# Should the Cops Take Risks?



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Do you feel like part of a cops job is to take some risks to protect the citizens ?
That they should take a second longer to pull the trigger so they are sure the citizen has a real gun?
That they take the chance of getting a stray punch so that even a street urchin doesn't die or even get a broken arm?
In other words they work for us and we come first even at risk of their life?


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

They should take all kinds of chances. If a persion has a gun he needs to inspect it to see if it is loaded. If a persion has a gun he should be able to identify it as to brand name. :umno:


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

AmericanStand said:


> Do you feel like part of a cops job is to take some risks to protect the citizens ?


As a firefighter I took grave risks. I'm not a bit uncomfortable asking cops to do the same.


----------



## Maura (Jun 6, 2004)

I think if you are holding a gun in your hand you can&#8217;t expect a cop to make sure it is a real one. A little common sense.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Maura said:


> I think if you are holding a gun in your hand you canât expect a cop to make sure it is a real one. A little common sense.


Common sense is lacking these days.
You point a gun at a cop, you will most likely be shot.
Doesn't take a lot of intelligence to figure that out.
What do they expect the cop to do, wait until the suspect pulls the trigger, duck and then shoot?


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Nevada said:


> As a firefighter I took grave risks. I'm not a bit uncomfortable asking cops to do the same.


You probably didn't have a lot of people shooting at you with a "president" and his cronies egging them on


----------



## fordy (Sep 13, 2003)

..............Taking 'Risks' are a normal part of their job ! The number of murdered citizens who were basically innocent OR received the Bonnie and Clyde treatment due to the excessive use of force says the cops aren't too worried about being either investigated and\or prosecuted for killing citizens . 
...............And , they always shoot to kill , they never wound anyone cause they don't want them testifying in court . Cops like the 'Group Shoot' method of execution where the innocent until proven guilty person receives 30 to 40 hits . These folks can't be organ donors for sure ! , fordy


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Society is deteriorating. The public cops dealt with 40 years is gone in many places. Too many today have zero respect for any symbol of law and order and often downright hate it. OTOH, cops no longer serve and protect. Get stopped for a traffic violation in many places and the cops assume you have committed other crimes as well. They ask where you've been, where you're going, if you have drugs or weapons in the car, etc. Act a bit nervous and they want to search your car or call in the drug dog. None of that should be allowed unless they have reason to suspect you of a crime but it is commonplace today. That is not protecting and serving. That is hassling.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Nevada said:


> As a firefighter I took grave risks. I'm not a bit uncomfortable asking cops to do the same.


Are you suggesting cops do not take risks?


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

HDRider said:


> Are you suggesting cops do not take risks?


No. I'm just responding the the question. The original poster asked the question, didn't he? Maybe you should ask him if he was suggesting that cops don't take risks.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

If you take a job as a cop, you take a certain amount of risk. That does not mean you try to get yourself shot, but also that you use what used to be called "common sense"


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

Cops already take risk simply by taking the job. Many metro areas have a shorter in field life expectancy factor for a LEO than the in field life expectancy factor given to a combat zone forward observer whose assigned duty is to draw friendly fire aim close to their location.

A few years back the estimate of a LEO of a patrol shift sustaining critical or fatal wounding during normal patrol in some zones of Montgomery Al, Houston TX, NYC and Los Angeles was estimated at less than half a minute after entry into the hot zone areas.

At the same time the risk factors were so high in those metro areas, those LEAs advertised job openings at what first appeared to be good salaries in other parts of the country for applicants willing to relocate.



mnn2501 said:


> If you take a job as a cop, you take a certain amount of risk. That does not mean you try to get yourself shot, but also that you use what used to be called "common sense"


 Common Sense on the part of a suspect includes that when told to lay down and not resist when surrounded by armed LEOs, they lay down with arms spread and hands in plain view without resistance because at that point as the song goes "the law won".


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Maura said:


> I think if you are holding a gun in your hand you canât expect a cop to make sure it is a real one. A little common sense.


Why not? 
And what if I have a gun in my hand that IS real? Should I die for either of those reasons?

How about a little common sense?


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Cornhusker said:


> Common sense is lacking these days.


So sad but very true.



Cornhusker said:


> You point a gun at a cop, you will most likely be shot.


Again sad but true.





Cornhusker said:


> What do they expect the cop to do, wait until the suspect pulls the trigger, duck and then shoot?


 Well Yes, since that's their job. Im not sure if the duck will help though.


----------



## ksfarmer (Apr 28, 2007)

fordy said:


> ..............Taking 'Risks' are a normal part of their job ! The number of murdered citizens who were basically innocent OR received the Bonnie and Clyde treatment due to the excessive use of force says the cops aren't too worried about being either investigated and\or prosecuted for killing citizens .
> ...............And , they always shoot to kill , they never wound anyone cause they don't want them testifying in court . Cops like the 'Group Shoot' method of execution where the innocent until proven guilty person receives 30 to 40 hits . These folks can't be organ donors for sure ! , fordy


:umno:No one is trained to shoot to wound. You shoot until the threat is ended, period. You can end up very dead trying to "wound" someone with a gun.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

mnn2501 said:


> If you take a job as a cop, you take a certain amount of risk. That does not mean you try to get yourself shot, but also that you use what used to be called "common sense"


But wouldn't "common sense" dictate that you didn't put yourself into those risky situations in the first place?
I think we ask more of our police than common sense , we ask them to be trained well and to protect the citizens at some risk to themselves.


----------



## jwal10 (Jun 5, 2010)

Shrek said:


> Cops already take risk simply by taking the job.
> Common Sense on the part of a suspect includes that when told to lay down and not resist when surrounded by armed LEOs, they lay down with arms spread and hands in plain view without resistance because at that point as the song goes "the law won".


 
Life in society has consequences. Break it. Stupid can get you killed. Cop or law abiding citizen....James


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

When I was range trained in a self defense shooting class by the same instructor who trains area LEOs, he taught us to shoot center mass .

When a woman asked where to aim if she only wanted to wound somebody he reminded her that a firearm was lethal force not wounding force and in a self defense shooting situation a wounded man could be a greater threat than he was before being wounded if he was still armed.


----------



## jwal10 (Jun 5, 2010)

AmericanStand said:


> I think we ask more of our police than common sense , we ask them to be trained well and to protect the citizens at some risk to themselves.


 True. To the same level as a well trained law abiding citizen. Break the law or put "yourself" at risk, you may die. "You" then take the risk on your self. Break the law, I want police to protect me, the law abiding citizen, as it should be....James


----------



## jwal10 (Jun 5, 2010)

Do police go to far, yes, a lot. Police should be held to the same letter of the law as any other law abiding citizen. Murder is murder. Every gun death, that the dead suspect had a gun, even if not fired, should go to a court with a jury of 12 people....James


----------



## Ozarks Tom (May 27, 2011)

Quote: 
Originally Posted by *Cornhusker*  
_What do they expect the cop to do, wait until the suspect pulls the trigger, duck and then shoot?_



AmericanStand said:


> _Well Yes, since that's their job. Im not sure if the duck will help though._




How many times have you been shot at and missed? 10? 15? Their job is NOT to get shot at, but to keep people from shooting them or others.

As to the risks cops should take to save me, I don't expect them to take any risks I wouldn't take to save them.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

AmericanStand said:


> So sad but very true.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I don't think getting shot is a job requirement, but it happens.
I know quite a few LEOs, and most are decent people trying to do a job, make a difference and go home alive.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Ozarks Tom said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Cornhusker*
> _What do they expect the cop to do, wait until the suspect pulls the trigger, duck and then shoot?_
> 
> ...


That's why it's important for honest men and women to arm themselves.
Cops can't be everywhere, and politicians just seem to make the country more dangerous every day.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Ozarks Tom said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Cornhusker*
> _What do they expect the cop to do, wait until the suspect pulls the trigger, duck and then shoot?_
> 
> ...


I think most people to expect people paid to be cops to take certain risks they dont want to, that's the reason they hire them.
As for how many times Ive been shot at and missed while thats too many wouldn't the times Ive been shot at and hit more relevant?


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

A couple of points:
A garbage man is 3 times more likely to die on the job than a cop is.
The courts ruled it is not the job of the police to protect us.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

ksfarmer said:


> :umno:No one is trained to shoot to wound. You shoot until the threat is ended, period. You can end up very dead trying to "wound" someone with a gun.


 You pull a gun at a officer how is he tho know it is not real or what if going through that person head at the time. He is trained to point and shoot. And shoot to kill.
Want to live OBEY his commands and for goodness sakes to pull a weapon on him unless you have a death wish.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

HDRider said:


> Are you suggesting cops do not take risks?


I'm still waiting for you to ask the original poster that question.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Nevada said:


> I'm still waiting for you to ask the original poster that question.


My question was to you.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

HDRider said:


> My question was to you.


By why were you asking me? Did I suggest that cops don't take risks? The OP might have, but I certainly didn't.


----------



## jwal10 (Jun 5, 2010)

JeffreyD said:


> The courts ruled it is not the job of the police to protect us.


 
What happened to Serve and protect. Other wise....You come to my place waving a gun at me or mine....You ARE dead....James


----------



## jwal10 (Jun 5, 2010)

Nevada said:


> By why were you asking me? Did I suggest that cops don't take risks? The OP might have, but I certainly didn't.


 Why didn't you just say that the first time....James


----------



## Michael W. Smith (Jun 2, 2002)

AmericanStand said:


> Do you feel like part of a cops job is to take some risks to protect the citizens ?
> That they should take a second longer to pull the trigger so they are sure the citizen has a real gun?
> That they take the chance of getting a stray punch so that even a street urchin doesn't die or even get a broken arm?
> In other words they work for us and we come first even at risk of their life?


Wow. Has it REALLY come to this - that people ask if it's a cop's job to take risks? That they should wait longer to make sure a gun is a gun? That they should take a punch rather than harming a criminal?

My point of view is that cops take risks EVERY single day they are on the job. Just pulling somebody over for a traffic violation can result in their death - the person they pulled over might have all kinds of drugs in their car and have already been in prison and don't want to go back. Easy enough for them to pull a gun and shoot the cop as he is coming up to the car.

I guess this attitude shouldn't surprise anyone. After all, the criminal has always had way more rights than the victim. I guess we are at the point now of protecting the criminal before they come under arrest. 

I guess it was wrong for the people of Flight 93 to try to take back the plane? After all, they didn't have proof that terrorists were planning on flying the plane into some building. They might have just been out for a joy ride.

:hair


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Define risk?

Jump into a frigid pond to save a child, or second guess a suspect, who won't take his hand out of the front of his pants?

The NYC Cops minimized their own risk by putting a "choke hold", to subdue a 300lb suspect, who was clearly agitated and clearly resisting arrest. they received their own _beat down_ from all sides, for their effort to maintain law, while protecting themselves. The criminal was the victim.

Not sure how much risk, they will _want_ to take, when the public all to happy to throw them under a bus. Second guess a suspect too long and they might be the one in the body bag.

They used to set in a donut shop all night, because there was no crime. In the future, they will set in a donut shop all night, because although there will be plenty of crime, they will not be willing to arrest anyone.


----------



## ksfarmer (Apr 28, 2007)

Risk? Every cop is at risk the minute he goes on duty. Risk? Walk up to a car you just stopped for speeding and reckless driving. Young county deputy here did just that, man jumped out shooting. Turns out he had killed a man about an hour before in a nearby city. Luckily the deputy survived his wounds and the speeding-reckless driver was apprended after taking a 80 yr old lady hostage for 5 hrs. I once watched a young officer stop a car, as he walked up he laid his hand on the car near the tail-light. I asked him about that, part of his training to put his hand print there in case something happened, would help id that car as being involved. Risk? I know I wouldn't want that job.


----------



## FireMaker (Apr 3, 2014)

When we trained, a common approach was "I will go home to my family at the end of shift". The cost could be a death on the other side, oh well.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

FireMaker said:


> When we trained, a common approach was "I will go home to my family at the end of shift". The cost could be a death on the other side, oh well.


That would be my motto too, If was a Cop.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

I believe there is an implied risk with emergency service jobs but the original question is a bit ambiguous. 

Most police can work their entire career and never discharge their sidearm but I can think of examples to defend both sides of the debate. 

Four young RCMP officers in Mayerthorpe were killed while guarding a grow op while awaiting a legal search warrant. They shouldn't have been in the position they were and they should have fired immediately. 

A mentally ill man was very distraught and neighbours called police and upon arrival, family members offered to calm him down. He was shot leaving his home with an umbrella. Maybe letting family talk him down was a better idea. 

Vancouver RCMP will forever be known for detaining a Polish man at customs for several hours and tasering him to death for 'a menacing gesture with a stapler.'

Statistically speaking if an officer has to draw a weapon, they are trained to use it, the end result will be fatal and they are likely fearful and fuelled by adrenalin. 

I'm less offended by police making a split second decision than I am the fact that our police investigate police. Perhaps civilians would feel a bit better if investigations were a bit more transparent or investigated in another way.


----------



## bluemoonluck (Oct 28, 2008)

My husband is as cop. Several of my uncles are cops, or have retired from the force after years of service. One of my uncles was medically retired after an unarmed suspect wrestled his service weapon away from him and shot him in the leg.

Cops can and do take risks every single day that the average citizen would not be willing to take. They bust down doors not knowing what they're going to find on the other side, pull over cars that may be driven by people who have committed crimes more serious than speeding, and get called into situations where every single move they make can and will be reviewed at length by Monday morning quarterbacks.

If a cop hesitates to shoot someone because he's not sure the gun being pointed at him is real, is subsequently killed by that gun due to his hesitation, and the person with that gun then goes on to kill a whole schoolyard full of children, the general public will riot and loudly declare that the cop was a moron who was too chicken to shoot someone who clearly had a weapon.

If a cop shoots someone because he pointed something that appeared to be a weapon at him, and it turns out the gun was a fake, the general public will riot and loudly declare that the cop was a moron who was too chicken to risk getting killed and he should have instead waited to ensure the weapon was real before he fired.

It's pretty simple: if you don't want the cops to shoot you, don't point anything that resembles a weapon at them :shrug:. Thugs are painting their guns to look like toys, they've been doing it for years. Cops do not have bionic eyesight 

My husband takes risks on the job every day he's on duty. I've shared this before, but when he took his oath to serve and protect he was also putting my life, and the lives of our children, on the line. If he's in the state of Virginia, even if he's off duty, and he sees a felony in progress, he is REQUIRED to try to stop it. In plain clothes, no uniform, no kevlar, no backup, no way to call for backup..... even if I'm in the car next to him and our toddlers and teenagers are buckled up in the back seat. 

My husband would jump out of his car in a heartbeat to protect your family against an armed mugger or carjacker whether he's "on duty" or not. If he dies doing it, and the armed attacker then comes over and executes me and our kids, we would have died because of his oath to serve and protect. 

So do I think my husband should shoot someone who points a gun at him? Yes, yes I do. Should he be required to ask to inspect the weapon first to make sure it's real? No, he should not, and honestly that's a ridiculous question. 

My husband has been in a few situations in his 17+ years on the force where he was within his legal rights to shoot someone, and he made a split second judgement call not to. Fortunately they all ended well (so far), but in every one of those cases he could have shot and killed someone and had it deemed a clean shoot. Pretty much every officer who's on duty for very long can say the same thing. You don't hear about THAT on the news, but I assure you that it happens every day.


----------



## FarmerKat (Jul 3, 2014)

My husband is retired cop, served for 25 years. I assure you that every day a LEO goes to work, they take risks. The last year of his career, DH was transferred to a "safer" position serving civil warrants (knowing he was planning to retire soon). His first week in the "safe" position he came closest to being in a shoot out than he has been in a long time. He was serving an eviction notice. The man was desperate and was planning for "suicide by cop". He had loaded guns ready by every window. He was not a criminal, he was a good guy, a veteran, just really really desperate about his situation. He planned to have a shoot out with the cops and die in the process. He broke down and when the knock on the door came, he did not have the guts to do it. He had nowhere to go and the cops helped to get him to a temporary shelter ... Everyone walked away alive from this, but the point is ... cops take risks every day - even doing something perceived as safe. My children need their father to come home at the end of the shift.


----------



## TnAndy (Sep 15, 2005)

The average number of cops feloniously killed per year over the past decade: 51.1.
(FBI statistics)

In 2014, 126 total died in line of duty. 50 died by gunshot wounds. 49 died in traffic accidents. 

In 2013, traffic crashes were the #1 cause of death.

By comparison, the 60's and 70's had about 3 times the average for the last 10 years. Their job has gotten far more safe.

In contrast, *the police killed 593 citizens in 2014.
*
I think they are winning.


----------



## TnAndy (Sep 15, 2005)

FarmerKat said:


> Everyone walked away alive from this, but the point is ... cops take risks every day - even doing something perceived as safe. My children need their father to come home at the end of the shift.


Not to make light of his choice of occupations, because the "how" one lost a loved one really doesn't matter....they are still gone..... but one thing that often gets lost in the discussion is the fact that there are FAR more dangerous jobs.

By ranking: (per 100,000) (for 2011)

1. Commercial Fishermen (127.3 per 100k)
2. Loggers (104 per 100k)
(the above two tend to swap places from year to year)

3. Pilots/Flight engineers (56.1 per 100k)
4. Garbage collectors (36.4 per 100k)
5. Roofers (34.1 per 100k)
6. Structural Steel workers (30.3 per 100k)
7. Construction Trades (26.8 per 100k)
8. Farmers/Rancher (26.1 per 100k)
9. Truck drivers (25.9 per 100k)
10. Miner (22.9 per 100k)


Sworn officers: *11 per 100k* Way down the list.


----------



## FarmerKat (Jul 3, 2014)

TnAndy said:


> Not to make light of his choice of occupations, because the "how" one lost a loved one really doesn't matter....they are still gone..... but one thing that often gets lost in the discussion is the fact that there are FAR more dangerous jobs.
> 
> By ranking: (per 100,000) (for 2011)
> 
> ...


I do not think that anyone claims that there are not other occupations where more deaths occur (I come from a family of coal miners and my parents/grandparents have seen their friends perish in the mines) ... it just that the title of the OP really struck a nerve, implying that LEOs do not take any risk at all.


----------



## unregistered168043 (Sep 9, 2011)

Given that, statistically, you are 8 times more likely to be killed by a cop than by a terrorist, I'd say that they need to start making radical changes. If the whole purpose for the existence of police is to protect the citizenry, yet their existence poses a greater threat to life and liberty than our worst enemies....what's the point?


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Darntootin said:


> Given that, statistically, you are 8 times more likely to be killed by a cop than by a terrorist, I'd say that they need to start making radical changes. If the whole purpose for the existence of police is to protect the citizenry, yet their existence poses a greater threat to life and liberty than our worst enemies....what's the point?


I've wondered about those statistics, are they counting people killed during the commission of a crime?


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Darntootin said:


> Given that, statistically, you are 8 times more likely to be killed by a cop than by a terrorist, I'd say that they need to start making radical changes. If the whole purpose for the existence of police is to protect the citizenry, yet their existence poses a greater threat to life and liberty than our worst enemies....what's the point?


People killed by cops are most likely posing a threat to the cop or someone else.
In other words, they are the bad guy.
I'd like to see the stats on how many lives are saved when a bad guy gets shot, or how many have died because of the bad guys?
If you don't want to get shot by cops, don't attack cops.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Wonder if the stats include off duty cops? This just happened locally, the deputy was off duty but still in uniform. 

http://www.kmbc.com/news/offduty-deputy-shot-at-kck-convenience-store/31603394


----------



## unregistered168043 (Sep 9, 2011)

no really said:


> I've wondered about those statistics, are they counting people killed during the commission of a crime?


 Yes. But keep in mind that committing a "crime" does not usually warrant being gunned down or choked to death in the street. There are so many laws on the books that the courts are not even aware of most of them. The average American commits multiple felonies in his/her life time without ever being aware of it.


----------



## unregistered168043 (Sep 9, 2011)

Cornhusker said:


> People killed by cops are most likely posing a threat to the cop or someone else.
> In other words, they are the bad guy.
> I'd like to see the stats on how many lives are saved when a bad guy gets shot, or how many have died because of the bad guys?
> If you don't want to get shot by cops, don't attack cops.


Hm. I think looking at people as "bad guys" because they end up on the wrong side of a policeman's bullet or choke hold is probably part of the problem. its always "somebody else" who must have been a "bad guy", until it happens to you.

Are you aware of the recent case of the police swat team that raided a house and threw a flashbang grenade in a child's crib? Not if you only watch network news. They have chosen not to inform you about those events.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Darntootin said:


> Yes. But keep in mind that committing a "crime" does not usually warrant being gunned down or choked to death in the street. There are so many laws on the books that the courts are not even aware of most of them. The average American commits multiple felonies in his/her life time without ever being aware of it.


That wasn't the question, I understand what you are saying but it does make a difference the context involved.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

I did not mean to imply that the cops jobs are risk free just to ask if they should put the risk balance in favor of the citizen or themselves.


----------



## Jlynnp (Sep 9, 2014)

JeffreyD said:


> A couple of points:
> A garbage man is 3 times more likely to die on the job than a cop is.
> The courts ruled it is not the job of the police to protect us.


Your quote about the job of the police is not quite accurate according to what I have been taught. The role of the police is to protect the PUBLIC not the INDIVIDUAL. 

As for the person who posted about the police officers are taught is correct - they are trained to stop a threat not wound someone. Bullets travel fast, standing there to see if the person is going to shoot is not an option, if they have a gun pointed at a police officer they run a great risk of being shot.


----------



## big rockpile (Feb 24, 2003)

poppy said:


> Society is deteriorating. The public cops dealt with 40 years is gone in many places. Too many today have zero respect for any symbol of law and order and often downright hate it. OTOH, cops no longer serve and protect. Get stopped for a traffic violation in many places and the cops assume you have committed other crimes as well. They ask where you've been, where you're going, if you have drugs or weapons in the car, etc. Act a bit nervous and they want to search your car or call in the drug dog. None of that should be allowed unless they have reason to suspect you of a crime but it is commonplace today. That is not protecting and serving. That is hassling.


 Got to agree Time before last I got stopped for Speeding I made wrong move, had two Cops hollering, Lights Shinning and Guns Pulled  I thought are you kidding?

Use to be I wasn't nice I was one to get in their face. My wife said now days they would just shoot me 

I had a Cop come out when I was drinking, I was upset, tried to get him to take me to Jail. He said there was no room for me there. Later I took a swing at him, he busted me up side the Head, told me to cool it that he told me there wasn't any room at the Jail. Sat there with me in his Car Front Seat, I was drinking we was talking. Early next morning I half pass out, he asked if I was ready for Bed? Yelp. He takes me to my House, laid me on my Couch, Covered me and went on.

Use to be Cops used some common sense with things anymore seems they just don't have time to mess around.

This coming from a Guy that was friends with two LEO's one was killed in line of Duty, the other his wife was killed because of who he was. 

big rockpile


----------



## Jokarva (Jan 17, 2010)

AmericanStand said:


> I did not mean to imply that the cops jobs are risk free just to ask if they should put the risk balance in favor of the citizen or themselves.


Depends on what the citizen is up to.

My retired cop DH took plenty of risks over the years, was given two valor medals for risking his safety for a citizen. But he would have taken some of those risks as a civilian, because he's a decent guy. 

But if you're threatening him, fighting him or waving a gun at him....then I certainly hope he doesn't balance any risk in your favor.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

I can understand how a cop and his family can make his personal survival their primary concern. 
The question is should a cop do that? Should that be the policy ? 
Now before you think the very question is insane look at other jobs where we ask someone t put their lives at risk.
The Army asks lots of men to put their lives second to their duty.
A citizen shouldn't die for a moment of stupidity or a misconstrued move should he?
If the job of a fisherman is 10 times as dangerous to bring us some crab legs and the job of the garbage man is 4 times as dangerous to clean up afterward Doesn't that say something about a job that we EXPECT to be dangerous?

I don't ever remember Mat Dillion shooting first.:lonergr:


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Interesting thread, when maybe we should be concerned with why it seems the media is concentrating on my. Maybe it is the talk in DC about nationalization of LEO's.


----------



## jwal10 (Jun 5, 2010)

AmericanStand said:


> I don't ever remember Mat Dillion shooting first.:lonergr:


Oh....he shot the other man first, he was faster. The other man made the move for his gun, first....James


----------



## unregistered168043 (Sep 9, 2011)

no really said:


> That wasn't the question, I understand what you are saying but it does make a difference the context involved.


Well, of course we don't have the dead person's account of any incident do we?

All we can say for sure, is that they are shooting alot of people. In fact, my stats may be off the mark considerably. According to new data, you are actually *55 x more likely to be killed by a cop than by a terrorist!!

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-...ore-likely-be-killed-police-officer-terrorist

*


> &#8220;*Reliable estimates of the number of justifiable homicides committed by police officers in the United States do not exist*.&#8221; A study of killings by police from 1999 to 2002 in the Central Florida region found that the *national databases included *(in Florida)* only one-fourth of the number of persons killed by police as reported in the local news media*.


*
*


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Darntootin said:


> Well, of course we don't have the dead person's account of any incident do we?
> 
> All we can say for sure, is that they are shooting alot of people. In fact, my stats may be off the mark considerably. According to new data, you are actually *55 x more likely to be killed by a cop than by a terrorist!!
> 
> ...


Well if people can't elect officials that are capable of questioning bad shoots that is their fault. 

Maybe a nationalized police force is what this country needs. Been in several countries that have them, learned plenty. 

I don't in anyway support nor condone needless violence. There needs to be money spent on psychological testing on all recruits, in depth testing. If you want the best you gotta pay for it with vigilance and training.


----------



## Truckinguy (Mar 8, 2008)

Darntootin said:


> Well, of course we don't have the dead person's account of any incident do we?
> 
> All we can say for sure, is that they are shooting alot of people. In fact, my stats may be off the mark considerably. According to new data, you are actually *55 x more likely to be killed by a cop than by a terrorist!!
> 
> ...


The police are an integral part of our society and are constantly called to situations that are very likely to be confrontational. Terrorists are completely random and most that are likely to shoot me are far across the ocean. Apples and oranges.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

What the OP is really asking is how much risk are the police supposed to take to keep the truly stupid from injuring themselves. That a cop who has confronted someone over some level of suspicion of illegal activity should allow himself to err on the side of getting killed rather than injure this stupid person waving a maybe not real gun.
Or that the police should not try to arrest anyone who is resisting lest they get hurt in resisting. 
Some results are certainly worth review of police actions. But I could only hope that justice would call on the public to exercise the same review of their own behavior, which is certainly falling short. There is little self examination and much hyperbole from the most indignant posters.


----------



## michael ark (Dec 11, 2013)

Jlynnp said:


> Your quote about the job of the police is not quite accurate according to what I have been taught. The role of the police is to protect the PUBLIC not the INDIVIDUAL.
> 
> As for the person who posted about the police officers are taught is correct - they are trained to stop a threat not wound someone. Bullets travel fast, standing there to see if the person is going to shoot is not an option, if they have a gun pointed at a police officer they run a great risk of being shot.


Six rulings from the supreme court of the united states government says different.By on of the ruling they said that they were their to solve crimes only.
http://www.copblock.org/55867/legally-police-do-not-have-to-protect-you-yet-you-go-to-jail-for-not-assisting-them
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1GGGE_enUS455&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=supreme%20court%20says%20police%20do%20not%20have%20to%20protect%20you
They are now only money making arms of the state constantly fishing for something to arrest or fine you for to justify their pay check. Now that they have been removed from a to protect and serve role.:lonergr:


----------



## mekasmom (Jan 19, 2010)

Nevada said:


> As a firefighter I took grave risks. I'm not a bit uncomfortable asking cops to do the same.


Very well said.
Our military takes risks. Firefighters take risks. Doctors and nurses take the risk of exposure to germs. Yes, police should also take risks instead of being too quick to hurt people if something else will work.


----------

