Three NC Cops vs. One 18 YO kid

[Deacon923]

My analysis of this is pretty simple. Three trained geared up kevlared cops vs. a 100 pound kid. They knew he was mentally ill and had been called to subdue him and get him help.

There is almost no possible scenario in that interaction that could have justified shooting that kid. He is not a serious threat to those three officers unless he has a gun. No way, no how.

The justification now being put forward is that the kid was "making a stabbing motion toward an exposed area". Ok. Cops are paid to take risks. They know when they go to work they may get into physical altercations with crazy people. When they sign up and put on the badge they take the risk that someone might make a threatening "motion toward an exposed area". If that is justification for shooting someone, holy crap.

Maybe I could see it if the kid was trying to get a gun from one of the officers - that might present a serious enough danger that one of the other two needs to open fire. But that was not alleged here. Just a "stabbing motion".

 

[BeachBumDeac]

If your protocol says that you have to make a split second decision to use deadly force against a kid armed with a screwdriver making "motions" towards an armored police officer, then your protocol is completely fucked.

This is disgusting, and any fellow police officer defending it is a fucked up individual.

 

[DeaconOEF/OIFvet]

Way too much of the good 'ol boy system in place with NC local law enforcement. It results in unqualified and incompetent individual police officers making terrible decisions, and groups automatically defending those that do, regardless of the situation.

 

[BeachBumDeac]

My analysis of this is pretty simple. Three trained geared up kevlared cops vs. a 100 pound kid. They knew he was mentally ill and had been called to subdue him and get him help.

There is almost no possible scenario in that interaction that could have justified shooting that kid. He is not a serious threat to those three officers unless he has a gun. No way, no how.

The justification now being put forward is that the kid was "making a stabbing motion toward an exposed area". Ok. Cops are paid to take risks. They know when they go to work they may get into physical altercations with crazy people. When they sign up and put on the badge they take the risk that someone might make a threatening "motion toward an exposed area". If that is justification for shooting someone, holy crap.

Maybe I could see it if the kid was trying to get a gun from one of the officers - that might present a serious enough danger that one of the other two needs to open fire. But that was not alleged here. Just a "stabbing motion".

Dude also changed his story. Immediately after the shooting, he said on the radio that he was shooting to defend himself. Then he changed it to he was shooting to defend a fellow officer.

This is just a completely fucked up situation. If there was any justice in the world, that detective would be behind bars for the rest of his life.

 

[RacerDeac]

My analysis of this is pretty simple. Three trained geared up kevlared cops vs. a 100 pound kid. They knew he was mentally ill and had been called to subdue him and get him help.

There is almost no possible scenario in that interaction that could have justified shooting that kid. He is not a serious threat to those three officers unless he has a gun. No way, no how.

Seriously, remember when police were the people you called for help rather than paramilitary thugs with armored vehicles?

 

[Deacon923]

Seriously, remember when police where the people you called for help rather than paramilitary thugs with armored vehicles?

the ironic thing is that we are experiencing the lowest violent crime rates in living memory. the only group getting more violent is the cops.

 

[PhDeac]

Seriously, remember when police where the people you called for help rather than paramilitary thugs with armored vehicles?

If we return to those days, who is going to buy the paramilitary gear and armored vehicles?

 

[RacerDeac]

http://www.journalnow.com/news/local/article_8a2568cf-b7ef-569f-a698-5d5bd833622d.html

County to vote on future of historic guns

He told the commissioners that the sheriff’s office has 180 first responders but only 66 rifles, when ideally each officer should be equipped with a long gun and a sidearm.

I'm a huge believer in the 2nd amendment and own rifles myself for hunting, self defense and fun. But the idea that every Sheriff needs a rifle in order to do their job is just absurd. If you equip a cop like a soldier, he's going to think and act like he's a soldier.

 

[DeaconCav06]

People that have a passion for being everyday custodians of American Civil Rights and upholding the law, are those that we need joining NC's police forces... and we do have many of them.

Not uneducated people with an overwhelming desire for power and authority complex, that were too scared to leave home and join the military.... and we have many of them as well.

I feel like every fuck up I knew in high school is now a cop.

 

[DeaconOEF/OIFvet]

I feel like every fuck up I knew in high school is now a cop.

Ditto.

 

[DeaconOEF/OIFvet]

http://www.journalnow.com/news/local/article_8a2568cf-b7ef-569f-a698-5d5bd833622d.html


I'm a huge believer in the 2nd amendment and own rifles myself for hunting, self defense and fun. But the idea that every Sheriff needs a rifle in order to do their job is just absurd. If you equip a cop like a soldier, he's going to think and act like he's a soldier.

Most of the guys from the military, at least have some background in training and ability to deal with some of these law enforcement situations. I'm worried about the guys with no education and no prior training, suddenly being equipped like a soldier.

 

[ImTheCaptain]

http://www.journalnow.com/news/local/article_8a2568cf-b7ef-569f-a698-5d5bd833622d.html


I'm a huge believer in the 2nd amendment and own rifles myself for hunting, self defense and fun. But the idea that every Sheriff needs a rifle in order to do their job is just absurd. If you equip a cop like a soldier, he's going to think and act like he's a soldier.

 

[RacerDeac]

Most of the guys from the military, at least have some background in training and ability to deal with some of these law enforcement situations. I'm worried about the guys with no education and no prior training, suddenly being equipped like a soldier.

I'm just worried about them being equipped like a soldier and having a soldier mentality torwards the job. I'm not sure experience as a soldier really has anything to do with being a cop. The VAST majority of a policeman's job has nothing to do with physical alterations or needing a firearm. Those things make the news, but they rarely happen...meanwhile, thousands of cops work thousands of hours a day serving their city at far more mundane things. Giving directions, directing traffic, helping at wrecks, traffic tickets, etc, etc. But it seems like more and more, we're bringing battlefield ROE to the civilian world. So, when something the slightest bit "dangerous" happens, the response is to go in with weapons drawn. It was a kid with a screwdriver...one officer grab one arm, the other grabs another. I don't even see why he needed to be tasered, much less shot and killed. Hell, he was running AWAY from the officers when he was tasered.

 

[DeaconOEF/OIFvet]

Military members do not spend their entire career in Afghanistan and Iraq. A good portion of military members may never even deploy to a combat zone, and a greater portion have vast experiences doing many of those same mundane things that you pointed to (think Military Police, and other basic watch standing positions in CONUS bases).

The main point that I was driving for is that instead of hiring more qualified individuals in our local police forces, it is often more warped towards who knows the Sheriff's momma's uncle's brother deal. DeaconCav06, mentioned it earlier how there is this perception out there that you can go out and be a complete screw up in life and still get a job at your local police department, if you're drinking buds with the right people. The problem with these instances is that we have way too many unqualified and incompetent people running around in these positions, that see themselves not as custodians of the law, but more as an authoritarian figure that is above the law.

 

[RacerDeac]

Military members are do not spend their entire careers in Afghanistan and Iraq. A good portion of military members may never even deploy to a combat zone, and a greater portion have vast experiences doing many of those same mundane things that you pointed to (think Military Police, and other basic watch standing positions in CONUS bases).

That's a fair point...but those aren't the military folks, at least in my experience, who look to "continue" their career as cops. Most of the cops I've known who came out of the military were enlisted soldiers who have spent plenty of time downrange. I don't see a lot of military admin, mechanics, communications, media folks etc joining the police force, mostly because the skills they gained in the military are very applicable to a lot of other civilian jobs in various businesses/fields.

All of that to say, your point stands...whether military or not, we need stricter standards/qualifications. Many cops already meet them, but those that don't seem to be causing a lot more problems in this "militarized" age of policing.

 

[deacphan]

seems similar to teaching in a a lot of this. jobs that aren't properly valued economically for their impact on society, and so we have highly important positions being filled by unqualified folks.

 

[DeaconOEF/OIFvet]

I don't expect all cops to be have the same level of education as lawyers, but I do expect them to be able to know and understand some basic functions of the law and their job inside and out.

I could ask many NC cops to tell me just 5 out of the 10 Bill of Rights, and they wouldn't be able to. Basic part of their daily job.

 

[deacphan]

I don't expect all cops to be have the same level of education as lawyers, but I do expect them to be able to know and understand some basic functions of the law and their job inside and out.

I could ask many NC cops to tell me just 5 out of the 10 Bill of Rights, and they wouldn't be able to. Basic part of their daily job.

yeah, i'm not asking for geniuses. i'm asking for people that meet what the qualifications should be. the issue is establishing those criteria, recognizing it, and attracting people that meet it to those jobs. that's a really tough task and one we're clearly failing at in both professions.

 

[EatLeadCommie]

http://www.journalnow.com/news/local/article_8a2568cf-b7ef-569f-a698-5d5bd833622d.html


I'm a huge believer in the 2nd amendment and own rifles myself for hunting, self defense and fun. But the idea that every Sheriff needs a rifle in order to do their job is just absurd. If you equip a cop like a soldier, he's going to think and act like he's a soldier.

It's not like they're walking around with rifles. That's just not practical if you have to draw your weapon. They throw them in the trunk and use as needed, which isn't often.

I wonder if the reporter didn't misreport long arms or shotguns as rifles. I don't see a reason for every cop to be equipped with rifles, but shotguns would seem to be practical.

 

[RacerDeac]

It's not like they're walking around with rifles. That's just not practical if you have to draw your weapon. They throw them in the trunk and use as needed, which isn't often.

I wonder if the reporter didn't misreport long arms or shotguns as rifles. I don't see a reason for every cop to be equipped with rifles, but shotguns would seem to be practical.

It's not only not often, it's almost never. Thus the point that having a rifle is in no way something that every Sheriff needs to do his or her job. Just the idea that everyone "needs" a rifle is pushing the wrong attitude down from the top.

And the article specifically refers to rifles, Bushmaster AR's. Every Sheriff I've seen already has a scattergun mounted between his seats.