Posted on 08/31/2014 9:32:59 PM PDT by Rabin
St. Louis Police Chief Sam Dotson, officer safety is the number one issue, after two of his officers fired nine rounds into a shoplifter.
Is a police officer's number one job really to protect himself and his partner? Really?
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
The politicians and media have trained us to hate each other while our nation’s freedoms and wealth are plundered by the puppet masters. I’ve become a cynical old coot watching our nation being destroyed by propagandists.
“It is a leftists dream to have the population not the trust the police because then chaos and anarchy are easy to foment. The left is doing all it can to stoke the flames.”
How is it philosophically consistent for one to believe in limited government and criticize an anonymous leftist for criticizing corrupt behavior in government employees?
Moreover, how is it philosophically consistent to advocate shrinking the size and scope of government, yet make defenses for employees of a branch of governance which yearly *expanding* in size and scope?
Would that the hypothetical leftist would broaden his criticism to all government employees (if he hasn’t already).
Would that the conservative would realize that he is aiding and abetting the growth and power of an intrusive monolith, to which he claims to be opposed, by his actions.
Freegards,
That is well stated. Many Conservatives have a ‘hold-over’ effect of their parent’s and Grandparents; which was an admonishment to always trust government and their agents as upright and virtuous. Such was taught to be civic patriotism.
Sadly, we are no longer a moral or a virtuous society and corruption and cronyism is rampant in every single institution in this country.
Because government was taught and seen as ‘virtuous’ - growing it and expanding it was accepted as a societal good even by ‘conservatives’. This includes any agent of the state with a badge and uniform. They fed a beast that is now self-aware with an insatiable of appetite for everything the people possess that it does not have absolute control over.
What many ‘Conservatives’ mean when they say they want ‘smaller government’ is simply less ‘liberals’ and liberal programs in government. They have little problem with ‘Conservative’ expansion of government, for things like SWAT teams for the weather bureau (because they are Police and a good citizen always supports the police in any fashion).
We are a people grown ignorant of what was intended for us. So many Conservatives are comfortable with living in a police state, and will make excuses for it.
This is not a discussion about the size of government or even the size of a police force. If you wish to the days of the late nineteenth century when towns hired bad guys to protect them from other bad guys then we can have that separate discussion.
Would that conservatives would focus on the real enemy and not straw men.
I don’t know what kind of conservatism your grandparents or parents taught you. Mine KNEW that the government was not trustworthy because they were all politicians. The police were local folks who cared about their community....in small towns. The city police it depended upon the particular officer...but on the whole they were okay people.
I NEVER was taught that government was virtuous....don’t know where you ever got that idea.
Suggesting that a police officer get the same constitutional due process, including a presumption of innocence, as other citizens does not mean one is living in a police state. The idea that you think you do suggests you do not know what a true police state is. Have we lost and/or given up essential freedoms? The answer is an unequivocal yes. The idea that you cannot see the inherent threat from the left(communists) and the right (Islamists) means that you put us all at risk.
Grandparents. He fought in WWI and served in Intelligence during WWII and Korea. He did not trust too many politicians, but he was emphatic about the institutions of government and our requirement to trust them.
He turned me onto Reagan and set the foundation for what I have now in terms of ideology.
I never trusted the institutions however as he did. I saw them growing more corrupted even in the early 80's.
Suggesting that a police officer get the same constitutional due process, including a presumption of innocence, as other citizens does not mean one is living in a police state.
That is not the reason I think we live in a Police State.
Have we lost and/or given up essential freedoms?
Yes. Willingly too I might add. It's disconcerting to be stopped at roadblock "Safety checkpoints" and be told to get out of your car with your 'papers bitte' while other cops have their hands on their sidearms looking into your vehicle while you have to answer questions about where you are coming from and where you are going. This was just last week too. In a rural area.
The idea that you cannot see the inherent threat from the left(communists) and the right (Islamists) means that you put us all at risk.
I see the threat from both, but I think the Left and their agents in the Union Police Force pose greater and more imminent risk to me than Jihadists do.
I do not believe in trading essential liberty for safety and security. And since the federal government has opened up our borders wide, the truth is - we are on our own in terms of security. Cops look at us as 'domestic terrorists' via incitement reports from DHS and the feds.
Theory is the Obama is preparing “props” (think stage props) for creating a scenario which will persuade a majority to sweep him into a third term. Not unlike the Reichstag Fire and Kristallnacht. Those who object (yelling things about the Constitution) will be drowned out by the majority clamoring for his leadership & protection while MRAPs prowl the street silencing & persuading the ambivalent.
I watched the video in detail several times. This guy Powell was actively seeking “suicide by cop”: he stole a few petty items to elicit a police response, set the items (two cans) on the sidewalk with deliberation, pulled a knife when they showed up, checked behind himself and _moved_ when he realized he was putting bystanders in the line of fire, then started screaming “SHOOT ME” while heading toward the police in a threatening manner with knife draw, while police shouted “DROP THE KNIFE” many times before finally shooting him - waiting so long that when he fell he just about reached one of the cops.
The police did everything exactly right in this scenario. One quibble may be had over the last 2 shots, arguably unnecessary - but understandable in the high-adrenaline moment.
“he wasn’t begging to be shot”
Oh yes he was. I watched & listened to that part many times. He was fast approaching the cops with knife drawn, screaming “SHOOT ME”, after doing something to attract them (he carefully set the shoplifted items on the ground as though caring for something he knew wasn’t his). He even took bystanders into account and relocated his attack position so they didn’t get shot.
Straight up “suicide by cop”.
“why can’t we do the same on the ground?”
Because he was actively approaching with lethal force, intent, and opportunity. If he wasn’t shot a cop would have died.
“If you want to come around the vehicle with your knife, THEN I’ll shoot you.”
That’s exactly how it was playing out. No doubt the guy was approaching to kill, and walking around the car would only delay the act by no more than a second. By the time his intent was clear, retreat was not a viable option.
A car is a trivial obstacle to walk around, and not hard to jump & slide over.
“Our Instructors always emphasized AVOIDING a conflict”
Powell was obviously actively trying to create a lethal conflict leading to his own demise.
You’re suffering from the cognitive dissonance of “there MUST have been another way!”
Sure, your instructors emphasized avoiding conflict; they also taught you at length how to engage in conflict resulting in great harm to your opponent.
That's the standard excuse cops use to justify whatever brutality they decide to dish out. We had to face that ugly truth firsthand.
Cops lied on the stand after withholding video and audio evidence during an illegal forced entry into my daughter's home without a warrant. To cover the fact they acted illegally, they both charged my youngest (20 years old) with 'assaulting a police officer'. Evidence showed both cops lied about it - and the case was thrown out of court after a year of hell.
We were told this is S.O.P. procedure and that was admitted to on the stand. Cops said they have the 'legal right' to do anything to 'affect an arrest', including incitement or falsifying and altering police reports to justify unlawful acts.
You’re suffering from the cognitive dissonance of “there MUST have been another way!”
At one time, not long ago - there used to be. Now the policy is for cops to empty their guns into a perp or a dog if they 'feel threatened'.
Sure, your instructors emphasized avoiding conflict; they also taught you at length how to engage in conflict resulting in great harm to your opponent.
Not lethality. We were not trained to empty our guns into someone holding a knife high on something. Tasers mace and batons give an edge to TWO COPS and one perp. But since we are growning desensitized and indeed justify cops shooting to kill as a matter of S.O.P., we admit we like living in a police state.
“That’s the standard excuse cops use”
DID YOU WATCH THE POWELL VIDEO???
The guy had a knife.
The cops shouted repeatedly “DROP THE KNIFE”.
The guy walked fast toward the cops (guns drawn!) shouting “SHOOT ME”.
What part of “actively trying to create a lethal conflict” does this not fit?
I’m not talking rhetorical theoreticals, I’m talking concrete on-video clear-case specific situation.
[sigh] I know exactly how you’re thinking. I was there too, once. I stood in the very convincing live-fire simulator, Glock 17 drawn & loaded & chambered, faced with a knife-weilding attacker I _knew_ was intent on killing me. He came at me, I kept the car between us as best I could, I - deep down - thought I could somehow defuse the situation just as you’ve insisted, and then ... I lost the confrontation.
That was a very disturbing mental moment.
I finally snapped thru the “this can’t _actually_ happen” barrier.
I hope you will too.
So long as a case _this_clear_ won’t lead you to “shoot!”, instead leaving you flailing with “but what about” and “what if” and making sweeping accusations about unrelated situations, you’re in stark raving denial.
If you want to quibble about their last two shots, sure. There’s room for debate there.
Discussion of the “middle” shots can be had, but are unreasonable.
If you can’t accept the imperative of the cops shooting Powell at all, while claiming training in self-defense, then you’re suffering severe cognitive dissonance and cannot be reasoned with.
Yup. Multiple times.
The guy had a knife.
So they say. I heard them first tell him to get his hands out of his pockets and as he approached them it was then they were saying 'drop the knife'.
Police emptying guns into perps and killing family pets upon dynamic entries are now endemic in society. That's my problem. This killing is just one more in an almost daily slew of reports of cops acting like Enforcers for the mob and not 'peace officers'.
When I was a kid back in the late 60's, I saw a single cop take out a hippie swinging a bowie knife at him, all the cop had was a baton. Hippie was disarmed, cuffed and kicking with his feet into the air like a pig on his back. So do not give me this crappola that two cops have to empty their guns into a single perp with a knife. They couldn't shoot him in the thigh or arm and then rush him? Nope. Cops are now trained to kill first, deal with the consequences afterward.
Thats not a free society. That is indicative of a police state.
If you can’t accept the imperative of the cops shooting Powell at all, while claiming training in self-defense, then you’re suffering severe cognitive dissonance and cannot be reasoned with.
If you accept the fact that cops are justified in emptying their magazines into anyone or anything they claim they feel "threatened by" as 'self-defense', then you are comfortable living with a police state and NO - you cannot reason with me about such a justification. Period.
I have my own personal reasons for loathing and distrusting today's law enforcement. Holder's corruption goes all the way down to the local level if you need a clue.
Cops are now just Enforcers for a beast. Nothing more in my estimation.
“They couldn’t shoot him in the thigh or arm and then rush him?”
Awright, you’ve just proven yourself incompetent on the subject.
We’re done.
Right, because two cops emptying both of their sidearms at the same time into a perp with a knife is much better than a single cop from 1969 who could disarm a hippie swinging a bowie knife at them.
Of course when a society becomes wicked, and life is cheap because safety and security is valued above all, INCLUDING life - we of course expect law enforcement to have the freedom to empty their weapons into anyone they feel threatened by.
You seem to be incompetent on the subject of liberty and where this kind of Death Squad Police mentality will lead us.
Maybe cops learned from the 60s that defending against a knife with a baton failed lethally often enough that shooting is preferred.
Is there ANY justification for a cop to shoot someone?
Should be the same exact justification afforded to citizens.
Right now, the rules governing use of deadly force for a citizen are extremely limited.
Emptying an entire magazine from two weapons into a someone we felt 'threatend by' would be an anal examination by the same agency that absolves what their agents are permitted to do to citizens.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.