That truck in his hand could have mowed down 84 people.

It was a BS16. Just a little better than an AR15.

 

And now CNN is reporting that the therapist asked the cop, "Why did you shoot me?" And the cop replied, "I don't know."

Several hours later, the story about the cop trying to shoot the one holding the gun came out. Still not sure which one was supposedly holding the gun.

I think they though the autistic young man was armed. In this case why shoot the "unarmed" man? But, in this case, why shoot at all? The state of paranoia is so severe, the police should not be out on the street I guess. Are they not taught to assess and de- escalate a situation? The training videos ppsted before were informative, but they do not show any attempt to de-escalate. There is a lot of yelling and gun pointing. Yes police is stressed. But so is a person on the other end. At the moment it looks like a no win situation. This incident just destroyed the beloef that of you comply, you will be ok. We have all been at the hands of aithorities, asking their mindless questions and following their dorections just to realize that it is all a power trip...

 

This incident just destroyed the belief that of you comply, you will be ok. We have all been at the hands of authorities, asking their mindless questions and following their directions just to realize that it is all a power trip...

How many calls have been deescalated this year in the first 30 seconds vs the very few that turn out bad because of poor judgement? We all know the vast majority don't turnout like this so there's no need for fear building on fear and paranoia. What's needed is that those who do make mistakes under color of law be held responsible and not shielded behind the 'Blue Wall' just because the person was a cop.

 

How many calls have been deescalated this year in the first 30 seconds vs the very few that turn out bad because of poor judgement? We all know the vast majority don't turnout like this so there's no need for fear building on fear and paranoia. What's needed is that those who do make mistakes under color of law be held responsible and not shielded behind the 'Blue Wall' just because the person was a cop.

I agree with your general comment. However, there is a general issue when a citizen encounters a person of authority - that is police, security (here I refer to my interactions at the airports specifically) - and, in my experience most figures, perhaps due to who is being hired or die to my luck or due to how they perceive me, attempt to show me that they are a figure of power. The problem is that police is there to serve the community and I think that many of them think that they do something else. Now, culture is to blame here as the word "hero" is used any time someone saves a cat so things have gotten out of control for multiple reasons and it will be difficult to put them back together.

If a civilian shot that man claiming that he felt threatened, what would the outcome be?

Next question: did they not considwr that someone just called in with a fake threat creating a hostile situation and setting them up? For example, a few years ago, a policeman shot a psychotic native canadian in seattle who had an knife and was babbling incoherent nonsense somewhere downtown. The guy was homeless and not taking any medication. He died.

 

Next question: did they not considwr that someone just called in with a fake threat creating a hostile situation and setting them up? For example, a few years ago, a policeman shot a psychotic native canadian in seattle who had an knife and was babbling incoherent nonsense somewhere downtown. The guy was homeless and not taking any medication. He died.

A knife is a very deadly weapon. I (once) could give you a mortal stab wound before you could shoot me at hand-shake distance.

 

How many calls have been deescalated this year in the first 30 seconds vs the very few that turn out bad because of poor judgement? We all know the vast majority don't turnout like this so there's no need for fear building on fear and paranoia. What's needed is that those who do make mistakes under color of law be held responsible and not shielded behind the 'Blue Wall' just because the person was a cop.

That is like asking how many airbags saved a life vs. killed someone. That argument didn't work for Takada. Why not push more training and have the vision that we can be perfect eventually. Up until a few years ago, the chemical industry had targets to minimize injuries, emissions, etc. We always came close and a few years we beat the target. Now, the target is ZERO. Since we set the target to zero, our injury/accident rate fell like a rock. I think the medical and police INDUSTRIES could learn a lot from the training and mentality of the chemical, nuclear and aerospace industries. Accepting these behaviors as a low percentage of the whole is just making excuses for bad behavior, bad training and bad people.

 

That is like asking how many airbags saved a life vs. killed someone. That argument didn't work for Takada. Why not push more training and have the vision that we can be perfect eventually. Up until a few years ago, the chemical industry had targets to minimize injuries, emissions, etc. We always came close and a few years we beat the target. Now, the target is ZERO. Since we set the target to zero, our injury/accident rate fell like a rock. I think the medical and police INDUSTRIES could learn a lot from the training and mentality of the chemical, nuclear and aerospace industries. Accepting these behaviors as a low percentage of the whole is just making excuses for bad behavior, bad training and bad people.

NO excuses for bad behavior, I just believe we should 'think' before jumping into a ZERO tolerance world when human behavior not science defines failure. We won't be perfect and an expectation for perfection in a possible life/death human behavioral situation is foolish on it's face in a nation of individual rights.

 

I do not believe that it is foolish to have high expectations. From the Simpsons - "aim low, aim so low that no-one cares if you succeed"...

If you want me to have respect for your life, you should have respect for mine. What happened with that concept?

I have epilepsy, it has been under control for 10 years. Legally I can get a drivers license if I am seizure free for 6 month. Yes they ask a question about your health but do no checks. I gave myself 3 years of seizure free health before applying for a license. It took me 2 more years to be driving by myself (because of our rules). This was my conscious decision because of who I am as a person. I do not care much if I doe, but I do not have a right to put others in jeopardy. Regulations do not protect me in this case, neither did they protect other people from me getting a drivers license when I was still ill. People need to be less selfish then they are and think about the impact they have on others.

A lot in life has to do with your attitude. If you think that everything is a threat, then everything will be a threat because that is how you see it and your world is full of enemies. I have known people like this up close and personal and I feel sad for their state of being.

 

NO excuses for bad behavior, I just believe we should 'think' before jumping into a ZERO tolerance world when human behavior not science defines failure. We won't be perfect and an expectation for perfection in a possible life/death human behavioral situation is foolish on it's face in a nation of individual rights.

Interesting. I'm surprised at the head-in-the-sand approach from such an enlightened and worldly person as yourself.

 

I do not believe that it is foolish to have high expectations. From the Simpsons - "aim low, aim so low that no-one cares if you succeed"...

If you want me to have respect for your life, you should have respect for mine. What happened with that concept?

I do have high expectations from the police but to say aiming for LEO ZERO errors is just a rhetorical snort as people will game just about any system. It's better to be realistic and face the problem head-on. You F-up, you fall on the sword.

 

That is like asking how many airbags saved a life vs. killed someone. That argument didn't work for Takada. Why not push more training and have the vision that we can be perfect eventually. Up until a few years ago, the chemical industry had targets to minimize injuries, emissions, etc. We always came close and a few years we beat the target. Now, the target is ZERO. Since we set the target to zero, our injury/accident rate fell like a rock. I think the medical and police INDUSTRIES could learn a lot from the training and mentality of the chemical, nuclear and aerospace industries. Accepting these behaviors as a low percentage of the whole is just making excuses for bad behavior, bad training and bad people.

There's a huge difference between industries in which everyone is working together toward a common goal and industries in which the nature of the job means that you are routinely confronting people that are actively trying to prevent the desired goal from being achieved -- and you have almost no way to distinguish between the two.

 

Interesting. I'm surprised at the head-in-the-sand approach from such an enlightened and worldly person as yourself.

I've seen what can happen to good people under life and death stress, my eyes are wide open to the fact that people are not equations.

 

I've seen what can happen to good people under life and death stress, my eyes are wide open to the fact that people are not equations.

That is the difference between trained and untrained people. It is amazing what people can do when properly trained. It is no longer stress, it is just another scenario.

 

I do have high expectations from the police but to say aiming for LEO ZERO errors is just a rhetorical snort as people will game just about any system. It's better to be realistic and face the problem head-on. You F-up, you fall on the sword.

That is where you are wrong. You don't have to fall on your sword. The person that made the mistake becomes the most experienced person on the staff concerning the scenario. They find a way to figure out what happened, and what can be done to make sure it doesn't happen again - to any employee (officer in this case).

Your attitude is completely wrong. You are so defensive, so offended and so right in your own mind while plenty of evidence in the chemical industry, airline industry and nuclear industry (to name a few) show just how a trained individual can determine a solution to a problem and carry out the right steps to insure a safe conclusion in an urgent/seemingly stressful situation.

 

That is the difference between trained and untrained people. It is amazing what people can do when properly trained. It is no longer stress, it is just another scenario.

Right, like regular street cops are SOF. Even with those guys the stress is suppressed or channeled not eliminated.

 

There's a huge difference between industries in which everyone is working together toward a common goal and industries in which the nature of the job means that you are routinely confronting people that are actively trying to prevent the desired goal from being achieved -- and you have almost no way to distinguish between the two.

An interaction with a cop can be categorized just like all the possible scenarios of an airline pilot or chemical operator. Shit happens on a daily basis in everyone's occupation. Do you think Captain Scully trained for hitting a goose and landing in a river? No, he trained for general system failures. A Cop's possible interactions with the public can be broken down into less than a dozen major scenarios and each of those likely can be broken down into 3 to 5 sub-types. Having an expectation that someone can be trained to spot one of 36 to 60 different scenarios is not unusual. The people who train cops simply do not know how to break an activity down into a process - and then develop procedures and training to implement the processes. then re-train and re-train processes - and reward for using the processes.

 

That is where you are wrong. You don't have to fall on your sword. The person that made the mistake becomes the most experienced person on the staff concerning the scenario. They find a way to figure out what happened, and what can be done to make sure it doesn't happen again - to any employee (officer in this case).

Your attitude is completely wrong. You are so defensive, so offended and so right in your own mind while plenty of evidence in the chemical industry, airline industry and nuclear industry (to name a few) show just how a trained individual can determine a solution to a problem and carry out the right steps to insure a safe conclusion in an urgent/seemingly stressful situation.

I work in a zero tolerance industrial environment so I do understand your argument. If you shoot another person flat on the ground with his hands up while 'allegedly' aiming for a man holding a toy truck while sitting down like a big baby I don't think you need a second chance as a police officer. I'm not saying go to jail but maybe you need to look for another line of work.

 

plenty of evidence in the chemical industry, airline industry and nuclear industry (to name a few) show just how a trained individual can determine a solution to a problem and carry out the right steps to insure a safe conclusion in an urgent/seemingly stressful situation.

I'd normally agree with you, but in the cases that you've mentioned it's about people vs machines, or people vs procedures. I think that example does not apply when (such as this case) it's people vs people.

 

That is the difference between trained and untrained people. It is amazing what people can do when properly trained. It is no longer stress, it is just another scenario.

That takes experience. One thing I've noticed from the few times I've talked to a cop is that the older and more experienced one is more calm even though they had the same(similar) training as the younger ones.

 

I'd normally agree with you, but in the cases that you've mentioned it's about people vs machines, or people vs procedures. I think that example does not apply when (such as this case) it's people vs people.

I maintain that being a cop is no different than dealing with the machines and equipment. Get them to map out the process and the various scenarios. Leave a bucket for OTHER for the rare ones. Also, make sure that one option the cops are given and even encouraged to use is, disengage. Not every person needs to be chased, hog-tied and brought to the station. Most people flee the cops because they don't want points on a license or they have an outstanding warrant for a minor pot or traffic offense - nothing worth being shot over. Just because someone flees, doesn't mean immediate chaise through a residential area is the only option.

In other words, the whole process needs to be reviewed, processed defined, training developed and implemented. Easy.