Man shot reaching for license.

[Tbone76]

Person A gets killed, while doing their job, by a steel beam tearing loose and falling on their head.

Person B gets killed, while doing their job, due to criminal attack.

In regards to danger they're the exact same spectrum.




Things are just as dangerous as the statistics say they are.

You want to argue that folks doing a civil service deserve more praise for doing an equivalently dangerous job? Sure, I can see that. Want to argue that folks with an identical death/injury rate are doing a "more dangerous job" because it's for the public benefit? You're conflating the "danger" of the job with the choice to engage in civil service.



No matter what the cause - if the rate of death/injury has gone down, the job is less dangerous by definition.

When new training among loggers in log handling and safety equipment usage reduces death/injury rates - logging gets less dangerous.

You're missing the point here. The causation is different, so a direct comparison is invalid. An injury caused by a mechanical failure on a job site is different (accidental) than a criminal who decides to hurt a cop (intentional). The end result is the same, but the causation is different. Someone makes the decision to hurt a cop (The recent PA trooper ambush, for example), as opposed to your example of a steel beam hitting someone on the head. The beam has no intent of causing injury. Intent is everything, and (in NY, anyways) the basis between similar criminal acts, ie: criminal trespass to burglary, manslaughter to murder, etc.

OSHA was created to make the workplace safer, and it's worked. Maybe they should start a campaign telling criminals to stop trying to hurt cops, to therefore make their work environment safer. Sounds ridiculous, because it is.

A lot of people's perceptions of law enforcement (good and bad) have no doubt been influenced by personal experience. A lot of other people's perception has no doubt been based solely from biased internet babble and news media accounts. Their whole perception is based not on experience, but word of mouth.

 

[Bass_Pounder]

I guess it does not count either that LEO's have a shorter life expectancy due to the stresses of the job.

For a while, the average life expectancy PAST retirement was a whopping 5 years. I believe it is better then that now, but still many Departments have what is known as the "heart bill" or "death gamble".

How many of those jobs that "more dangerous" then policing on paper have the same kind of working conditions that take their toll on your health on a daily basis ?

 

[Tbone76]

I guess it does not count either that LEO's have a shorter life expectancy due to the stresses of the job.

For a while, the average life expectancy PAST retirement was a whopping 5 years. I believe it is better then that now, but still many Departments have what is known as the "heart bill" or "death gamble".

How many of those jobs that "more dangerous" then policing on paper have the same kind of working conditions that take their toll on your health on a daily basis ?

You can add in divorce rates, infidelity and alcoholism while you're at it. For a while, the average life expectancy after retirement was around 3 1/2 years.

 

[Bass_Pounder]

You can add in divorce rates, infidelity and alcoholism while you're at it. For a while, the average life expectancy after retirement was around 3 1/2 years.

Yeah, but hey - they knew the risks of the job anyway (sarcasm mode off) - SMH

 

[Downunderwonder]

I will go back on my word, and add that we all need to remember that no one is drafted against her or his will to be a police officer. People freely chose this line of work knowing the possible dangers. As such, it is the responsibility of the officer to be well trained and to assess any situation properly. Any time a person who was not actually threatening an officer is killed by an officer, it is an unforgivable mistake that should not be justified by saying how difficult the job is. No one would accept such an argument from a doctor who killed patients or from a contractor whose shoddy work killed people in his buildings.

I honestly believe that arguments excusing wrongful killings almost always come from people in the demographics least likely to be wrongfully killed by an officer. What is unspoken is the notion that those killed are probably guilty of something and are no good even if they weren't up to no good a the moment they were killed. In that sense, the apologies for the police remind me of book written recently by a doctor who looked into shootings of young black men that were almost automatically classified and drug or gang related. What he found was that most of these young men were simply victims of crimes, mainly robbery, but social prejudice kept law enforcement from seeing them as victims. I will see if I can site a title for that book.

Point of fact, doctors kill patients accidentally all the time, medicine is difficult. If they make a habit of it they don't get to practice any more but medical manslaughter cases are very rare.

 

[Bass_Pounder]

Point of fact, doctors kill patients accidentally all the time, medicine is difficult.

And so is processing your surroundings, then making a life changing decision in a split second.

 

[Pilgrim]

I just saw the video.

The IDIOT dives BACK into his car????????

Holy crap, that's ASKING to get shot. Doesn't anyone have any sense???????? That's EXACTLY what a stupid person (most criminals) would do to grab a firearm and start shooting. NEVER, NEVER, NEVER DO THAT. And if you get stopped in the car DO NOT grab for the glove box (or your hip pocket) to get your license or papers. Tell the officer exactly what you want to do, get permission to do it, and move slowly while keeping your hands in sight.

I was a reserve deputy for seven years. This video scared me. At the very least, I would have pulled my weapon and gotten under cover, then yelled at the guy until he was face down on the ground.

Do I think he was justified in firing? I probably (not certainly) would not have done so, because from the lousy video I didn't see a weapon nor did I see either of the guy's hands pointing at me. I'm not sure that he wasn't justified, though.

 

[96tbird]

I was a reserve deputy for seven years. This video scared me. At the very least, I would have pulled my weapon and gotten under cover, then yelled at the guy until he was face down on the ground.

.

That's the key here. Popo immediately drew down and advanced from behind cover. Bad choice until the situation was secure.

Don't reach for hip pocket??? Most men keep a wallet there. We don't walk around with our papers pinned to our chest.

I'm quite sure dude was likely reaching for his wallet on the console wrong move but MAYBE he was complying. Popo rushed in... Stupid, he's the pro the victim is a fool on the street that ran into the wrong officer. If he ran into you, Pilgrim, the story would have been routine instead of street assault.

 

[Downunderwonder]

And so is processing your surroundings, then making a life changing decision in a split second.

Sure is, never implied anything else. My point was that equating medical fatal error with law enforcement fatal error is a nonsense.

They are not treated alike, nor should they. You may or may not agree.

American police draw guns on potential threats uncomfortably often. Then there is two options, shoot or not shoot. The standard required is perfection. Clearly in this case the standard wasn't met.

 

[Dr. Cheese]

That's the key here. Popo immediately drew down and advanced from behind cover. Bad choice until the situation was secure.

Don't reach for hip pocket??? Most men keep a wallet there. We don't walk around with our papers pinned to our chest.

I'm quite sure dude was likely reaching for his wallet on the console wrong move but MAYBE he was complying. Popo rushed in... Stupid, he's the pro the victim is a fool on the street that ran into the wrong officer. If he ran into you, Pilgrim, the story would have been routine instead of street assault.

It seems it never occurs to the police that the people they pull over are nervous and afraid. This man was probably afraid of the officer looking for a reason to take him in. As a young man, I was in situations where it seemed like the cop was looking for something or anything as a pretext for an arrest. He was polite, and if you look at him, before he went quickly into the car, he patted his hip pocket as if he were looking for his license.

It is was the responsibility of the officer to take command of the situation and provide an environment where the subject and the officer felt safe. He should have used his loud speaker to instruct the man to move slowly. I know I would have moved more slowly, but the victim did not create the situation, the officer did.

 

[Pilgrim]

Don't reach for hip pocket??? Most men keep a wallet there. We don't walk around with our papers pinned to our chest.

Me neither. But there isn't enough money to make me grab for my hip or dive into my car when someone armed is staring at me. Darwin works full-time, stupidity or panic is a self-terminating characteristic.

It seems it never occurs to the police that the people they pull over are nervous and afraid.

And what the public doesn't realize is that the officer is just as scared as they are...and he/she is armed. A traffic stop is the #1 most dangerous thing that any officer does...because there's no really safe way to do it. Right after that on the hazard list comes walking in on a domestic dispute call.

I'm not supporting the way this turned out, but if I were on a jury I'd have a lot of trouble finding the officer guilty of anything.

 

[Dr. Cheese]

Me neither. But there isn't enough money to make me grab for my hip or dive into my car when someone armed is staring at me. Darwin works full-time, stupidity or panic is a self-terminating characteristic.



And what the public doesn't realize is that the officer is just as scared as they are...and he/she is armed. A traffic stop is the #1 most dangerous thing that any officer does...because there's no really safe way to do it. Right after that on the hazard list comes walking in on a domestic dispute call.

I'm not supporting the way this turned out, but if I were on a jury I'd have a lot of trouble finding the officer guilty of anything.

He almost killed somebody because of incompetence! That is a crime! If I carelessly shoot my gun while hunting, it is a crime. If I injure someone from reckless or drunk driving, it is a crime! If an officer shoots someone because he did not handle a stop properly, he has committed a crime. I really don't want to hear about how dangerous his job is. He is supposed to know how to properly perform his dangerous job.

Cutting this officer slack is the same as telling the victim he is worthless. As I said before, if there were a lot of pale victims of these sorts of shootings, patience would run out a lot more quickly than it does for victims that so many automatically assume are thugs.

 

[Tbone76]

Me neither. But there isn't enough money to make me grab for my hip or dive into my car when someone armed is staring at me. Darwin works full-time, stupidity or panic is a self-terminating characteristic.



And what the public doesn't realize is that the officer is just as scared as they are...and he/she is armed. A traffic stop is the #1 most dangerous thing that any officer does...because there's no really safe way to do it. Right after that on the hazard list comes walking in on a domestic dispute call.

I'm not supporting the way this turned out, but if I were on a jury I'd have a lot of trouble finding the officer guilty of anything.

Stop with your voice of reason

I said earlier that the video doesn't look good, but the total picture may very well turn out to be different. It could be worse for the cop, but he may also be exonerated when all is said and done. The crazy thing is, the majority of incidents involving dash-cam video/audio end up helping exonerate the officers. It eliminates the grey area to a lot of people. They only provide a fixed-position snippet of an encounter, though, and often don't show the whole picture. That's where witnesses and other video can help better paint the total picture. I don't think body-cams are a bad thing, but a lot of people are raising vocal concerns about privacy in their residences. They want to be able to film the cops wherever and whenever, as long as the cops aren't able to film inside their homes during a call for service there. Kind of a "have your cake and eat it, too" situation.

We have the benefit of Monday-morning qb'ing a lot of these incidents. Everyone knows "what they absolutely would have done" if it was them. The reality is that until it is you, most of you don't know how you'd react. If the video was the same, except instead of the cop shooting, the driver instead came out guns blazing, people would have questioned "the dumb cop" and his failure to see what was unfolding. Instead, comments about him being scared, pissing his pants, and being dumb came thru.

Actually, if the cop had been shot, I doubt it would have been posted here in the first place.

 

[Tbone76]

He almost killed somebody because of incompetence! That is a crime! If I carelessly shoot my gun while hunting, it is a crime. If I injure someone from reckless or drunk driving, it is a crime! If an officer shoots someone because he did not handle a stop properly, he has committed a crime. I really don't want to hear about how dangerous his job is. He is supposed to know how to properly perform his dangerous job.

Ummm, he was charged with a crime, too.

Some people are also getting hung up that a cop wouldn't be charged with attempted murder because he shot someone, and therefore must have been trying to kill him. Officers are trained to shoot to stop the threat, which is different than training to shoot to kill. Had the cop in question kept shooting after the victim was deemed to be no longer a threat, than an attempted murder or murder charge would be warranted. Again, I'm not showing favor towards the cop in the situation, more what the prosecutors are most likely looking at with all the facts in hand.

And lest you think that this only pertains to cops, in NY, a lot of criminal shooting suspects are charged with assault 1st or 2nd, and not attempted murder.

 

[Dr. Cheese]

Stop with your voice of reason

I said earlier that the video doesn't look good, but the total picture may very well turn out to be different. It could be worse for the cop, but he may also be exonerated when all is said and done. The crazy thing is, the majority of incidents involving dash-cam video/audio end up helping exonerate the officers. It eliminates the grey area to a lot of people. They only provide a fixed-position snippet of an encounter, though, and often don't show the whole picture. That's where witnesses and other video can help better paint the total picture. I don't think body-cams are a bad thing, but a lot of people are raising vocal concerns about privacy in their residences. They want to be able to film the cops wherever and whenever, as long as the cops aren't able to film inside their homes during a call for service there. Kind of a "have your cake and eat it, too" situation.

We have the benefit of Monday-morning qb'ing a lot of these incidents. Everyone knows "what they absolutely would have done" if it was them. The reality is that until it is you, most of you don't know how you'd react. If the video was the same, except instead of the cop shooting, the driver instead came out guns blazing, people would have questioned "the dumb cop" and his failure to see what was unfolding. Instead, comments about him being scared, pissing his pants, and being dumb came thru.

Actually, if the cop had been shot, I doubt it would have been posted here in the first place.

The SC Statetroopers fired this officer and charges were brought after they saw the whole video. What was worse, even though the man he shot was only guilty of a seatbelt violation, he left him cuffed, and actually left him cuffed to the bed. The man was not released until the officer returned when realized his cuffs were missing. An innocent man, who was shot was left handcuffed to a bed from around 5 until midnight, according to his lawyer who I saw on TV.

 

[Dr. Cheese]

Ummm, he was charged with a crime, too.

Some people are also getting hung up that a cop wouldn't be charged with attempted murder because he shot someone, and therefore must have been trying to kill him. Officers are trained to shoot to stop the threat, which is different than training to shoot to kill. Had the cop in question kept shooting after the victim was deemed to be no longer a threat, than an attempted murder or murder charge would be warranted. Again, I'm not showing favor towards the cop in the situation, more what the prosecutors are most likely looking at with all the facts in hand.

And lest you think that this only pertains to cops, in NY, a lot of criminal shooting suspects are charged with assault 1st or 2nd, and not attempted murder.

As far as I know, the victim was only guilty of not wearing a seatbelt. If there is another charge, what is it, and what is your source?

 

[Tbone76]

The SC Statetroopers fired this officer and charges were brought after they saw the whole video. What was worse, even though the man he shot was only guilty of a seatbelt violation, he left him cuffed, and actually left him cuffed to the bed. The man was not released until the officer returned when realized his cuffs were missing. An innocent man, who was shot was left handcuffed to a bed from around 5 until midnight, according to his lawyer who I saw on TV.

Like I said, my friend, he got charged with a crime. I put a limited amount of credibility in attorneys in a lot of these cases, because they have the luxury of trying a case in the court of public opinion, and many are looking for a future civil settlement. It's usually why when all of the facts are heard in a court of law, the verdict is different than the perception painted by the media. When and if he's found guilty, punish him.

 

[Tbone76]

As far as I know, the victim was only guilty of not wearing a seatbelt. If there is another charge, what is it, and what is your source?

I meant that the cop was charged with a crime. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

 

[Bass_Pounder]

The SC Statetroopers fired this officer and charges were brought after they saw the whole video. What was worse, even though the man he shot was only guilty of a seatbelt violation, he left him cuffed, and actually left him cuffed to the bed. The man was not released until the officer returned when realized his cuffs were missing. An innocent man, who was shot was left handcuffed to a bed from around 5 until midnight, according to his lawyer who I saw on TV.

He was not an innocent man - he was guilty of the seatbelt violation. And yes, you CAN be arrested and hauled off to jail for violations. Summonses are actually a courtesy, and are issued in lieu of arrest.

Secondly, it is standard procedure in law enforcement to immediately handcuff and suspect that is shot - even if he is obviously DOA.

 

[Dr. Cheese]

He was not an innocent man - he was guilty of the seatbelt violation. And yes, you CAN be arrested and hauled off to jail for violations. Summonses are actually a courtesy, and are issued in lieu of arrest.

Secondly, it is standard procedure in law enforcement to immediately handcuff and suspect that is shot - even if he is obviously DOA.

He was innocent any crime that would have justified him being shot. More to the point, once it was established that he was not a threat or someone wanted for crime, he should have been uncuffed. There no justification for him being in handcuffs for eight hours.