Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[EnigmaticHat]

Common in fiction or real life?

[Neonivek]

Common in fiction or real life?

Fiction.

[wierd]

Yes and no, on shooting while resisting arrest.  Non-fatal injuries, like in a leg, can be acceptable if the suspect is armed, or presumed to be a threat to others.

(Yo, dad was a cop for 26 years.)

[Neonivek]

Yes and no, on shooting while resisting arrest.  Non-fatal injuries, like in a leg, can be acceptable if the suspect is armed, or presumed to be a threat to others.

(Yo, dad was a cop for 26 years.)

In most jurisdictions cops have absolutely no expectation to ever shoot "Non-lethally" (Quotations because... well... I am not sure how 'Non-lethal' a leg shot is). I'd say all, but I don't know all jurisdictions.

Though that myth is surprisingly potent. There are a LOT of people who seem to believe that if you pull a gun on a police officer that they are obligated to shoot the gun out of your hand.

When not only are they told to shoot you... but quite often they are told to keep shooting you to make sure you are dead.

THEN AGAIN This is in a situation where the officer isn't under threat at all. So maybe their training is different in that situation than if they were in a shoot out.

----

Ohh another thing that doesn't exist?

Ticket Quotas.

At least I haven't heard of a place that factually has a ticket quota. Only that people "think" has ticket quotas. The CLOSEST is that some places have "Implied quotas" in that you are judged on tickets but where no such quota exists.

[wierd]

Yes and no, on shooting while resisting arrest.  Non-fatal injuries, like in a leg, can be acceptable if the suspect is armed, or presumed to be a threat to others.

(Yo, dad was a cop for 26 years.)

In most jurisdictions cops have absolutely no expectation to ever shoot "Non-lethally" (Quotations because... well... I am not sure how 'Non-lethal' a leg shot is). I'd say all, but I don't know all jurisdictions.

Though that myth is surprisingly potent. There are a LOT of people who seem to believe that if you pull a gun on a police officer that they are obligated to shoot the gun out of your hand.

When not only are they told to shoot you... but quite often they are told to keep shooting you to make sure you are dead.

THEN AGAIN This is in a situation where the officer isn't under threat at all. So maybe the law is different in that situation.

----

Ohh another thing that doesn't exist?

Ticket Quotas.

At least I haven't heard of a place that factually has a ticket quota. Only that people "think" has ticket quotas. The CLOSEST is that some places have "Implied quotas" in that you are judged on tickets but where no such quota exists.

One can be a threat to others, and not be armed.  Armed assailant gets lethally shot. Punk kid with dope who sucker punches in the kidney and runs? No. Legshot. Combative drunk boyfriend, who tries to slip the cuffs? Baton to the back. Things like that.

[Neonivek]

Ok, for the sake of argument I am going to say I am PRETTY sure... where I live a police officer cannot shoot you just for running away.

Especially since... "Legshot" is a lethal gun wound and can kill you extremely quickly (almost like there are major arteries in your legs). I am not sure how law enforcement would accept the bad PR for killing a teenager who was only running away.

I cannot argue that places outside Canada don't let cops kill people for resisting arrest.

Running away while carrying a weapon they clearly intend to use... Ok... a bit more reasonable.

[wierd]

To be fair, my dad was a cop way back in the 60s and 70s. It was a different world then.

And lots of kids were fatally shot while resisting arrest. The age of mass social media has caused mass shaming of police officers, for both good and bad reasons. There is no defense against public slander, which is why I have mixed feelings about that development in modern times. In some people's eyes, any use of physical restraint to grab hold of, or otherwise prevent the escape of a frightened suspect is considered excessive-- they would rather the drug dealer get away, than that the drug dealer get bumps and bruises from a struggle. Nevermind the reason why the pushing of drugs is illegal, is because selling drugs to young people destroys their lives and bodies, and the police are trying to remove a person who profits from that systemic harm. (Due to a crime of statistics, this person is often young, male, and black, which causes serious problems with PR.)

I am not weighing in if it was better or worse in that period. Only that the social media revolution is not all roses and sunshine. Greater transparency is good, but public slander is not transparency- it's witch hunting.

[TD1]

I was gonna say something about my mum's friend who killed a guy, but that was during the Troubles. Also, he was in the army, so different system.

Long story short - IRA man tried to kill an off duty police officer as he was buckling his daughter in to the car, and my mum's friend happened to (also off duty) be there.

Same guy also shot another IRA man who tried to kill him in a train station - don't know if he killed that one, though. The others dragged him away when a train passed through.

[GiglameshDespair]

So the people hired to dig up the front lawn cut through the internet cable.  God knows when I'll be back online.

Having to use my phone.

Damn it. I was gonna play the Stellaris dlc today.

[Frumple]

Ok, for the sake of argument I am going to say I am PRETTY sure... where I live a police officer cannot shoot you just for running away.

Where you live, that's probably true. Pretty sure most of the fiction influence for that comes from the US. Where a cop might not strictly speaking be able to shoot you just for running away, but they definitely can for about a dozen different reasons that don't particularly have to have grounding in reality. Practically, they can shoot you for basically anything, and are probably going to get away with it unless there's some very explicit video of the event, and even that isn't a guarantee. Running is just another excuse the depraved ones among them can use to shoot you, and can make the merely murderously skittish ones put a bullet in you, too.

[TempAcc]

The general idea is that resisting arrest, by itself, is not enough cause to the police to shoot someone. No police officer can shoot anyone in any circunstance other than in defense of himself or other people. As such, if someone resists arrest using violence against the police officer or other people, then yea, the police can shoot him/her, but if no violence is used, then they can just restrain said person using the usual methods, pointing the gun being one of them.

While the US does have some rather obscure legal mechanisms for identifying when a police officer can act in defense of himself or others (IE the stand your ground rule and whatnot), I wouldn't go as far to say the police can shoot you for anything. As long as you aren't a complete dumbass or someone hellbelt into suicide by cop, don't do anything that might make an officer think you're going to use violence against him/her or other people  and you'll likely be fine. THings such as RUNNING TOWARDS A POLICE OFFICER WHEN HE TOLD YOU TO STOP, WAVING YOUR HANDS LIKE A CRAZED ANIMAL WHILE CURSING LOUDLY, BRANDISHING A KNIFE, MAKING SUDDEN, RAPID MOVEMENTS or FLASHING YOUR GUN are generally big no-no's.

[hops]

Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, heretic.

Non qui negat.

Fabricati diem, pvnc.

[Frumple]

TA, cops can and have straight up lied about the reason and never seen meaningful legal repercussion for it, if any official consequences at all. Legally, they do need one. Practically, they can goddamn invent one and it'll pass through quite a few of our courts and/or grand juries. Folks have been shot for complying. Folks have been shot for doing nothing but laying there. Folks have been shot for being so injured they couldn't comply. With many of the cases of shit like that, if it even made it to court the cop was not found guilty and received no censure besides maybe paid leave.

Again. Legally, yes, the cops need more of a reason than just resisting arrest. In practice, even with the increased scrutiny in recent years and (not even remotely complete) erosion of the trust given to police officers, any reason invented or not will be accepted as justification. "Likely" fine does not mean fine. There's nothing obscure about the mechanisms involved. We trust officers to honestly report the justification they used. Officers that tend to get in the crosshairs of this sort of thing seem to have this odd -- and rather effective -- habit of not doing that. They're fortunately a minority, but it very easily explains where the fiction trope of shooting a fleeing individual comes from.

[NJW2000]

Fun fact: the body responsible for monitoring police in UK (HMIC) is mostly made up of old police officers.

Still a lot better than the situation with US police. Partly because they have few firearms.

Tbh the army deals with protestors better than the police does here, in my experience.

Right, I'll stop writing about the police before I go off on one about Thatcher...

[TempAcc]

But thats why you employ things such as body cams, proper training, periodical psych evaluations, etc. People who work in security and are armed for that end need that sort of structure, after all, they're just people, so there needs to be safeguards against their misbehavior. When someone trusted with that kind of onus fucks up, intentionaly or not, there needs to be swift and strong mechanisms to deal with that, something thats not always present.

However, I am a big critic of the general culture of hating cops because they're cops, which has spread around certain strata of western society, and also a popular political stand to suck votes out of people. Just like you said, these things do happen, but its quite a small minority. And yet, these cases get a fuckhuge coverage, meaning everyone gets that image of cops imprinted into their skull cavity, thus creating a general feeling of tension in cop x civilian situations. Hell, I personally know people that literally tremble and sweat when they're approached by cops, because all they see and hear about cops comes from word of mouth of their less than reputable friends and the media blasting them every single day about that one case of police violence that happened some weeks ago.

Whats even worse, is that this feeling of "cops vs us" makes cops themselves aprehensive and more stressed, maybe even to the point that they start approaching situations in a more fearful way. "Can I arrest this one guy in the middle of this neighborhood and not get swarmed by everyone around pulling their cellphones and filming what is only regular procedure?", "are these people armed?", "am I going to get murdered on social media for doing my job?", "what about my family? will they be targeted as well?", etc. This creates an incentive among cops to adopt conducts that aren't terribly professional, but that give themselves more protection from that kind of stuff. Having to shoot a perp that attacked you nowadays is good recipe for social suicide, so cops start to come up with MORE reasons to justify their actions, which can lead to rather shady situations.

Its a vicious cycle in which cops are only one of the factors, and not even the driving one.