[Tom4784]

There's only nothing to see here for racists that think the murder of a child is acceptable because they're black.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

There's only nothing to see here for racists that think the murder of a child is acceptable because they're black.

This is a construct you have created I'm afraid

[user104658]

I actually do think that in this case it comes down more to the policing methods than anything else. Watching the video, and going by what I know of standard US police tactics, the officer won't be found to have acted wrongly; she was armed, she was about to use it on someone else, police in the US are taught to shoot the armed person in that scenario.

However, in the UK (and in MANY other countries) this entire situation would have been handled differently, they're trained to disarm and apprehend people with knives and other weapons without anyone getting killed, and in this exact scenario it's likely that NO ONE would have died. To people who think the officer had no choice; does the UK police not deal with knife crime every single day? Do not they do so every day without firearms? And are people often killed because of the lack of guns?

Basically I'm saying that in most places, this situation (teens getting violent, weapons being present) would have been handled differently by necessity and thus it is perfectly possible to handle these situations without shots being fired.

Again it comes down to police in the US being trained too quickly, their methods being too basic, and the constant "one size fits all" solution of using their guns. The UK police have tonnes of training in how to handle violent situations without it ending badly. In the US it seems to be;

1) Point gun and make threats,
2) If that doesn't work pull the trigger.

[rusticgal]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I actually do think that in this case it comes down more to the policing methods than anything else. Watching the video, and going by what I know of standard US police tactics, the officer won't be found to have acted wrongly; she was armed, she was about to use it on someone else, police in the US are taught to shoot the armed person in that scenario.

However, in the UK (and in MANY other countries) this entire situation would have been handled differently, they're trained to disarm and apprehend people with knives and other weapons without anyone getting killed, and in this exact scenario it's likely that NO ONE would have died. To people who think the officer had no choice; does the UK police not deal with knife crime every single day? Do not they do so every day without firearms? And are people often killed because of the lack of guns?

Basically I'm saying that in most places, this situation (teens getting violent, weapons being present) would have been handled differently by necessity and thus it is perfectly possible to handle these situations without shots being fired.

Again it comes down to police in the US being trained too quickly, their methods being too basic, and the constant "one size fits all" solution of using their guns. The UK police have tonnes of training in how to handle violent situations without it ending badly. In the US it seems to be;

1) Point gun and make threats,
2) If that doesn't work pull the trigger.

Why do they always have to shoot to kill though?....I obviously get it if someone is armed with a gun and shooting people...otherwise surely a bullet in the leg will immobolise them without killing them.

[Glenn.]

Originally Posted by rusticgal

Why do they always have to shoot to kill though?....I obviously get it if someone is armed with a gun and shooting people...otherwise surely a bullet in the leg will immobolise them without killing them.

This is my thinking too.

If the person is a danger you immobilise the problem, not irrationally spray bullets at them. It just shows that the police are not mentally stable enough to handle a gun if they can’t keep a cool head when needed.

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

This is my thinking too.

If the person is a danger you immobilise the problem, not irrationally spray bullets at them. It just shows that the police are not mentally stable enough to handle a gun if they can’t keep a cool head when needed.

Too many of the police seem to be TRIGGER HAPPY , and on a deranged power trip. The sheer ignorance and incompetence that they keep showing is beyond infuriating. But what can we expect from the land of the gun nuts .

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by rusticgal

Why do they always have to shoot to kill though?....I obviously get it if someone is armed with a gun and shooting people...otherwise surely a bullet in the leg will immobolise them without killing them.

we have been through this time and again and i have posted the reason

Limbs move fast, are thin and are very difficult to hit

they also do NOT stop people from doing what they are doing

ALL armed Police aim for the torso and shoot to KILL

[Beso]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I actually do think that in this case it comes down more to the policing methods than anything else. Watching the video, and going by what I know of standard US police tactics, the officer won't be found to have acted wrongly; she was armed, she was about to use it on someone else, police in the US are taught to shoot the armed person in that scenario.

However, in the UK (and in MANY other countries) this entire situation would have been handled differently, they're trained to disarm and apprehend people with knives and other weapons without anyone getting killed, and in this exact scenario it's likely that NO ONE would have died. To people who think the officer had no choice; does the UK police not deal with knife crime every single day? Do not they do so every day without firearms? And are people often killed because of the lack of guns?

Basically I'm saying that in most places, this situation (teens getting violent, weapons being present) would have been handled differently by necessity and thus it is perfectly possible to handle these situations without shots being fired.

Again it comes down to police in the US being trained too quickly, their methods being too basic, and the constant "one size fits all" solution of using their guns. The UK police have tonnes of training in how to handle violent situations without it ending badly. In the US it seems to be;

1) Point gun and make threats,
2) If that doesn't work pull the trigger.

By the time the uk police deal with a knife crime there is a dead teenager on the street already.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by parmnion

By the time the uk police deal with a knife crime there is a dead teenager on the street already.

Obviously it happens, but for context, in 2020 there were 24 fatal stabbings of under-18's in the UK and 248 fatal knife attacks total...

In the same period in the US there were over 1000 fatal police shootings and over 20,000 gun-related killings total.

It's plain as day that disarming both the police and the population is the only answer.

[bots]

it's almost impossible to shoot someone to disable them. It requires extreme levels of skill and a calm environment, so it's just not a realistic option. If a policeman shoots you in any country, they intend to kill you.

[rusticgal]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

it's almost impossible to shoot someone to disable them. It requires extreme levels of skill and a calm environment, so it's just not a realistic option. If a policeman shoots you in any country, they intend to kill you.

I cant see whats too difficult to shoot someone in the leg...either that or use the stun gun....

[user104658]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

it's almost impossible to shoot someone to disable them. It requires extreme levels of skill and a calm environment, so it's just not a realistic option. If a policeman shoots you in any country, they intend to kill you.

It's almost impossible to shoot to DEFINITELY disable as aim is never that precise any gunshot wound carries a risk of death (because arteries) - BUT if you shoot someone once in the shoulder or a limb they have a decent chance of survival. If you shoot someone three times center mass they're almost certainly going to die.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I actually do think that in this case it comes down more to the policing methods than anything else. Watching the video, and going by what I know of standard US police tactics, the officer won't be found to have acted wrongly; she was armed, she was about to use it on someone else, police in the US are taught to shoot the armed person in that scenario.

However, in the UK (and in MANY other countries) this entire situation would have been handled differently, they're trained to disarm and apprehend people with knives and other weapons without anyone getting killed, and in this exact scenario it's likely that NO ONE would have died. To people who think the officer had no choice; does the UK police not deal with knife crime every single day? Do not they do so every day without firearms? And are people often killed because of the lack of guns?

Basically I'm saying that in most places, this situation (teens getting violent, weapons being present) would have been handled differently by necessity and thus it is perfectly possible to handle these situations without shots being fired.

Again it comes down to police in the US being trained too quickly, their methods being too basic, and the constant "one size fits all" solution of using their guns. The UK police have tonnes of training in how to handle violent situations without it ending badly. In the US it seems to be;

1) Point gun and make threats,
2) If that doesn't work pull the trigger.

Problem is that there are cases when they've taken in white active shooters without harming them before. The training is terrible in the US, but we can't undersell how deeply racist the police organisation is in the US.

The police are more likely to show restraint to a white mass shooter than they will any black person. The system is broken.

[Tony Montana]

He could have just tackled her to the ground, not shoot her.

[Vanessa]

It's definitely a race issue.
Because I doubt they would have shot to kill a white person. Even if they were armed.

[arista]

Originally Posted by Vanessa

It's definitely a race issue.
Because I doubt they would have shot to kill a white person. Even if they were armed.

I think
Cops would also Shoot a White Person
with such a Deadly Steak Knife

[rusticgal]

Originally Posted by Vanessa

It's definitely a race issue.
Because I doubt they would have shot to kill a white person. Even if they were armed.

I think you will find that many white people have been shot/killed by the Police in America...its just that we never hear about it.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by rusticgal

I think you will find that many white people have been shot/killed by the Police in America...its just that we never hear about it.

I don't know how reliable this graph is but it would appear so

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...olice-by-race/

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Cherie

I don't know how reliable this graph is but it would appear so

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...olice-by-race/

You have to take into account though the population size of each race

White: 60.1% (Non-Hispanic) Hispanic: 18.5% Black: 12.2% Asian: 5.6%

And then :

In an analysis of 4,653 fatal shootings for which information about both race and age were available, the researchers found a small but statistically significant decline in white deaths (about 1%) but no significant change in deaths for BIPOC. There were 5,367 fatal police shootings during that five-year period, according to the Post’s database. In the case of armed victims, Native Americans were killed by police at a rate three times that of white people (77 total killed). Black people were killed at 2.6 times the rate of white people (1,265 total killed); and Hispanics were killed at nearly 1.3 times the rate of white people (889 total killed). Among unarmed victims, Black people were killed at three times the rate (218 total killed), and Hispanics at 1.45 times the rate of white people (146 total killed).

“Those killed by police on average are young people — the average age for all victims is 34,” Boatright said. “For Black people, the average age is 30.” For Hispanics killed, the average age is 33; for Native Americans, 31; and for white people, 38.

https://news.yale.edu/2020/10/27/rac...d-over-5-years

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Cherie

I don't know how reliable this graph is but it would appear so

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...olice-by-race/

We know white people get shot and killed ,but the point is as I've said already you're more likely to be shot and killed if you're black in America.

There's been 'incidents' of people sleeping in bed and getting senselessly killed, why because the police either got the wrong address or they assumed the worst as usual.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

You have to take into account though the population size of each race

White: 60.1% (Non-Hispanic) Hispanic: 18.5% Black: 12.2% Asian: 5.6%

And then :

In an analysis of 4,653 fatal shootings for which information about both race and age were available, the researchers found a small but statistically significant decline in white deaths (about 1%) but no significant change in deaths for BIPOC. There were 5,367 fatal police shootings during that five-year period, according to the Post’s database. In the case of armed victims, Native Americans were killed by police at a rate three times that of white people (77 total killed). Black people were killed at 2.6 times the rate of white people (1,265 total killed); and Hispanics were killed at nearly 1.3 times the rate of white people (889 total killed). Among unarmed victims, Black people were killed at three times the rate (218 total killed), and Hispanics at 1.45 times the rate of white people (146 total killed).

“Those killed by police on average are young people — the average age for all victims is 34,” Boatright said. “For Black people, the average age is 30.” For Hispanics killed, the average age is 33; for Native Americans, 31; and for white people, 38.

https://news.yale.edu/2020/10/27/rac...d-over-5-years

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

We know white people get shot and killed ,but the point is as I've said already you're more likely to be shot and killed if you're black in America.

There's been 'incidents' of people sleeping in bed and getting senselessly killed, why because the police either got the wrong address or they assumed the worst as usual.

Valid points, I do think the gen population being armed does feed into it as well, in Spain and Italy the police carry guns but are no where near as trigger happy

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

We know white people get shot and killed ,but the point is as I've said already you're more likely to be shot and killed if you're black in America.

There's been 'incidents' of people sleeping in bed and getting senselessly killed, why because the police either got the wrong address or they assumed the worst as usual.

no they are not that is misinformation

[rusticgal]

Originally Posted by Cherie

I don't know how reliable this graph is but it would appear so

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...olice-by-race/

Thats the one I found.

[Tom4784]

Imagine assuming a person is 'high on drugs' based on nothing but the colour of their skin, some people are really letting their white hoods show.

[Oliver_W]

Cops saving black girls from getting stabbed