ANSWERS: 2
  • I'm not following your question.... "Other than defunding the police, what other non-lethal restraint techniques...?" There are plenty of options for officers to use, but it depends on the force the suspect uses. It's called the use of force continuum and every law enforcement agency has some model of it.
    • Linda Joy
      Yeah, I didn't word it well. Can I claim chemo fog? I wanted to get it out there right off I'm not for defunding the police. It just doesn't necessarily relate to nonlethal force. I saw a demonstration of foam used to restrain a suspect once. It hardened almost immediately and they couldn't move. There are rubber bullets... don't know how effective they are, tasers stop some people. I'm just not informed on how effective this stuff is. I also heard police are not given regular psychlogical exams or reviews. Is that true. Its got to be a tough job!
    • Archie Bunker
      Usually when you see demonstrations of less-lethal options for police, it's being used on a person who is standing still or moving slowly. Not against a person who is within arms reach and actively fighting. Most of that shit don't work then. Rubber bullets were just taken off the table when it comes to dispersing crowds in most areas and OC spray goes whichever way the wind is blowing. I've seen tasers not work and pepper spray not work (I'm one of the people that it doesn't work on). That narrows your options because sure don't like it when batons were used. As far as psychological exams, that's up to individual jurisdictions and when you start delving into that, you run into all kinds of ADA laws.
    • Linda Joy
      Thank you, dear!
  • "Frankly I think if they are committing a crime and don't obey the officer the officer is within their rights to use lethal force, but I do think there should be other options." So, if the officer determines, by his or her own discretion, that a person is uncooperative, that officer is free to end that person's life?! That's the most ignorant argument I've ever heard. The officer should be able to defend his or her own life from a violent threat and that is all. If officers start murdering people willy-nilly, then they will be respected no more than the criminals who do the same.
    • Archie Bunker
      Agreed. But we both know that the question will come down to what is a "violent threat" and whether or not the officer actually felt their life was in danger.
    • bostjan64
      That's the problem. No one should give a quarter of a crap whether someone felt this or felt that. We need to examine the facts of each matter and decide accordingly. If the officer felt the need to shoot a crackhead or not, it doesn't matter. If the crackhead in question was charging at the officer with a meat cleaver and the officer shot him from seven feet away, it's pretty clear what's going on. If the crackhead was twenty feet away with his back to the officer, then it's murder. Since the officers all have body cameras now, there should be enough evidence to make a pretty certain determination. Let's break it down: cop shoot a guy he pulled over because the guy said he had a CCW and there was a weapon in the car - that's murder. Cop strangles a dude for twenty minutes because he was on drugs - that's murder. Cop stuffs a suspect in the back of a police van for a "rough ride" to teach him a lesson for talking back - that's negligent homicide. A cop shoots a guy a dozen times because the guy is whining while he's on the floor of a hotel hallway with his hands in the air and he has no idea what's going on - that's murder. A cop breaks into a dude's apartment and shoots him and then says she thought he was an intruder and that she was in her own apartment, even though she had to break in - I dunno, jury trial, because that sounds unbelievable. It's at the very least breaking and entering, though. Another example: a cop shoots a woman who asked for help and then refuses to explain to anyone what happened. Is it murder? I don't know, because he won't say why he did it... But if you replace "cop" with "civilian" in any of these stories, it'd be preposterous to think that the killer would get away scott free. So, if I was driving down an alley and a woman ran up to my car asking for help, and I pulled out a gun and just mowed her down and then refused to tell investigators anything, I'd guarantee that I'd be locked up for murder two. Even if I told the investigators that I was startled and for a moment, feared for my life, they'd still lock me up just the same, because the story really doesn't make sense. Some cops are bad and should never be cops. Definitely not all, definitely not none. There's some number somewhere between 1% and 99% of cops that have no business making life and death decisions on a day-to-day basis. If we shy away from the idea of holding the police responsible for explaining why they kill people when they kill people, and are afraid that, too often, they'll just wave it away, saying, "I felt I was in danger," so we'd end up with too many court cases - well, it just proves that we need better police training.

Copyright 2020, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy