1 hour ago, Black Jesus said:

It's well known, that in dynamic situations accuracy will go out the window. This is because the target is moving, actively attacking (or you perceive them to be actively attacking you), and you yourself will be on the move and with adrenaline pumping. Most police shootings are defensive situations. Not offensive, where they can prepare how they're going to shoot their target. So 40% is not bad actually, and it's the whole reason cops have 13+ round mags. 

 

It would be reckless if they didn't know where the target was at all, and decided to shoot anyway. But I wouldn't call it reckless if the shoots were all downrange towards their intended target.

Then how is it possible that in my country this would not happen but the outcome would be the same? I do not recall a single situation where that many rounds are fired and that many are missed.

2 hours ago, TylerF said:

I have to lol when people talk about use of force, laws, and ramifications for use. Just like when departments or cities create "Citizen review boards" for police officers.

 

Also, as far as I can tell, no-one here has really used a handgun, particularly under high stress. Adrenaline is a bitch.

 

It's not like the movies. The real world is messy.

Maybe used, maybe didn't, can you really tell? I recall a conversation I had on this forum with a member (who as I understood was a USAF vet or active duty). To convince him leg/arm shots are fairly standard here, I had to locate and provide him with the Ministry of Internal Affairs regulations of firearms training. One exercise includes officers shooting the target's arm holding a firearm from 10 meters, 3 shots. And it is a standard exercise which all the cadets and active officers shall pass. 

 

Of course I never mean "do as we do". I only mean that some people do things differently. 

5 minutes ago, Antia said:

Then how is it possible that in my country this would not happen but the outcome would be the same? I do not recall a single situation where that many rounds are fired and that many are missed.

I'm assuming, based off what I know about European police shootings, and their objective to maim, that officers have more of an opportunity to land their shots on specific places. US police are more defensive and reactive in their shootings. That will lead to less accuracy. Look at the shootings here that are similar to the ones in your country (man with a knife for example). Less shots are fired, and they usually hit their mark. These guys were in the dark, had just ran, and they now have to click it in their brain that the dude has a gun. Lot easier to land most of your shots when your gun was already out and you can plan accordingly.

5 minutes ago, Black Jesus said:

I'm assuming, based off what I know about European police shootings, and their objective to maim, that officers have more of an opportunity to land their shots on specific places. US police are more defensive and reactive in their shootings. That will lead to less accuracy. Look at the shootings here that are similar to the ones in your country (man with a knife for example). Less shots are fired, and they usually hit their mark. These guys were in the dark, had just ran, and they now have to click it in their brain that the dude has a gun. Lot easier to land most of your shots when your gun was already out and you can plan accordingly.

I can agree to that. I'm not really aware of the situation as it had went down in California, but would these differences be the result of a completely different kind of policing? I mean, you are presenting 2 different cases here, but how come they are different for US and EU? Why does EU get to plan ahead and US doesn't? Maybe because at least in my country there's always 2 in a car? Less danger of the suspect having a gun? That I find a negative side of the gun laws in the US. I am pro-gun, but it makes the police job so incredibly harder.

 

Mods, delete this last post that I made on the first page.

 

Edited April 21, 20188 yr by Westcoaster
Wrong page

11 hours ago, Antia said:

I can agree to that. I'm not really aware of the situation as it had went down in California, but would these differences be the result of a completely different kind of policing? I mean, you are presenting 2 different cases here, but how come they are different for US and EU? Why does EU get to plan ahead and US doesn't? Maybe because at least in my country there's always 2 in a car? Less danger of the suspect having a gun? That I find a negative side of the gun laws in the US. I am pro-gun, but it makes the police job so incredibly harder.

 

I think it has more to do with guns. I spoke to many US LEOs and the way I understood they always expect the worst and prepare for the worst, i.e. they must be ready to react and use lethal force at any moment, or get killed. In such circumstances it's logical that the priority is to neutralize the threat. 

 

I think in Europe and my country the threat goes uphill: the most common is physical resistance, then blunt weapons and only then guns, and even then shots are rarely fired at the police. So the response to the threat is scaled accordingly -- from less lethal by default to lethal in extreme cases.

 

In the States they prepare to counter a shooting... So they can't rely on less lethal weapons by default.

 

Of course it's just my theory and can be completely bull lol

23 minutes ago, Hastings said:

 

I think it has more to do with guns. I spoke to many US LEOs and the way I understood they always expect the worst and prepare for the worst, i.e. they must be ready to react and use lethal force at any moment, or get killed. In such circumstances it's logical that the priority is to neutralize the threat. 

 

I think in Europe and my country the threat goes uphill: the most common is physical resistance, then blunt weapons and only then guns, and even then shots are rarely fired at the police. So the response to the threat is scaled accordingly -- from less lethal by default to lethal in extreme cases.

 

In the States they prepare to counter a shooting... So they can't rely on less lethal weapons by default.

 

Of course it's just my theory and can be completely bull lol

But then the US police has a great danger of getting a tunnel vision. When you go into a situation with the mindset that it will or could very possibly turn lethal, you're gonna be shooting a lot quicker than when you go into a situation only taking into account that it can turn lethal. This could possibly make a hugely different outcome for the same situation but with the different approaches that US and EU police handle.

Edited April 19, 20188 yr by Antia

9 hours ago, Antia said:

But then the US police has a great danger of getting a tunnel vision. When you go into a situation with the mindset that it will or could very possibly turn lethal, you're gonna be shooting a lot quicker than when you go into a situation only taking into account that it can turn lethal. This could possibly make a hugely different outcome for the same situation but with the different approaches that US and EU police handle.

Tunnel vision is caused by adrenaline and is not more susceptible to U.S. cop's than European cop's. And because you go into a situation prepared for the worst does not mean that you are more susceptible to shoot someone.  If you do not approach a situation with the mindset of it going south in the split of a second, then you are setting yourself up for failure and that may cost you your life and that is unacceptable.

13 hours ago, ToeBius said:

Tunnel vision is caused by adrenaline and is not more susceptible to U.S. cop's than European cop's. And because you go into a situation prepared for the worst does not mean that you are more susceptible to shoot someone.  If you do not approach a situation with the mindset of it going south in the split of a second, then you are setting yourself up for failure and that may cost you your life and that is unacceptable.

Nono, that's not what I am saying. I am saying that EU cops are aware that a situation could turn bad in a second, but they are less focused on that happening. You can see that in many things, like traffic stops for example. Most dangerous part of the job say many US cops. In EU that's not a thing at all. So that'll make a traffic stop on a normal nice mother, a very different thing. Where US cops will (sometimes) make people put their hands on their steering wheel, in EU (or at least my country) they'll be casually chatting, doing their thing. And like I said, they're trained to respond in a split-second to a very dangerous situation.

On 4/20/2018 at 4:07 AM, Antia said:

Nono, that's not what I am saying. I am saying that EU cops are aware that a situation could turn bad in a second, but they are less focused on that happening. You can see that in many things, like traffic stops for example. Most dangerous part of the job say many US cops. In EU that's not a thing at all. So that'll make a traffic stop on a normal nice mother, a very different thing. Where US cops will (sometimes) make people put their hands on their steering wheel, in EU (or at least my country) they'll be casually chatting, doing their thing. And like I said, they're trained to respond in a split-second to a very dangerous situation.

  U.S. Cop's do chit chat with people and most of them that I have had encounters with are nice people but to not be focused for a situation to turn south in the blink of a second is a terrible way to approach anything ever.  I am kind of confused as to what you are saying because the beginning of your statement says one thing while the ending says another.  Remember that the news only shows you what it wants to show you, and thay is usually the bad parts of things.  

 

  I remember seeing some video's of police in England willing to die or be seriously injured just so that they don't have to shoot someone and I found that appalling.  To be willing to die or sustain serious injury so that the criminal does not die or get seriously injured is wild and in my opinion unacceptable.  But my country is completely different than Europe and I find that  for someone to try and kill or injure me, then they care little for there life as they do for my life and I would not be willing to die so that he/she lives.

 

  

4 hours ago, ToeBius said:

I remember seeing some video's of police in England willing to die or be seriously injured just so that they don't have to shoot someone and I found that appalling.  To be willing to die or sustain serious injury so that the criminal does not die or get seriously injured is wild and in my opinion unacceptable.  

 

My take on that is that they don't consider themselves judge, jury and executioner like many people in the US do when they consider they're in relative danger. Those officers consider themselves more like representatives of the law who must enforce it, and capture the non-law abiding citizens so they can have a fair trial and be punished accordingly, nothing more. I find this kind of mindset very honorable and much healthier.

3 hours ago, Hystery said:

 

 I find this kind of mindset very honorable and much healthier.

I don’t think it’s healthier for the cops who end up getting stabbed lol 

To me, I don't know what the result of this bill will be until it passes.  To contribute my two  cents that I just found on the armchair, I do believe that regular officers should carry beanbag  shotgun ammunition in their vehicles; how this works is that the first shotgun round would be the beanbag and the rest would be the normal lethal rounds.

5 hours ago, Black Jesus said:

I don’t think it’s healthier for the cops who end up getting stabbed lol 

 

I said the mindset was healthier mind you. I'll always find it healthier for a cop to want to have a criminal judged according to the laws of their country, even if it means to endanger their own life, rather than for a cop to just prefer to gun down any possible threat they might face and ask questions later.

Yes, because all American LEOs just look to shoot down everyone possible and see themselves as Judge Dredd.

 

Ridiculous.

On 4/17/2018 at 8:37 AM, Hystery said:

Sounds good to me, depending on the case. De-escalation and non-lethal techniques should always be a priority before resorting to deadly force.

 

I like California.

If you believe someone has a gun, you can't try "non-lethal techniques". It doesn't work that way, split second decisions are going to be made. Legislation in regards to this is just another political stunt done by the state of California. 

Edited April 23, 20188 yr by SpikeTerm

On 21-4-2018 at 11:26 AM, ToeBius said:

  U.S. Cop's do chit chat with people and most of them that I have had encounters with are nice people but to not be focused for a situation to turn south in the blink of a second is a terrible way to approach anything ever.  I am kind of confused as to what you are saying because the beginning of your statement says one thing while the ending says another.  Remember that the news only shows you what it wants to show you, and thay is usually the bad parts of things.  

 

  I remember seeing some video's of police in England willing to die or be seriously injured just so that they don't have to shoot someone and I found that appalling.  To be willing to die or sustain serious injury so that the criminal does not die or get seriously injured is wild and in my opinion unacceptable.  But my country is completely different than Europe and I find that  for someone to try and kill or injure me, then they care little for there life as they do for my life and I would not be willing to die so that he/she lives.

 

  

The point that I am trying to make is that both EU and American are aware that a situation can turn bad very easily, but that I think that US cops are actively thinking that something can turn bad and that reflects in their decisions, like cuffing a person while searching his vehicle. In EU I'd say the cops are trained to react instantly when a situation turns really bad, and in the back of their head they all know it. But they are not constantly actively thinking about it which also reflect in their decisions. 

 

But I guess this difference has gotta be there, because it is way more dangerous in the US. And I don't think EU's should judge US too easily as the US shouldn't judge EU too easily. I mean, when I read comments from US people about EU police officer safety I sometimes think 'dude, you have no clue why we'd it this way' and I suppose that's vice versa, so I'll leave it at this.

It appears as though California has some of the highest police officer deaths in the country. Hmmmmm.....

 

http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/state.html

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/u-s-states-with-the-most-police-officers-killed-in-the-line-of-duty.html

15 hours ago, Antia said:

The point that I am trying to make is that both EU and American are aware that a situation can turn bad very easily, but that I think that US cops are actively thinking that something can turn bad and that reflects in their decisions, like cuffing a person while searching his vehicle. In EU I'd say the cops are trained to react instantly when a situation turns really bad, and in the back of their head they all know it. But they are not constantly actively thinking about it which also reflect in their decisions. 

 

But I guess this difference has gotta be there, because it is way more dangerous in the US. And I don't think EU's should judge US too easily as the US shouldn't judge EU too easily. I mean, when I read comments from US people about EU police officer safety I sometimes think 'dude, you have no clue why we'd it this way' and I suppose that's vice versa, so I'll leave it at this.

  We will "SOMETIMES" cuff someone if the situation call's for it.  It all depends on the situation.  If I put someone in cuff's then that will make it less likely that that individual will attempt to attack me.  He may run but he wont get far because I cuffed him. 

When you start to let your gaurd down then you are more susceptible to failure.  There are "SOME" criminals that would rather kill or be killed in order not to go to jail.

 

When you see these thing's, you need to first, put yourself into there shoes and try to find out as to why a officer is doing the thing's that they do.

 

It is usually for there safety and the officer's safety.

13 minutes ago, ToeBius said:

When you see these thing's, you need to first, put yourself into there shoes and try to find out as to why a officer is doing the thing's that they do.

 

It's difficult to conceive for us because here, when someone has their car searched, it's either after they've been actually arrested for a proper reason, or while having the owner of the vehicle just standing on the side with another police officer, not cuffed, not detained, just standing there and waiting. That's the thing that I think eludes us europeans, that kind of culture of violence you have over there with people ready to kill for the slightest offense.

6 hours ago, TheDivineHustle said:

It appears as though California has some of the highest police officer deaths in the country. Hmmmmm.....

 

http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/state.html

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/u-s-states-with-the-most-police-officers-killed-in-the-line-of-duty.html

 

It also appears that California has the largest police force in the US, so it makes sense for them to have high numbers when it comes to that. I don't see your point.