Unarmed South Florida man with hands up shot by police while calming autistic patient

Thank you. So pretty much what we already suspected: someone called 9-1-1 worried that someone had a gun and was a danger to themselves and/or the public.

I can only speculate that, from a distance (it didn't appear that there was a cop closer than 60 feet), the shiny long object in the man's hand MAY have given the police suspicion that it might have been a firearm.

Obviously, again: better communication could have avoided all of this nonsense.

Unfortunately, many police officers are going to be wound up after last week's murders in Dallas and Baton Rouge. But I think they went quite a bit extreme here. But I would encourage the public to understand that, when the police show up to situations involving guns, that they are taking extra caution and measures. It's all too easy after these ambushes to see that a 9-1-1 caller could lead responding police into an ambush.

I think, therefore, that we have to acknowledge that they just aren't taking any chances, and that it's REALLY not the time to fuck around with them. I am NOT saying that's what happened here. But if it's something I could say to the public, it would be this: cooperate COMPLETELY, do NOT play SJW with them while they have their guns drawn on you, and be vigilant.

 

I agree that they need to, in many cases, use a bit more common sense. Like in this case.

However, police are the way they are, and the policies that govern them are the way they are, because of what's happened recently. A complacent officer is a dead officer. It's better to have your gun drawn and not need it, than to need it and have to draw it.

Police Departments SOP have been shaped in this country because of lessons learned from the crimes of the past. That's simple common sense and reform. Expecting police to become less confrontational is unrealistic.

 

I wish I had an easy answer. I'm sure we all do.

 

Then tensions will remain high and both unarmed civilians and cops will continue to be shot.

That said, I think it's perfectly realistic for police to become less confrontational. There's been real police reform in various places around the country, and it's been working to reduce violence altogether in those places. It'll take time, but eventually the authoritarian police hardliners in other places will be replaced by police chiefs who actually want to make the entire situation better, rather than seeing their job as protecting the image of every officer under their jurisdiction, whether or not they're in the wrong.

 

Sure. Until one of their own is shot and/or killed on the job. And then out come the SWAT teams and armored vehicles. And I believe such response is reasonable, depending on the situation.

There's one problem I have with this statement: what about those officers who do their jobs, who do it legally, and who do it correctly.....yet are still rail-roaded by political activists, politicians, and Social Justice Couch Warriors? What about them? Why can't the police chiefs protect their own in the face of such pre-judgement propaganda?

In many cases, I've heard of good officers doing their jobs, only to have their "Progressive Chiefs" kick them to the curb in the name of either politics or social pressures. And that's just wrong.

The "hardliner chiefs" are the ones who protect the good cops, and who tell the politicians to go fuck themselves. If I'm a cop....I know who I want in my corner.

 

I am pretty pro police when it comes to all these things, but seriously? That cop needs to be terminated immediately and brought up on attempted murder charges.

Killings last week or not, his job is to protect and to serve. That man had his hands up and was in absolutely no position to cause harm to the police

 

That's akin to saying that black people should justifiably be more confrontational with police after incidents like this. The instinct may be to become more violent, but humans don't have to operate purely on instinct--that's why policies aimed at lowering confrontation are necessary.

The ones I'm talking about "protect" their own well after all the facts are out, opposing any and all attempts to prosecute the cops, etc. They're impediments to justice, operating on the principle that the cop is always right.

A lot of non-cops operate on the same principle.

 

I wonder if the officers were in possession of police issue binoculars and used them to fully understand the situation by locating the possible suspects and potential objects/weapons involved. I think that would be one of the first logical steps in their mind before putting themselves into a potential threatening confrontation.

 

Completely agree. IMO, every department should have at least one pair per shift, per precinct. With the option to supply your own and keep them in your kit as necessary.

The more tools that police have at their disposal to make sure that BOTH sides go home safe, the better. Whether it be a TAZER or a pair of binoculars. Everyone wins when nobody dies.

 

I'm starting to lose count. And making light? How do you figure? I honestly believe that in the wake of all the violence cops are going to be even more on-edge and aggressive.

 

Stop hiring former military.

Just stop.

I understand that those guys don't have many options once they get out of the service because their trade is killing people, but this is not the right job for them. Police are supposed to save lives.... not take them. It's completely counter intuitive to what military are trained for.

 

Precisely. Armies are good at one thing, breaking things and taking/holding territory. About the only MOS that makes any sense as a translatable skill is an MP.

 

It was nothing personal. I just thought the term "itchy trigger finger" was said as a form of sarcasm. And there's nothing sarcastic or funny about what's going on right now; either from the perspective of the police or the civilians. And if you ask me, losing 8 officers in the deadliest week for Police in this country since 9/11, they have a right to be on edge, and I can't blame them for being so.

At the same time, however, former military members bring a mindset and discipline to Law Enforcement that is much needed. Not to mention that much of their training can transfer to Law Enforcement very effectively.....when used appropriately.

Folks, I want to invite you to check out a man who's work I've followed for many years. I have many of his books, and I've had the pleasure of corresponding with him through the forum GlockTalk. That man is Massad Ayoob.

From his website:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massad_Ayoob

His personal blog, which he updates regularly:

http://backwoodshome.com/blogs/MassadAyoob/
His experience speaks for itself. He's far from just an armchair commando author. He's studied these cases in person for about 40 years, including autopsies and trauma-room experience. He's also defended both civilians and police officers in court, as well as provided key evidence as an Expert Witness in numerous cases.

He follows these incidents very carefully, and is a bastion of wisdom when it comes to them. You may not always agree with what he says, but he DOES know what he's talking about. Give his blog a read when you get a chance. He takes emotion out of the equation and approaches things with logic and reason.

If anyone can answer the questions of how we can better police work in this country, it's him. And if it's anyone who admits that Law Enforcement needs to constantly be evolving for the better.....it's him.

If you would like to email him personally:

mas@massadayoob.com

 

The bad policemen are getting the good ones shot. Perhaps if more police departments looked at it that way, they'd be more interested in holding the murderous ones accountable, getting them out of the police force and into jail.

 

Your post begs the question. Did you serve in the any branch of the armed forces?

To be honest, it does not sound like it. If you did, it probably was with an MOS that required little to no training of firearms. I strongly disagree with your post, for several reasons.

Military personnel going into harms way receive extensive training to properly identify hostile targets. This also includes training to identify armed military personnel that are our allies, as well as identifying civilians. They are taught to identify a threat BEFORE FIRING their weapon.

During my 6 years in the Marines, I was placed on temporary duty with their MPs. Their training was similar to civilian police training, but with a stronger emphasis on shooting accuracy. Every Marine must qualify with their weapon on a regular basis. Marines that do not qualify are not given promotions and often drummed out of the service. That includes every Marine from cooks to the Commandant.

Any retired military MP would make an excellent LE officer in civilian life. And so would soldiers with ground combat experience.



One of the problems with our civilian police is they do not receive enough training in shooting situations. Also, too many of them are not very good shooters. The accuracy rating for the average LE officer is way below acceptable standards, and not even close to military standards.

It is the under trained LE officers that make mistakes.