>Didn’t even check on her partner after he went down right next to her
>Ventilated a random terrified civilian who was running away from the shooter, also didn’t check on him
>Ran away from the shooter herself, leaving her partner to die
>Got shot 6 times in the back
What does being female have to do with any of that?
What does being female have to do with any of that?
Women police officers have consistently worse records than men in violent confrontations with criminals.
Very specifically, on a per-capita and per-incident basis, women show these differences from men:
The areas where women may do at least as well as men are investigations and interrogations.
I watched the video 3x on a large screen.
I also saw nothing qualifying the female cop critique, and I am no cheerleader for women in LEO roles on the street. Quite the contrary.
Then I caught a different report:
It seems to me that the 2 officers were the first responders and were poorly armed to meet a shooter with a high-powered rifle. Additionally, anyone can see the 2 police units. So, a fundamental question: Why didn’t they have partners? That would have made it 4-on-1 and the situation would likely have played out quite differently even if they all lacked rifles.
Once her partner was down, she was pinned and alone. There is no checking vitals under fire.
Based upon the video alone I’d call them both heroes for engaging the gunman to save lives.
But I’d like to know how many mooslims are on the police force in Montreal and how long it took other units to roll on scene. Ya know?
In all fairness, how is she to check on her partner when she is in the middle of a gun battle, in close quarters, trying to stay alive herself?
I’m am the first to say women do not belong on the street in the patrol division, I know first hand. They are more suited as matrons handling female prisoners, juveniles, and unarmed meter maids, writing parking tickets. They have ruined law enforcement, along with racial quotas.