Insurrection

[dexeron]

Of course, with so many conflicting reports, it's impossible at this point to tell whether or not they were justified.

If, as some reports suggest, she was still behind the wheel, then she was in control of a deadly weapon and I could understand (and maybe, or maybe not agree) that it was justified.

If, as some reports suggest, she had left the car and was fleeing, then it was not justified, because that's not justice; it's revenge.

[Despanan]

I'm pretty much with both Dex and Phant here. I don't like it that she was killed, but I can understand why the cops did it.

There are three big things that trouble me about it though:

1) What they did is actually illegal under most police department rules. You can't shoot someone in a car, even IF that car has been previously used as a weapon. It's only considered a deadly weapon if the person is in the act of trying to run down someone. It has to pose a direct threat at the time shots are fired, not beforehand. So car speeding towards you, with clear intent to run you down? You can shoot. Car speeding away from you after hitting someone else? You can't.

2) News reports differ on when she was shot. Behind the wheel? Still isn't regularly considered a deadly weapon, but it's at least understandable. Outside the car and running away/the car is disabled? That's either over-zealousness or revenge, neither is justified.

3) Most troubling is that the argument they seem to be using is: "well the targets were the White House and Congress and those places are so important the cops can use deadly force against anyone or anything they see as a direct threat to either." That's pure authoritarianism. It doesn't matter how "Hot" of a target Washington DC is - As a matter of policy force should not be escalated just because the people/places involve leaders or prominent citizens.

[Phantomgrift]

Right, having gone through Criminal Justice classes prior to the Navy, researching this in accordance to various state laws, and the like, I can state that the first one is pretty much wrong. You can shoot someone in a car, and there are various scenarios that cops are trained for specifically dealing with shooting a car. Case in point? The Hollywood factor again... Most cops will refrain from simply shooting a windshield head on. Unlike the movies, you stand a good chance of the bullet striking the window at enough of an angle, especially on sports cars and the like, and ricocheting off completely. Windows are tougher than people give them credit for, and your window won't explode every time a rock hits it.

The only one you have correctly asked, is if she was on foot.

If you are on foot, the options have changed. There are various less-than-lethal options to subdue someone.
In a vehicle? Options are limited. Usually to gunfire, spike strips or other vehicles. The driving within an enclosed space ruled out strips and other LE Vehicles.

It's not a matter of "Oh the cops can use the force because it was D.C.", it's a matter of "What other options did they have in accordance to police procedure?"

Case in point? While we were undergoing our "Policing In America" class, we covered a number of unique cases currently ongoing at the time.
One was a mentally ill black man who during a confrontation, reached into his jacket and was shot in response... He was carrying a stapler.
One was a black man on a massive cocktail of drugs and booze, wielding a three foot long sword, repeatedly told by a mix of white and black officers to drop his weapon and get on the ground from about six feet away... He tried to charge them and was filled with more holes than swiss cheese.
One was a teen who was being a disruptive little shit at a local skate park. Old boy got tired of his crap and bounced him off the roof of the car as he was shoving him in the back. It was caught on film.
Others concerned the use of TASERS in the line of duty. Most helped, a singular incident was making the rounds because an elderly white man drugged and boozed out of his mind, suffered a heart attack shortly after being hit with the TASER.

Again, this is not a "ZOMG! AUTHORITARIAN POLICE OF EVIL!" moment.
There are numerous factors as to what specifically happened, what the regular procedure was, and what was ultimately on hand and available to stop the women from attempt to harm others.

Your first comment stands as wrong, because a vehicle driven in a violent manner or sporadic manner is no different than someone wielding a firearm or a baseball bat. The cops do indeed have the right to defend themselves and the public at large in such situations.

[Phantomgrift]

Another note... Look at it from the perspectives of the officers.
9/11 has changed America, for better or worse. In a day and age where you have idiots trying to detonate homemade bombs in Times Square, compounded by the fact you are in the heart of D.C. and response becomes a series of critical, time-responsive reaction.

This person unknown has just deliberately ran over a number of local law enforcement, federal agents and general civilians in their vehicle.
Earlier this year?

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... -1.1417146

Deliberate vehicular-borne attack.
So from the LEO perspective. Is this person carrying out an attack? Does this person have a bomb or explosive on them? Is this someone trying to incapacitate a crowd with their car before detonating it in order to increase the amount of casualties?

Hindsight is 20/20 and we can look back and bemoan that it was just a poor mom with mental issues. But without that information when you arrive on the scene, you are faced with the possibility of a crazy person out to do harm against fellow humans. How much harm are they looking to commit? How far have they planned to carry this out?

These are questions that cops have to face, and the rest of the public never does. Hopefully, they never will. Because the choices you make are something you have to live with forever.

This is why, for some folks, it's easier to paint Law Enforcement as this vile, faceless evil... An army of stormtroopers doing the bidding of their cackling overlords. Which is, well, sad and incredulous.

Sure, not all cops are shining examples of their profession, but due to human nature, you can say that much about anyone in any job.
The barista who cheerfully welcomes you to the store vs. the one who you've got to double-check your drink and make sure they didn't spit in it. Etc.

Sadly, a post 9/11 world has caused us to explore options that we wouldn't have considered thirty or forty years ago. The simple notion of someone using lackluster daily items to carry out an attack against people was, and in some cases, still is, shocking.

If the police aren't trained for an eventuality, the public screams at them. If they are trained and respond in kind for something that didn't carry out, the public screams at them.

Shoot the drugged out mental patient? The public screams that you should have used a TASER.
Use a TASER and the drugged out old man dies? The public screams that you should have done something else.

Hell, we could invent full on fucking stun rays and some group would still be bitching at the police over their response to scenarios.

[dexeron]

My main complaint about law enforcement is two fold:

1. There are bad cops out there who abuse their authority, and they far too often get nothing but slaps on the wrist for doing so. Not always, it varies by department, but there needs to be a culture change to weed out those who become cops only because they have some kind of power fetish.

2. There's always room for improvement, but too often, even the question of "Hey, X number of people are being killed by tasers... maybe we should discuss if there's a better way to do this" is responded to with "WHY DO YOU HATE POLICE. THEY PUT THEIR LIVES ON THE LINE! WHAT DO YOU WANT THEM TO DO?" If cops want communities to actually trust them, they should at least pretend to give a crap about what those communities are asking.

As for everything else you said, sure... IF she was still in the car.

[HisDivineShadow]

Might interest peeps:

http://www.shutdowncost.com/

[Phantomgrift]

My reply Dex?

The number of people who die after an incident involving a TASER have mitigating factors. Usually drugs, alcohol, or pre-existing medical conditions that the officers weren't aware of.

And in pure statistical numbers of TASER use vs number of deaths, the "x people killed" is, well, miniscule. Impressively so when contrasted against live-fire situations with a firearm.

TASERS, to date, are the most effective method of less-than-lethal force available to police.
Others are still fielded, like pepper-balls, bean-bag rounds and the like, but there are serious rules governing the use of less-than-lethal projectiles. Even the classic "rubber bullet" was designed to be skipped off a surface for a ricochet shot, and cannot be used under ten to twenty feet depending on the round.

The only item currently better than the TASER, is the TASER shotgun round they devised and started putting into IOC a few years back. It helps to increase the stand-off distance between a cop and the suspect, preventing injury and risk of assault.

Certain items are being tested... The MASER truck-mounted riot-contol device created by the military, or a pulse-laser dazzler system, but those are still predominantly in the testing phase.

Other items like frictionless riot-control liquids exist. It's fun to watch video of that being tested. The only downside, is with something that effective, it introduces a new risk of injury by people uncontrollably falling. Another possible was a foam crowd control that fired in much the same way as silly-string and expanded on contact. It was an immobilizer that came off the skin at the rate of one inch every thirty minutes. Not fielded due to the unspoken scenario of what would happen if it ended up in someones face.

I know there are bad cops. Some truly get the punishment they deserve. Others, don't... Thankfully, there are far more cops who do their jobs like their supposed to. But as far as less-than-lethal munitions and products? Well, yeah, until someone straight up invents a stun-ray, what we have is what we have, and I'd rather take a TASER burst than a 9 mil round.

[Sage]

[Phantomgrift]

Embrace the suck and save all your receipts so you stand a better chance of getting reimbursed by personnel when you get to your ship.

Where are you at and where are you finally supposed to wind up?

[dexeron]