zlacker

> Obviously nobody expects the police not to shoot back when fired upon

Well, I do. We had a case in Germany a few years back where the police served some kind of no-knock warrant, the guy (a Hells Angel) thought they were from a rival gang, shouted at them and then shot at them. A Policeman died, the guy dropped his gun immediately after police identified themselves. The Case made the news later because the guy got acquitted of all charges regarding the killing [1] but that's only secondarily relevant here.

For me the main take-away from this should be that there's a difference between shooting back at night against a home invasion and shooting at the police. Just because the police see a situation where someone shoots back in a home invasion-scenario does in no way mean they can expect an intention to shoot at cops. Shooting back at invaders is legal, and the police should not react until they have ruled that out.

[1] I suspect that's a german source, sorry. http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/justiz/0,1518,795678,00.html#

>>Grolli+(OP)
That's great that German police are trained to react that way. But American police are not. American police are trained to prioritize their own safety and survival above the safety and survival of suspects or even innocent bystanders. There's no consideration of intention or what information people are acting on - if there's a potentially lethal threat to the policeman, it must be dominated and suppressed.

So yes, with a practical understanding of how American police train and operate, this outcome is completely expected.

>>Maxfor+bf
In the above case, the killed officer was already dead. Returning fire would have killed the suspect and maybe more officers. Not to safe if you ask me. Identifying themselves as police was the prudent thing, having done so upfront would most likely have saved an officers live.

>>Maxfor+bf
Being trained to break the law does not (legally) justify breaking the law.

I'm not sure if shooting someone in "self defense" who is legally shooting at you is illegal under US law, it's an interesting thought though.

>>Maxfor+bf
American police aren't trained. It's literally idiots on steroids watching 3 YouTube videos for "training" combined with some shitty version of some martial arts.

They are not capable of solving anything without authority, force and violence. Just stacked with military equipment and tools to escalate anything until a "suspect" breaks - mentally or physically.

>>Grolli+(OP)
>A Policeman died, the guy dropped his gun immediately after police identified themselves.

Can you actually believe them though? What if the intruder does what the shooter in Canada did and impersonates the police?

>>Maxfor+bf
> "American police are trained to prioritize their own safety and survival above the safety and survival of suspects or even innocent bystanders."

But they're trained very badly at that. They're trained to escalate, which endangers everybody, including themselves.

>>Mirior+6u
This is my problem with police in general. They supposedly have all sorts of special privileges yet it's so easy to impersonate them. The only way to reliably identify a cop is by calling 911. Especially if you're driving. So I don't understand how you're ever supposed to believe someone's a police officer just because a home invader says so.

>>Maxfor+bf
Isn't this one of the main things that people are protesting about. Police shouldn't be trained like this. They could also carry things like tasers which allow them to protect themselves without killing anyone.

>>gpm+To
There's precedent to say its legal to return fire.

>>kcolfo+Xw
I remember reading a case where a woman was pulled over by a cop, in a pitch black area at night. She drove another mile or so before stopping when she found some light. She was arrested for "not stopping" or something along those lines. The case was dismissed, but she mentioned it took a toll on her.

We can have all the guns and take all the precautions but these kind of incidents will continue to happen. The only way is to hire better people to the police force and more importantly train them better. Above all, have proper social support.

>>jacobu+XB
As an intruder?

>>nicobu+2A
Correction: while minimizing the risk of death. Tasers can still kill people.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Dzieka%C5%84ski_Taser...

>>Zxian+RP
They certainly can. But they're a lot less likely to than a gun. I think their use would be justified in the case that a policeman was being shot at.

>>OGWhal+QL
I can't really remember the case, but there was a standoff where a (white) person returned fire against law enforcement after they shot his dog. In the end I think one law enforcement officer was killed on one side, and that guys wife, child and dog was on the other side.

There was no punishment for the killing of the LEO.

>>Mirior+6u
How often does that freaking happen... Edge case?

>>jacobu+WR
The incident you’re referring to is Ruby Ridge. There has been much more disconduct by the feds than just shooting guy’s dog, and his acquittal did not hinge on the fact that they shot his dog first.

>>xyzzyz+5i1
No, I didn't mean to imply it.

>>justag+lD
> the only way is to hire better people to the police force and more importantly train them better. Above all, have proper social support.

or, you know, not give every idiot cop a gun.

>>Mirior+6u
It was the equivalent of a SWAT Team. If you have >10 people shouting police it's very unlikely that's fake.

>>Grolli+(OP)
I once saw German police officers at a police shooting range (it's not public but I knew a participant). Shooting without identifying themselves as police and demanding to drop the weapon led to them failing the test immediately, independent of the behavior of the other party.