Posted on 04/16/2021 4:25:29 AM PDT by MtnClimber
Most people would consider the death of George Floyd or Daunte Wright to be a critical incident. They would make that rash assumption because they are "critical" to our political environment. Many pundits and businesses are piling on because the same faulty assumption is applied to voter integrity laws passed in Georgia and under consideration in other states.
No one should be rash enough to discount the importance of these events. But the term "critical incident" refers to a completely different concept — one that can inform how we address and prevent such public events. The process of "critical incident analysis" is a method of examining a series of events to identify where a single critical intervention or altered critical choice would have brought the whole "chain of events" to a different conclusion. Daunte Wright's death cries out for such an analysis.
SNIP
Notice the key events that led up to this. Assuming that his original arrest in the attempted robbery was correct, we find these events involving Daunte Wright:
-Participation in a violent crime -Violation of his bail conditions -Failure to keep his car properly registered -Resisting arrest -Attempting to flee
For the officer, we find:
-Possibly inadequate training involving Taser and firearm discipline -Failure to identify which weapon the officer was holding
We should not find fault in the choice to attempt to stop Wright's flight. After all, he violated the conditions of his bail and was known to be armed and dangerous. Public safety requires that such persons be removed from the street. But we do find that every step listed above was a "critical incident."
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
The officers should have handcuffed him away from the car door, but it was Daunte that caused the conflict situation.
Commit crimes, resist arrest, and there are going to be unintended consequences regardless of your skin color. You never hear about white people killed in the same manner because Democrats and their media accomplices are promoting a big lie in order to cause riots and bring down the republic.
“...”critical incident analysis” is a method of examining a series of events to identify where a single critical intervention or altered critical choice would have brought the whole “chain of events” to a different conclusion..”
Just like airplane crashes.
The handcuff technique was to use the car to hold him on one side and the officer on another. The officer had one hand free to apply the cuffs, and the driver grabbed his hands together, and pushed them to his body, so the cuffs couldn’t be applied. The shooter tried to pull one of the arms away from the drivers body, that’s when he wriggled free and got into the car.
"...There are many more examples available. These three illustrate that while the proximate cause of death was administered by a police officer (assuming that Officer Chauvin is found guilty), the ultimate cause of death was fully controlled by the decedent. It was actions leading up to the fatal encounter that set the critical chain of events in motion.
While the police chief and mayor of Brooklyn Center were correct in what they said, they were very wrong in not saying enough. Both of them should have emphasized — not in passing, but in sharp focus — that Daunte Wright ended up on the receiving end of lethal force because he resisted arrest and attempted to flee. This doesn't excuse any incorrect action by the officer, but it focuses the ultimate blame where it belongs — on the criminal who created the situation.
Until our public safety officials abandon political correctness and point out this irrefutable truth, we will see more and more public unrest, with more deaths and destroyed cities. It can't stop with the shootings. It has to be applied to all the rioting. Anyone who destroys a business or assaults a police officer is personally responsible for that choice. No excuses.
Years ago, I took care of a man who had been police chief in a medium-sized Midwestern city during the mid-'60s rioting. He had gotten word that instigators were coming to stir up trouble in his city. He let it be known that rioters and looters would be shot on sight. The rioters passed his city by. They had the presence of mind to make the critical choice to stay alive.
I don't suggest that this was the best approach — only that it worked. Rioters and criminals are generally aware that they don't want to die, and if they know that certain actions are likely to make them assume room temperature, they'll often choose wisely. Public officials who decline to point out that the bad guy's choice led to the bad guy pushing up daisies are acting in a way that does not put public safety first. They are creating an atmosphere that forces the police to avoid needed force in the interests of preserving themselves. We suffer for it..."
This is perhaps, for me, closest to the root of what makes me the angriest about all of this.
We live in a Republic, which is Rule by Laws (as opposed to an oligarchy or monarchy which are rule by men or a man). When the people whose JOB it is (because they were voted in as politicians or hired on as police chiefs) to execute and maintain the rule of law tell the public that the rule of law will not be enforced, we don't live in a Republic, we live in a state of anarchy.
“ We live in a Republic, which is Rule by Laws...”
I no longer believe that.
L
Yes! And law enforcement people don’t want to be on a nationally televised trial so they avoid incidents that could escalate. The other criminals see this and they run wild.
I have seen cop training films from the mid 50s that, if followed, would have prevented this shooting.
Yeah, but Police Departments were too "Neanderthal" back then, don'cha know.
“In this country, if you’re black and you get pulled over by the police, you have a very much higher chance of being dead just because you’re black, and just because you’re encountering police,” he said. “That is a fact we have to all wrestle with.”
What no one is talking about is that this was no longer a traffic stop when it went wrong. Wright re-entered his car by his own action when it was discovered there was a warrant out for his arrest in connection with an armed robbery:
The American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota said it had “deep concerns that police here appear to have used dangling air fresheners as an excuse for making a pretextual stop, something police do all too often to target Black people.”
He was originally pulled for no registration and a broken tail light along with violating a law about air freshners on rear view mirrors. And as they attempted to arrest him for the warrant, using cuffs, he burst back into the car attempting escape. His body position at the time of the shot was inside and facing the front of the car.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgAUrDTUk4Q
As for the officer mistaking the taser for a gun, she had the gun out and never came close to touching the perp, only aiming the gun at Williams for a few seconds as she shifted her body to the left during the encounter and never trying to get to the body to use a taser. She shot an escaping, warranted, individual with a warrant, also for his failure to appear in court on charges that he fled from officers and possessed a gun without a permit during an encounter with Minneapolis police in June.
wy69
I don’t believe it either which is what creates the anger level in me.
It is clear that we don’t. When people can come over a border where there are clear laws in place criminalizing it, and the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ITSELF declines to enforce laws put in place by legal legislative processes, and there are no consequences...
Ipso Facto we do not live in a Republic ruled by law anymore. When a government, federal, state or local decides on political whim of people to ignore the very laws it put in place, then we are fully an oligarchy and not a Republic.
THAT is what angers me.
All of these situations stem from not following police directives.
Exactly.
I am well versed in this, since I work in an environment where mistakes sometimes lead to injury or death, and I am called on to research causes and events to provide to people who are involved in the decision making process.
Before this, I worked with radioactive isotopes which engendered the need to study accidents in order to better understand the danger inherent in my field and how to avoid them.
And before that, I was a jet mechanic and the actions of any one of our team working on the plane could lead to loss of aircraft, destruction of property, and death.
It was there that I began reading official documentation in the form of accident reports and internal publications for the Naval Aviation community that addressed in detail all forms of NAVAIR mishaps. I was a very young man (still a teenager) but I found that fascinating reading, very engrossing and educational.
Reading those mishap reports every month made me realize just how flawed we are as humans, especially in a crisis when stress and adrenaline change how the mind operates and people who normally will be reliable do exactly the wrong thing. The military understands this very well, and tries to get around it by extensive and realistic training so that in a tight spot the training can take precedence over the course of events instead of the fear and confusion.
Marines who have been in combat are often heard saying that the privation, abuse, confusion, and stress of environments like Parris Island and Camp Lejune gave them a workable foundation to keep them upright in a bad situation when they were in combat.
And what you reference is spot on-that it isn't just ONE thing in a chain of critical events (in this case, the dead criminal not keeping his car registration up to date) it is the snowball effect of multiple elements of that "critical chain", each one often made MORE critical as they pile up.
Most of the time the first step in a critical chain is almost stupidly harmless, and all that is required to keep this as a singular event instead of the first step in a chain of events leading to a fatal mishap is...for the person to make the right choice and deal with it.
This event I describe below is completely made up, but I assure you, in years of studying and reading mishap reports in everything from nuclear accidents to airplane crashes, this is simply mind numbing in its repetition, and completely classic in content:
It is, on the surface, a tragedy. The pilot's "luck" just ran out, wasn't much he could do. But in the investigation, the prime contributing cause after "Equipment Malfunction" is "human failure" which angers some people.
After investigation, the prime cause was equipment failure due to a new valve that was installed incorrectly. Sure that is human failure, but for the pilot, it resulted in a valve failure.
But investigators determined that there was a long time between the valve being opened and the call of fuel emergency, and could only make the valid conclusion that the pilot was lax and not checking his instrumentation (fuel gauge) as he should have been. THAT'S human error, because if he had seen it in time, he would have been able to land safely at a few locations with a reserve of fuel on board instead of flaming out on approach.
Then, they further determined that the single drop tank on the starboard side had been nearly full of fuel (since it broke loose on impact) and was found nearly intact about 40 yards away, full of fuel) and that the pilot had never switched over to the single starboard drop tank with 2000 lbs of fuel available.
Investigators showed he had turned on the tank, but...in the wreckage, found the switch for the PORT side was turned on (which had no fuel tank attached) but he became so distracted with the task of vectoring to the emergency landing and the fear he must have been feeling, that he made a mistake in the critical task of switching on his fuel reserve and did it for the port side with no tank instead of the starboard side wing pylon which DID have a full external fuel tank installed on.
If he hadn't been so stressed, he might have noticed that after he switched the reserve tank on, instead of a green light and rising fuel levels as it was pumped into his internal tanks, he had a red light. In the NATOPS manual (The Bible for Naval pilots) it said in big bold letters surrounded by yellow and black striping: "When activating external fuel transfer light will be red if a fuel tank is not present or fuel flow is not established. It is CRITICAL to verify that the status indicator light for the switch is green, and also to visually verify that internal fuel levels increase." But, in this case, as he was calling the fuel emergency and vectoring for the nearest landing, when he switched on the tank he did not visually validate that the light turned green and that his internal fuel rose because he was busy talking to ground control and viewing his navigation instrumentation...and he never went back and looked, assuming the fuel was flowing in and that he had plenty to make it to the field.
The next time he noticed his fuel level was in a state of utter panic when his engine flamed out as he was lined up on the runway, and at that point, his doom was sealed and impact was seconds away. No time or altitude to switch on the tank and transfer the fuel or restart the engine.
Additionally, he also failed to take the vital steps of trimming his craft for maximum fuel efficiency (speed, angle of attack, flap position, etc) that would have made a small but perceptible difference so that instead of flaming out miles short of the runway as he did, he might have flamed out on the runway with a teacup of fuel left.
In any of these events, had the pilot watched his gauges, turned on his reserve fuel tank, or adjusted his flight attitude as he was trained repeatedly to do, it wouldn't have been a fatal mishap but a tale to be told over a Styrofoam cup of coffee in the visited ready room as his fuel dump valve is changed out and plane fueled back up. So you are right...just like airplane crashes. This scenario above is a completely fictitious one, but you can hardly read a mishap report without seeing this over and over and over and over again.
If this dead criminal had done one thing, just one thing differently, such as not assaulting someone with a gun, keeping his registration up to date, not resisting arrest, and not trying to drive off, he wouldn't be a dead criminal, he would be just another dumb ass criminal who is behind bars for a six months for the serious crime of armed assault and robbery.
But he is dead. And even though I think the officer is either poorly trained and incompetent, or at best, ill suited to be using any kind of weapon in a stressful situation because she is not mentally cut out for that kind of thing and becomes a "bed quitter" under stress. She might have been a fine trainer, but not someone who should be in a real, heated situation. I don't know.
“Marines who have been in combat are often heard saying that the privation, abuse, confusion, and stress of environments like Parris Island and Camp Lejune gave them a workable foundation to keep them upright in a bad situation when they were in combat.”
Which is exactly why they train that way. I remember times I missed the “easy life” of Boot. At least I had a nice warm cot to pass out in and a hot meal in my belly.
And you nailed the “proximate cause” in this shooting. If Mr. Dead Criminal had just coughed up the cash to keep his registration current he would most likely still be alive. Let alone the whole “do what the police officer tells you to do” thing.
L
There are completely incompetent cops, bad cops, evil cops. Just like there are incompetent physicians, bad physicians, and even evil physicians.
I believe they are an small minority. Due to a bell shaped distribution of "Terrible Cop" to "Superlative Cop", most cops are decent but ordinary cops with the evil, bad, or completely incompetent ones far to the tail of the curve on the left.
As you state, no intelligent or competent cop wants to be bunched in with the evil, bad, or incompetent ones in a very public way.
But we, as a society, are putting cops into situations where their "luck" will run out, and they will be put in a situation where they have to make an instant choice of "Tried by Twelve or Carried by Six".
And that fear and doubt that we have cast into their heads makes it more likely these days that a man, with a wife and three kids will "Carried by Six" if they are unlucky, and "Tried by Twelve" at best.
And at best, in the "Trial by Twelve", their professional reputation cast by the race baiters, scummy politicians, craven police leadership, and corrosive and lying media onto the tail of that bell curve to reside with the evil, bad, and incompetent cops, and their career will be over.
And THAT is if they are "lucky".
There is not a single BLM “celebrated” event (martyrs to the cause) that did not begin with an individual who took one or more really wrong turns in their life, leading to a confrontation with police that the average citizen avoids by not living in the wrong direction.
That does not excuse any actual proven wrong doing by any member of any local police force, but it does explain how the issue is not that of a police force scanning the local population to pick out a victim to act unlawfully against, and doing so most often with racial prejudice. The so-called “victims” of the police are victims of choices they made in their lives that led them eventually to bad consequences in encounters with the police.
There was a time (and not in the "distant past") when the only rational response WOULD HAVE been by citizens who heard of this:
"What the hell? What are they blaming the cop for? The guy was a criminal, had a record, and outstanding warrant for armed assault and robbery, and was fighting with cops trying to flee. Sure, the cop made a mistake, but if I'd been there, I wouldn't even have attempted to use a stun gun with a dangerous person like that. That is where the cop made the real mistake!"
And that would have been rational then, and would be rational today. God. Look where we are now.
We better find a way to turn this around, or there is no hope for this Republic (or Banana Republic, more accurately)
Some people seem to get focused under stress, some seem to make very bad decisions. I agree with your analogy.
From the “You’ll never take me alive, copper” school of criminal thought.
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.