Massachusetts Cop Forum banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
MassCops Angel
Joined
·
121,497 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
In a unique production assisted by the Force Science Institute, law enforcement authorities in an Oregon county have created an online video that explains to civilians the realities of officer-involved shootings and counters prevalent myths fostered by Hollywood fantasies.
In 17 minutes, the program ranges from addressing why officers don't t...

Read the full story at Police One
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,578 Posts
I posted that yesterday, but I won't get all upset about it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
126 Posts
Great video! But on the segment where they explained why "shooting to disarm" is impractical due to the difficulty and lack of effectiveness overall, I think they missed the most important thing to consider....

I have always been taught that generally if your "threat perception" is not great enough that you would have no other option but to use lethal force, then you didn't have the justification to use that level of force to begin with, even if it was an attempt to disarm. If you felt you could safely disarm/talk down the person because maybe there was no immediate threat due to circumstances (distance, type of weapon, whatever else), then your threat perception was not where it needed to be to justify that level of force....

It surprises me how many people in and out of LE I have met that don't understand that concept.
 

·
Subscribing Member
Joined
·
824 Posts
Every state academy director should leave an open invitation to every major journalist in their area to attend the police academy to include practical shoot/don't shoot exercises. I'd venture to guess the media hacks would change their tune after doing so. The ones that refuse could then accurately and relentlessly be labeled as cowardly hypocritesl and/or willfully ignorant in reponse to any future MMQB critiques. The training should be quite easy as they appear to be experts in police tactics now.

On a side note I am against civil review boards but there should be a requirement that the civilian board members be similarly trained before they can serve otherwise they have no basis of knowledge. I'm no attorney but I know when one screws up they have to answer to the bar of similarly trained professionals. Same goes for doctors, judges, electricians, etc in their respective professions. Can you imagine if Wal Mart cashiers, preachers, social workers and dental assistants were responsible for investigating ("reviewing") whether an electrician's faulty wiring job burned down your house? Sounds dumb right? Exactly.
 
G

·
I'm no attorney but I know when one screws up they have to answer to the bar of similarly trained professionals. Same goes for doctors, judges, electricians, etc in their respective professions. Can you imagine if Wal Mart cashiers, preachers, social workers and dental assistants were responsible for investigating ("reviewing") whether an electrician's faulty wiring job burned down your house? Sounds dumb right? Exactly.
I've been saying that for years.....as soon as the American Bar Association allows non-lawyers on their review board, and the American Medical Association allows non-physicians on their review board, I might consider letting civilians to be appointed to a police review board.

Many years ago (early 90's), I had a case at the Dorchester Gun & Drug Court. I don't even know if it still operates; it was just down the street from Dorchester District Court and only heard gun & drug cases. I had a case where the defendant was facing serious prison time (unlawful carrying of a handgun, defaced serial number, trafficking Class B), and the trial stretched into the lunch break.

I went to a KFC nearby, and to my surprise, the defense attorney for my defendant asked if he could sit at my table, since the place was packed and there were no more empty tables. I said of course, as long as we both agreed to not talk about the case, which we did.

Anyway, we got into a discussion about civilian review boards, which were all the rage back then. When I gave him my ABA and AMA arguments, I could almost literally see the light bulb flickering above his head, as he started to "get it". While he didn't actually agree with me, he said "You make some interesting and compelling points", which, coming from a Massachusetts public defender, is about as much of an endorsement as you can hope for.
 

·
Always Watching
Joined
·
8,261 Posts
Isn't it disgusting that criminals get a jury of their peers while we get judged by librarians and community activists.
 

·
I think, therefore I'll never be promoted.
Joined
·
18,339 Posts
"Isn't it disgusting that criminals get a jury of their peers while we get judged by librarians and community activists."

Actually juries ARE made up of librarians, community activists and everyday citizens, not criminals. Think of it, a criminal review board made up of criminals.

BEFORE YOU ALL START GOING FOR MY JUGULAR, Delta and BrickCop stated my stand on the issue perfectly and I am in 100% agreement. I just skewed LGriffin's meaning to suit my own sense of humor.

There was a special on TV years ago (I've brought it up before) hosted by Peter Falk where they asked a bunch of people if they felt the cops were too quick to use their guns. All pretty much said, "YES". They these 'experts' were put on the FATS machine and one woman in particular emptied her gun on a fleeing purse snatcher in a crowded park in the middle of the day.

Opinions were changed and the darkness was lifted from the eyes of the stupid. Great show. Doubt you could find it anywhere these days.​
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top