Off-Topic III: The Revengening!

[eldargal]

He's obsessed with sex workers, he thinks modern men are terrible because they act like women and modern women are terrible because they act like men and he's just a terrible person in general. He tends to sexualise characters a lot and apparently subjects them to a lot of sexualised violence as well because realism or something.

[Psychosplodge]

Ah I see. Yeah some of that could apply.

[Wildeybeast]

More common than it should be and the justification for using lethal force is vague:

"Officers have long been trained to shoot to kill because that is the only way they say they can neutralize a threat. The idea of shooting someone in a limb is fiction."

"In all policy everywhere on force in any law enforcement agency in America, the bottom line statement should read: If you feel sufficiently threatened or if lives are threatened and you feel the need that you must use lethal force, then you must take out the suspect."

Firman said shooting to wound is impractical because "the likelihood of success is low." The officer may miss the target, leaving both the police and the public at risk, he said.

Officers are trained to assess the risk before firing, Firman said, but often a situation escalates quickly. A guide from his association on officer-involved shootings states that deadly force is legally justified "to protect the officer or others from what is reasonably believed to be a threat of death or serious bodily harm; and to prevent the escape of a fleeing violent felon who the officer has probable cause to believe will pose a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others."

Full Article:

[url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/19/police-deadly-force_n_5693020.html[/url]

And police are free to bring the hammer down on any group of people the moment them deem it to be a "riot"... another vague definition awaits!

[url]http://news.yahoo.com/can-the-police-really-do-that-105437241.html[/url]

Apparently the 'Land of the free' turns into a 'police state' at the drop of a hat.

I had assumed armed police in the Uk had a similar policy, until I asked my father about it (a bobby himself at the time). Apparently they don't shoot to kill or injure, simply to stop the threat. Exactly what that means depends on the situation, most likely a torso shot since it is the easiest part to hit and pretty much everyone stops being threatening when you put a bullet through their torso. This often turns out to be fatal, but they don't deliberately shoot intending to kill someone.

[40kGamer]

Police have an awful job that puts them in some impossible situations but the training here seems a little quick to justify lethal force. Plus citizens don't share the same blanket protection from prosecution that police have for using lethal force.

[Kirsten]

I don't know if it has been mentioned here already or not, this thread has moved quickly last few days. but apparently in Germany in 2011, with a population of 81 million people, police fired a grand total of 85 rounds. in America in the same year, 84 rounds were fired by police at a single individual in one incident.

[40kGamer]

I don't know if it has been mentioned here already or not, this thread has moved quickly last few days, but apparently in Germany in 2011, with a population of 81 million people, police fired a grand total of 85 rounds. in America in the same year, 84 rounds were fired by police at a single individual in one incident.

Amazing! The US government (who keeps track of everything including as we now know individuals emails and phone conversations) does not track or report officer involved shootings. This is cause for suspicion in and of itself as it indicates they do not want the public to know these things. Here is an informal compilation from 2011.

[url]http://jimfishertruecrime.blogspot.com/2012/01/police-involved-shootings-2011-annual.html[/url]

From the data gathered there were 1146 people shot by police in the US and 607 of them died.

[Kirsten]

yeah it is quite something. the approach is so different to that of Britain for example. I don't know why it is that guns have such a hold over the imaginations of people in the US. so many other countries get by without shooting random people in the street. and who the hell fires 84 rounds at one person? must be a police issued M60

[40kGamer]

yeah it is quite something. the approach is so different to that of Britain for example. I don't know why it is that guns have such a hold over the imaginations of people in the US. so many other countries get by without shooting random people in the street. and who the hell fires 84 rounds at one person? must be a police issued M60

Gun culture and violence both run deep in the US. personally I would be happy if they at least required gun safety training and started screening people who want to buy guns. It is sad that people with mental health issues have no problem getting a gun but face an uphill battle of getting treatment.

[Kirsten]

it is such a bizarre situation. most people in western nations are largely indifferent to firearms. why do the americans go so crazy over them? I don't know what makes otherwise normal, intelligent people foam at the mouth over guns and how amazing they are and how they are going to save everybody, one lethal round at a time. my american friend is a smart, left wing (for an american) guy, yet the fact that a police helicopter was over his town looking for an escaped criminal made him get out his pistol, **** it, and grab several loaded magazines (because obviously nine rounds aren't enough, you need at least thirty to stop a single criminal) and wait up all night in case the guy broke in...

[40kGamer]

it is such a bizarre situation. most people in western nations are largely indifferent to firearms. why do the americans go so crazy over them?

Well this is a loaded topic...

I'll try to frame it with my own experience. I was born and raised in a rural part of the US where guns were imbedded in the culture. So much so that I was given a gun (and taught how to handle it) many years before I could legally drive... Seriously, how many people think it's a good idea to give a 10 year old a rifle? But that's how things were where I came from. Hunting, fishing and raising your own food were the way of life there. Every member of the family and community enforced gun safety and responsibility... and you practiced... a lot. I actually got pretty good at target practice but I was never one to shoot animals. Just didn't have the "killer instinct" or whatever it takes to kill living things.

Now move forward to the present. I haven't touched a gun in 2 decades and have no desire to use one for anything, yet the minute that the government mentions gun control my blood pressure goes through the roof...

Maybe its not wanting the government to take more freedoms away. The majority of the gun rights population does not trust the government.

Maybe its a cultural echo through history from when the country rebelled all those years ago. The War of Independence was covered with patriotic fervor in school so it has to have some impact on one's thinking.

...or maybe after having guns in your life from childhood you develop an irrational attachment to them like Linus and his blanket.

I honestly have no idea exactly why I have such strong feelings about this issue and I would be surprised if most people on either side of the debate truly know why they feel the way they do. I wish that they at least screened people and had mandatory safety training before selling weapons but it seems like that is even too much to ask at the moment.