmed."
3. A suspect attempting to disarm an officer or one who just attempted it and renewed his attack upon said officer.
4. A fleeing suspect who has committed a felony crime and the officer can articulate, based on what he knew at the time, that allowing the suspect to escape would pose a continuing danger to public safety.

These are just a few and among the most obvious examples but unless you do A LOT of digging beyond the raw numbers, you don't get the whole picture.

 

[ballen0351]

Double post

 

[ballen0351]

Yeah ok. There are people that make an unreasonable argument. But that does not mean there isn't a reasonable one.

Sure I'm all about reasonable discussion on the topic but 1st we need to start from a fact based position not an emotion position based from a false narrative like that site is promoting. I learned of that site from a similar debate on another site and that was his evidence for his position on bad cops he read the headlines and not the stories. 3 of the people on that list died in a car accident as they were running from the police lost control and hit a tree another one committed suicide alone in a jail cell.

 

[Juany118]

I tend to look at Australia and texas. As they are about the same population wise.

Of course cops shoot more guys in a year over there than have ever been shot here.

The devil is in the details.

Even if you do that though, as an example. In 2010 Australia had 1 murder for every 100,000 people, Texas had 3.2 murders committed only by firearm, 5.0 total in the same year. Now Australia has the dubious distinction of having a similar rate of Rape, Australia:28.6, to Texas and it's 30.3, however Texas cakes the cake again with Robberies; Australia: 44.9 to Texas @ 130.7.

Looking at Assaults is more difficult because Australia appears to count all Assaults, The US standard is Aggravated Assaults only. However just looking at thes three categories Texas alone still beats Australia on the violent crime front which by extension means there is again a higher likely hood of violent encounters involving police.

 

[Juany118]

And consider the UK population is approx 64 million. California alone is about 39 million.....

Comparing the entire United States to any other nation is a bit erroneous IMO. Our States vary widely from each other in population, crime levels, cultures, etc.

The US is unique in that we lump all of the various States together and then compare them to European Nations to make politicized points.

However when you look at States per capita (as I did in answer to Australia vs Texas) you do get a clear picture. I try not to because it's just depressing but there it is. On a side note regarding Great Britain. My parents went there on Holiday last year and they ended up getting a ride along in London. Apparently they allow US LE to do ride alongs, my parents got a photo with a female officer and mentioned my wife and I were LE and the nice Officer set one up for them.

In driving along they found were told that in London they are encountering a new personnel problem. Because of a perception of more violence (don't know if it's "real" or not, haven't checked). You have both new and veteran officers competing to get out of "normal" duty and to be assigned to the armed response units. But look at the per capita stats and GB is still well behind the US.

Long story short. The perception of one who has no choice but to confront violence will be different than the person who doesn't.

 

[Darrencowan]

This is very

Regarding the class for the reporter -- they give them some training and orientation before the scenarios. The extent depends on the program. One I'm more familiar with spends about 4 hours on orientation and preparation before doing scenarios. Partners... Well, when they show up and arrive on scene, I might have one -- but I patrol solo most of the day, and handle most encounters solo.

Hiring... Yep, there are some departments that won't hire someone with too high an IQ, and a court says they can, so long as they are consistent in their application. The departments that do that are a minority. I know officers who have JDs and have passed the bar (and they still hit the streets... Maybe they do need some psychological help!) as well as PhDs. Many with Master's or advanced certificates. Lots with a bachelor's. You're trying to use a minority of agencies to set a rule... doesn't work that way.

21 foot "rule" -- more accurately, the Tueller Drill. The point of it is to show how rapidly a person can cover 21 feet versus the ability to draw and place an aimed shot on target, not set up some magic distance rule for encounters. It's been greatly misunderstood and misapplied, especially within the self-defense community.

Use of less than lethal... If the person is posing a lethal threat, lethal force is the answer. A knife is lethal force. A big honking stick is lethal force. Lethal force is force likely to cause serious bodily harm or death -- and a big honking stick is likely to cause serious bodily harm. So... there's a time and place for less lethal, but it's not the answer when the question is lethal force. You don't hear about most of the times cops use force on someone, but it's not lethal force; it seldom makes the press. And, for the record, I am a firearms, control tactics, and Taser instructor, so I kind of know whereof I speak.

This is very interesting. The news doesn't want to share this and lie about Ferguson. I knew this, though, for one my brother is in law enforcement. He's a US Marshall. He is also a former 82 airborne soldier, worked in prisons and ice and has a bachelors in criminal science from the University of Western Michigan (go Broncos).

 

[TieXiongJi]

Well that is the problem, the statistics are very hard to compile because there is no uniformed reporting for every possible type of incident where an officer may be involved in a death. Even if you had a universal repository of all numbers you would likely have to read the entire report to see if it was justified or not. Let's just look at shootings and not deaths related to "simple" accidents, high speed pursuits etc. I'll even narrow it down to times when an officer is authorized to shoot an "unarmed suspect". Note in many of these scenarios civilians would be authorized to use deadly force. I will note these with a (C) before them. Also note a suspect performing criminal acts, such as driving directly at officers with a motor vehicle is technically considered "armed".

1. (C) an unarmed subject who has a dominant position and is beating you so bad you risk losing consciousness and/or suffering serious bodily injury.
2. (C) a suspect with a "facsimile" weapon, such a pellet gun who is committing a felony crime and or threatening serious injury. Some sources would identify this suspect as "unarmed."
3. A suspect attempting to disarm an officer or one who just attempted it and renewed his attack upon said officer.
4. A fleeing suspect who has committed a felony crime and the officer can articulate, based on what he knew at the time, that allowing the suspect to escape would pose a continuing danger to public safety.

These are just a few and among the most obvious examples but unless you do A LOT of digging beyond the raw numbers, you don't get the whole picture.

I totally agree that a statistic is only as good as the data. Drilling deep into each scenario is very different than analyzing statistics.

Though, I think you missed a few scenarios where an officer is justified in using deadly force according to our court system.
0.0. An unarmed subject who is unaware of police presence.
0.1. An unarmed subject who is made aware of police presence, but failed to respond to an order immediately.
0.2. An unarmed subject who is made aware of police presence, but failed to respond to an order within 30 seconds.
0.3. A subject armed with a "facsimile" weapon or "toy" who is not committing any crime.
0.4. An unarmed subject approaching the officer.
0.5. An unarmed and/or naked subject approaching the officer aggressively.
0.6. An unarmed subject who is attempting to flee from you on foot.
0.7. An unarmed subject who is attempting to flee from you in a car (not using the car as an aggressive weapon).
0.8. A subject armed with a melee weapon who is not committing a crime, not using the weapon aggressively and failed to respond to an order.
Probably a few more that I am missing as well.

I can source all of these stories and some videos showing officers using lethal force whereupon the jury decided the officer was justified in killing a civilian.

Like I said, I want to trust the police. Clearly, the majority of juries still trust the police. I have lost my trust in the police and they will have to work very hard to restore my trust.
Please recommend some source, some articles, some books, some documentaries, anything that objectively analyzes police killing unarmed civilians.
All of the objective evidence I have seen proves these two rules; No human is perfect. We all need proper feedback to improve.

BTW, thank you for the sincere conversation. I am so sick of Twitter and YouTube...

 

[Juany118]

I totally agree that a statistic is only as good as the data. Drilling deep into each scenario is very different than analyzing statistics.

Though, I think you missed a few scenarios where an officer is justified in using deadly force according to our court system.
0.0. An unarmed subject who is unaware of police presence.
0.1. An unarmed subject who is made aware of police presence, but failed to respond to an order immediately.
0.2. An unarmed subject who is made aware of police presence, but failed to respond to an order within 30 seconds.
0.3. A subject armed with a "facsimile" weapon or "toy" who is not committing any crime.
0.4. An unarmed subject approaching the officer.
0.5. An unarmed and/or naked subject approaching the officer aggressively.
0.6. An unarmed subject who is attempting to flee from you on foot.
0.7. An unarmed subject who is attempting to flee from you in a car (not using the car as an aggressive weapon).
0.8. A subject armed with a melee weapon who is not committing a crime, not using the weapon aggressively and failed to respond to an order.

Here is the thing though. You fail to account for what the officer actually knows at the time of the incident, 20/20 hindsight is not acceptable under the law. So in most of your circumstances if the officer knew what you posted, he would have committed a crime. It all depends on the "totality of the circumstances" as well. So if I am a 5'1" 110lbs female and a known felon, 6'3 300 lbs is approaching me to "beat my ***" I can likely articulate shooting them. For 0.6 If an unarmed subject, who has warrants for multiple rapes is fleeing the scene of another rape lethal force can be used under the "fleeing felon who the officer can articulate is a further threat to public safety. 0.7, as well, however because its a car most police departments have internal policies that prohibit shooting at fleeing vehicles, however violating Department Policy is further grounds for a Civil Suit, it is not a Criminal Act.

In short it is A LOT more complicated than you seem to think it is.

BTW, thank you for the sincere conversation. I am so sick of Twitter and YouTube...

Anytime. I think half the issue with many incidents is that people just don't understand, not only the written law, but the Case Law as handed down from SCOTUS. Example, The Freddie Gray case in Baltimore. The minute the "expert" for the prosecution said that the only evidence he had that the Officer's gave Gray a "rough ride" was that he heard it happened in Baltimore the case was sunk because the other argument was not within the law, that the Officer's could also be Criminally Convicted for lack of action (that is Civil not Criminal). Lets forget the Sheriff who signed the Arrest warrants admitted in a Statement to the Feds that he had NO knowledge of the investigation and signed the arrest warrants as the affiant as a "favor" to the Prosecution. So now Mosby faces... Freddie Gray case: Judge allows malicious prosecution lawsuit against Mosby to proceed

 

[Juany118]

double post

 

[ballen0351]

I totally agree that a statistic is only as good as the data. Drilling deep into each scenario is very different than analyzing statistics.

Though, I think you missed a few scenarios where an officer is justified in using deadly force according to our court system.
0.0. An unarmed subject who is unaware of police presence.
0.1. An unarmed subject who is made aware of police presence, but failed to respond to an order immediately.
0.2. An unarmed subject who is made aware of police presence, but failed to respond to an order within 30 seconds.
0.3. A subject armed with a "facsimile" weapon or "toy" who is not committing any crime.
0.4. An unarmed subject approaching the officer.
0.5. An unarmed and/or naked subject approaching the officer aggressively.
0.6. An unarmed subject who is attempting to flee from you on foot.
0.7. An unarmed subject who is attempting to flee from you in a car (not using the car as an aggressive weapon).
0.8. A subject armed with a melee weapon who is not committing a crime, not using the weapon aggressively and failed to respond to an order.
Probably a few more that I am missing as well.

I can source all of these stories and some videos showing officers using lethal force whereupon the jury decided the officer was justified in killing a civilian.

Like I said, I want to trust the police. Clearly, the majority of juries still trust the police. I have lost my trust in the police and they will have to work very hard to restore my trust.
Please recommend some source, some articles, some books, some documentaries, anything that objectively analyzes police killing unarmed civilians.
All of the objective evidence I have seen proves these two rules; No human is perfect. We all need proper feedback to improve.

BTW, thank you for the sincere conversation. I am so sick of Twitter and YouTube...

Can you provide a source for a few of these examples. I'd like to read them

 

[Tez3]

In driving along they found were told that in London they are encountering a new personnel problem. Because of a perception of more violence (don't know if it's "real" or not, haven't checked).

Was that the Met or the City of London Police, they have different ideas and ways of operating. In fact the Met has a very different way from all the other forces, ( it even has it's own rank structure) they tend to think they are 'the' police, everyone else is just rural ( even the other big cities) and they attract the type of personnel who certainly will want a more macho role. They are also the force with the most complaints against them, the most officers done for corruption, sexual and racial discrimination. The home of the infamous Sweeney ( Sweeney Todd= Flying Squad) as well, very muscular policing! They also have the specialist firearms unit SCO19 which is why your parents would have been told that officers want to go on it, SCO19 - British Armed Police. Other forces have armed response officers but not as units, they are ordinary officers who are trained on weapons, many are ex forces. If you look at the link you can see probably the attraction of the Met unit.
We only have three routinely armed police forces in the UK, the Civil Nuclear Constabulary, the Police Service of Northern Ireland ( they are allowed to be armed off duty as well, they are the most shot at as well as having the most murdered officers in the UK due to the Troubles) and the Ministry of Defence Police, the latter being the best trained, sexiest, most efficient force in the UK of course.

 

[Tez3]

I have lost my trust in the police and they will have to work very hard to restore my trust.
Please recommend some source, some articles, some books, some documentaries, anything that objectively analyzes police killing unarmed civilians.

Have you experienced anything yourself that would lead you to 'distrust' the police? Have you been involved in a shooting, incident or anything else that makes you think you can't trust the police or is this something you have taken from the media?
I wouldn't presume to judge any police action from a video or newspaper article, it's hard enough being there and trying to decide what has happened never mind fifth hand reports made with watcher ratings in mind. Perhaps too you could ask for articles etc on armed civilians killing police officers next. ( with the exception of Northern Ireland all the police officers on the mainland who have been shot and killed were unarmed)
I have to say it's quite fascinating watching you converse with serving police officers.

 

[Juany118]

Was that the Met or the City of London Police, they have different ideas and ways of operating. In fact the Met has a very different way from all the other forces, ( it even has it's own rank structure) they tend to think they are 'the' police, everyone else is just rural ( even the other big cities) and they attract the type of personnel who certainly will want a more macho role. They are also the force with the most complaints against them, the most officers done for corruption, sexual and racial discrimination. The home of the infamous Sweeney ( Sweeney Todd= Flying Squad) as well, very muscular policing! They also have the specialist firearms unit SCO19 which is why your parents would have been told that officers want to go on it, SCO19 - British Armed Police. Other forces have armed response officers but not as units, they are ordinary officers who are trained on weapons, many are ex forces. If you look at the link you can see probably the attraction of the Met unit.
We only have three routinely armed police forces in the UK, the Civil Nuclear Constabulary, the Police Service of Northern Ireland ( they are allowed to be armed off duty as well, they are the most shot at as well as having the most murdered officers in the UK due to the Troubles) and the Ministry of Defence Police, the latter being the best trained, sexiest, most efficient force in the UK of course.

Believe it was Met.

 

[Tez3]

Believe it was Met.

The Scotland Yard 'elite'.

 

[TieXiongJi]

0.1. An unarmed subject who is made aware of police presence, but failed to respond to an order immediately.
Dylan Taylor:

0.2. An unarmed subject who is made aware of police presence, but failed to respond to an order within 30 seconds.
Terence Crutcher:

This one is even worse due to multiple officers.
0.3. A subject armed with a "facsimile" weapon or "toy" who is not committing any crime.

0.5. An unarmed and/or naked subject approaching the officer aggressively.

0.6. An unarmed subject who is attempting to flee from you on foot.

4409 -- LAPD chase man EXECUTE him Claim Self Defense Police couldn't know if he was armed and he did not act aggressively toward another person.
0.7. An unarmed subject who is attempting to flee from you in a car (not using the car as an aggressive weapon).
COPS LICENSE TO KILL SHOOT AT VAN WITH KIDS IN IT
Cop Shoots Unarmed Boy with Down Syndrome, Says He “Feared for His Life.” Video Shows He’s Lying
0.8. A subject armed with a melee weapon who is not committing a crime, not using the weapon aggressively and failed to respond to an order.
Cop shoots teen on PCP 16 times

I did forget some.
Execute a compliant subject in custody.
Police Shoot Unarmed Man in the Back Execution Style in CA Local News Report

Here is a Top 5 I stumbled upon.
5 Worst Cases of Police Brutality Caught on Tape

Just a few I could look up while at work.

 

[TieXiongJi]

Have you experienced anything yourself that would lead you to 'distrust' the police? Have you been involved in a shooting, incident or anything else that makes you think you can't trust the police or is this something you have taken from the media?
I wouldn't presume to judge any police action from a video or newspaper article, it's hard enough being there and trying to decide what has happened never mind fifth hand reports made with watcher ratings in mind. Perhaps too you could ask for articles etc on armed civilians killing police officers next. ( with the exception of Northern Ireland all the police officers on the mainland who have been shot and killed were unarmed)
I have to say it's quite fascinating watching you converse with serving police officers.

Like I have stated, I have lived a safe life.
Only 2 note worthy interactions:
Officer determined blame in a minor traffic accident and allowed me to leave.
Officer investigated a threatening phone call.
Other than that, personal interactions, mostly at parties, with off duty officers. Traffic stops; I usually agree with the reason.

A big reveal for me was Gang police.
While serving on a jury, I was privy to the methods officers employ with gang suspects. After listening to the stories, I could see through these ******** reasons for stopping citizens living in 'gang' neighborhoods. It disgusted me so that I lost almost all trust in anyone assigned to gang division.

Another big reveal for me is DEA agents.
Cash and property seizures under some of the most ******** reasons I have ever read. And almost no method available to return the goods to the citizen.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

0.1. An unarmed subject who is made aware of police presence, but failed to respond to an order immediately.
Dylan Taylor:

0.2. An unarmed subject who is made aware of police presence, but failed to respond to an order within 30 seconds.
Terence Crutcher:

This one is even worse due to multiple officers.
0.3. A subject armed with a "facsimile" weapon or "toy" who is not committing any crime.

0.5. An unarmed and/or naked subject approaching the officer aggressively.

0.6. An unarmed subject who is attempting to flee from you on foot.

4409 -- LAPD chase man EXECUTE him Claim Self Defense Police couldn't know if he was armed and he did not act aggressively toward another person.
0.7. An unarmed subject who is attempting to flee from you in a car (not using the car as an aggressive weapon).
COPS LICENSE TO KILL SHOOT AT VAN WITH KIDS IN IT
Cop Shoots Unarmed Boy with Down Syndrome, Says He “Feared for His Life.” Video Shows He’s Lying
0.8. A subject armed with a melee weapon who is not committing a crime, not using the weapon aggressively and failed to respond to an order.
Cop shoots teen on PCP 16 times

I did forget some.
Execute a compliant subject in custody.
Police Shoot Unarmed Man in the Back Execution Style in CA Local News Report

Here is a Top 5 I stumbled upon.
5 Worst Cases of Police Brutality Caught on Tape

Just a few I could look up while at work.

1. Can't see much, don't know what the call was. Officer may have been told the guy was armed or possibly armed.
2. Guy was ignoring commands, getting back to his car where police may assume he's going for a weapon.
3. Looks like cops were called with a report of someone carrying a gun, so they came in with the (reasonable) understanding that they were facing an armed person. Someone carrying a big weapon like that would be assumed to be a huge risk. He looked toward cops and started raising the gun (probably wanting to show them it's a toy). They see armed subject raising a gun, rather than dropping it, so they shoot.

I didn't keep going, because so far these don't demonstrate any obvious police failings. The first is ambiguous without some context. The second seems reasonable if the guy wasn't responding to tasers. The third takes only a little imagination to understand why it might reasonably go down that way.