A fair question, although a fair answer might be, "Waiting until more facts come in before committing to a public position."
Still, the NRA could come out with a statement that doesn't take a position on the facts of the case, but that does reassert that police training should embrace the reality that there are millions more Americans lawfully carrying arms. The presence of a weapon should not be taken to indicate that the officer's life is in immediate jeopardy. Some new mode of training needs to be developed that doesn't go to DEFCON 1 at the first sign of a weapon.
but that does reassert that police training should embrace the reality that there are millions more Americans lawfully carrying arms. The presence of a weapon should not be taken to indicate that the officer's life is in immediate jeopardy.
ReplyDeleteThat would be like HRC showing the CIa and FBI how she was moving classified information on her private servers... before deleting the servers.
They are training LEOs to execute Americans who are armed... intentionally. They have a plan, or if they don't, their masters do.
It may have something to do with suppressing patriotic American "terrorists" like the operation at Waco Texas, number 2. It may have something to do with disarming Americans, as the Democrats did in New Orleans in Katrina.
There's a lot of possibilities why they intentionally train police forces to shoot automatically, via military conditioning, without the safety parameters military units must have.
Some new mode of training needs to be developed that doesn't go to DEFCON 1 at the first sign of a weapon.
They don't need a new mode of training. Even the old National Guard standards under Bush II, would be sufficient. A few US veterans or those with military small arms experience, tend to react to these situations, when I describe it to them, as the police being too gung ho but lacking in military experience and the ability to control their fears. So they start the Spray and Pray, or at least that was the implication.
It paints a different picture of LEOs receiving military training. If they received the full military kill via authorization operant conditioning training, they would be safer, for others if not for themselves. They receive a sort of hybrid, lesser half. One tailored to US politics and police union doctrines. That's cheap on ammo, too.
From the cite's cite: too many conservatives react to these stories by presuming that the police must have got it right.
ReplyDeleteCooke very carefully chose to provide zero evidence of this claim. I expect that out of Liberals; the elision is offensive when it comes from someone masquerading himself as a Conservative. There are, for instance, some Conservatives in the Hall who are not spring-loaded in this way.
The situation certainly looks bad for the cop, but it's necessary--even for guys like Cooke--to keep in mind that what it looks like is wholly dependent on what the press chooses to publish.
Eric Hines
In a civilized society, someone could say to the cop who just stopped their car, "Officer, you should know that I have a concealed carry permit and I am carrying a firearm today." This would enhance everyone's safety and peace of mind (not least the cop's, considering the low crime rate of CCW holders).
ReplyDeleteBut someone in this situation also needs to think about the possibility that the cop will flip into either I'm-in-mortal-danger mode or take-control-via-intimidation mode, pull his own weapon, begin screaming obscenities or threats, and possibly shoot. (That's where the training comes in - police are trained to hype themselves up, get the adrenaline flowing, and threaten in order to "establish control of the situation". And that's dangerous.)
So what do you do? You don't know which way the cop is going to jump. Announcing that you're armed might get you shot out of hand by a hysterical cop. But not doing so may cause a deadly misunderstanding at some point during the interaction. What's the best path to take?
Courtesy, coupled with taking great care not to be misunderstood. But in the long term, retraining the police in a better way is the only answer. Until that happens, we are in grave danger in many encounters with the police.
ReplyDeleteAnd it may well be that black men are in more danger even than bikers, and certainly more than many other segments. That's an aspect of this I don't discount, even though I'm not sure how much there is to say about it that is useful. The danger extends well beyond men in that category, but perhaps -- for various reasons of which we are all aware -- good men who happen to be black are in more peril of being misunderstood than many other kinds of men.
Uh-oh. Looks like officer down in Dallas following a BLM protest. That's not going to improve the odds for actually solving this problem.
ReplyDeleteIn some states, it's mandatory to tell police you have a CCL and are carrying if they make official contact (i.e., stop you as part of their duties).
ReplyDeleteBetter training would certainly be an improvement, I think.
So what do you do? You don't know which way the cop is going to jump. Announcing that you're armed might get you shot out of hand by a hysterical cop. But not doing so may cause a deadly misunderstanding at some point during the interaction. What's the best path to take?
ReplyDeleteThe operant conditioning the police have to pull triggers, is very weak. With some exceptions, like sociopaths or people who have been indoctrinated in a "civilians are the enemy" culture for decades.
Thus you can defuse most people's "ramp up" on the emotional escalator by de-escalating them. Making yourself into a human they can relate to. Showing the open palms. Moving very slowly so they don't trigger the kinetic motion sensors of the human eye.
Sometimes the most effective means of stopping someone, shouting at them in a loud but calm voice, then quieting down, isn't allowed, because people think that is "against police instructions". Many techniques that work on animals, get complicated when involving police who are trained to use "control" methods against civilians that are like controlling animals. COmmand Voice. Anger. Shouting. Pointing weapons at people. Not all of them work very well against animals, let alone humans.
Ideally, you do so before the person has escalated their emotions to a certain point. For example, the police officer in the shooting video on FB Live by the black girlfriend, apparently approached the vehicle from the front and from the driver's side. That seems to be a rookie mistake. If I considered a vehicle a danger and armed with dangerous people, I would approach from the back, on the passenger side. In order to make tracking me more difficult and to provide at least some car surface as cover or concealment, to duck under. That is how a person should keep themselves safe, by preparing the environment before hand. If the LEO thought pumping his heart beat and adrenaline up was going to save him... well, that is more like a rookie mistake.
There are also "trigger phrases". Use words and phrases that don't trigger negative emotions in a person, who has received indoctrination or conditioning. For example, don't say "Firearms" or "gun". Say a phrase that takes the person some time to consider it, while you give em time and space. Sort of like how an FBI negotiator gets into the good graces of the hostage takers, because the FBI has help on one hand and SWAT teams ready to kill em on the other. So the FBI negotiate by calming the subjects down first. Because if they aren't calm and start shooting up the place, the only option is a SWAT one. So the FBI have to somehow, communicate that they have kill teams on standby, but without intimidating or making the subjects afraid. Similar to this concealed carry issue now a days.
As for Black Lives Matter, I did tell people that Nation of Islam is associated with them and that attempting to ally with BLM is a bad idea. They are a terrorist org, and were still one before today, in my analysis.
Also, the police doesn't even have an LED flashlight. If I was really concerned about someone poking a hand cannon at me when I'm talking with them on the driver's side of the window, I would be pointing a flashlight at their face, and ready to turn it on. After I detect danger, I would just turn it on and body shift to a point where the driver cannot easily point a gun. Of course, ensure that nobody else is hiding out in the back or somewhere else waiting in ambush first.
ReplyDeleteThat is a very Non Lethal option, between the Lethal and No Force continuum. But being able to ramp up on that force continuum, takes some self discipline and some self confidence.
With guns, if you fire, that's a done deal. With a flashlight, at worst, they might get epilepsy. Even if they blink but can still see, I can still move out of a gun's vector in an eye blink. So I feel safe, because I set things up to make myself safe in those situations. If the police are authorized to shoot people without penalty, they can at least consider using flashlights to blind people without penalty as a lesser, but more effective resource. That's because non lethal weapons have less Bang, but more usefulness because you can use it in more scenarios as the triggers are triggered more often.
An officer may prefer to stop vehicles at evening and night, because he pulls out his flashlight and gets to stun the subject long enough for them to assess the tactical environment. These are tricks the older officers who survive, tend to pick up. Or perhaps those who were part of tactical teams or military infantry advanced training. They want every edge they can get, and don't depend on "procedures" to save them.
Assuming that anything in this article is correct:
ReplyDeletehttp://gotnews.com/breaking-philandocastile-falconheightsshooting-crips-gangmember/
Castile was a crips gang member. The optics may be all lies. May, I don't know.
And, if this is anything to go by, seems Alton Sterling wasn't a nice guy either:
http://gotnews.com/confirmed-bloods-gangbanger-altonsterling-owned-illegal-gun-drug-gun-convictions/
Everybody is being played.
I'll go with Occam's razor for the various liveleak individual videos. More corrobrative evidence can be found in the dash cams. For now, the two look like incompetent coincidences stacked on top of each other.
ReplyDeleteAs for Dallas, that looks more like a plan that is playing people, especially given its hallmark operational similarities to the DC Muslim shooters.