OK. Just had a really dumb question pop into my head. Here it is:
Is it not possible to train police officers to shoot to immobilize without killing the suspect?
That is a very old question much older than the existence of such things like tasers. The answer is the same now as it was then, No.
It is why we now have things like tasers. An alternative to guns. Sometimes even guns are not enough to stop someone in time.
Simply put, the use of a gun is the use of a deadly force. To be used only in certain circumstances, such as here in Columbus, Ohio the other day, when it was used to save the victim from immediate and real harm. Hesitate and two people might be dead instead of one.
Ok, I haven't watched this because time, but I have done quite a few role-playing training exercises for various things and there is tremendous potential for abuse in setting up situations to have predetermined outcomes that just reinforce the biases of the trainers rather than actually training people for reasonably realistic situations. It is hard to balance low-probability/high risk events with high-probability/low risk events, but the result is often to elevate the significance of the low probability events, particularly in the case of police where there is very low probability of consequences for blowing citizens away because you thought there was a slight possibility of them trying to harm you.
you should watch it
and is there a legit argument for guided policing/law enforcement? something that may have better outcomes?
absolutely, especially when there is a chance for the initiation of a strategy (serving a warrant for example)
Ok, I haven't watched this because time, but I have done quite a few role-playing training exercises for various things and there is tremendous potential for abuse in setting up situations to have predetermined outcomes that just reinforce the biases of the trainers rather than actually training people for reasonably realistic situations. It is hard to balance low-probability/high risk events with high-probability/low risk events, but the result is often to elevate the significance of the low probability events, particularly in the case of police where there is very low probability of consequences for blowing citizens away because you thought there was a slight possibility of them trying to harm you.
unfortunately a couple of fbi agents were killed here yesterday
just thinking about the process of capturing a human being
safety, resistance, leverage, difficulty, strategy, etc.
could it be safer and easier to arrest someone once outside their nest/burrow/home turf?
is there a way to minimize risk for all involved?
might produce a better outcome or the odds of a better outcome
Sure, but it's not as much FUN. Where else are they gonna use all those fancy military-grade toys?
Local (former) Sheriff escalated situations for ratings. Which led to at least one death. See: 'Live PD Williamson County'.
FYI, Wil-co recently elected the first Dem Sheriff in something like 20 years. Whats-his-name is still costing them a fortune, in $$$ and reputation. c.
