National Protest and 'disband the cops' discussion (please review page 1)

JedisonsDad said:
Two unsuccessful tase attempts were administered.
Click to expand...

Hey, I get it. The guy's a dirtbag. No tears from me. And if he turns around and comes at you with the blade, go nuts, blow his fucking head off. But Stumpy is stumpin away, headin for the next crack in the sidewalk and if you suck it up and run forward and smack him good with that cold steel collapsible baton, he's down and you spare your city the threat of riots.

My point is, being a cop is a risky job. You accept that when you take the oath. But if you're so risk averse you're going to just gun down every threat--even if it's running away--then you shouldn't be a cop. Have the balls to take a few risks.
 
Last edited:
Gunz said:
My point is, being a cop is a risky job. You accept that when you take the oath. But if you're so risk averse you're going to just gun down every threat--even if it's running away--then you shouldn't be a cop. Have the balls to take a few risks.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree with this more.

This situation with stumpy reminds me of the one in AZ(?) a few years back.

Dude In a motorized wheelchair stole something from a store and was riding around with a knife.

Cop shot him in the back (with civilians in the line of fire) because the knife was a deadly weapon.

Like fuck dude, put a stick in his tires or tip his wheelchair over first. Dude doesn't exactly have the mobility advantage.
 
Gunz said:
Hey, I get it. The guy's a dirtbag. No tears from me. And if he turns around and comes at you with the blade, go nuts, blow his fucking head off. But Stumpy is stumpin away, headin for the next crack in the sidewalk and if you suck it up and run forward and smack him good with that cold steel collapsible baton, he's down and you spare your city the threat of riots.

My point is, being a cop is a risky job. You accept that when you take the oath. But if you're so risk averse you're going to just gun down every threat--even if it's running away--then you shouldn't be a cop. Have the balls to take a few risks.
Click to expand...
To me, it’s a no win for the police force.

If they go hands on, they risk being stabbed, and there is the potential for a situation to come up where the guy cries “police brutality” or “I can’t breathe” and the city riots.

If they go with baton, they are in stabbing distance and they risk the headline of “Police use excessive force after striking crippled man with baton” and the city riots.

If they shoot the guy, they don’t risk getting stabbed, and the city riots.

I’ve always briefed most likely and most lethal courses of action. If the most likely is across the same, mitigate the most lethal.
 
JedisonsDad said:
To me, it’s a no win for the police force.

If they go hands on, they risk being stabbed, and there is the potential for a situation to come up where the guy cries “police brutality” or “I can’t breathe” and the city riots.

If they go with baton, they are in stabbing distance and they risk the headline of “Police use excessive force after striking crippled man with baton” and the city riots.

If they shoot the guy, they don’t risk getting stabbed, and the city riots.

I’ve always briefed most likely and most lethal courses of action. If the most likely is across the same, mitigate the most lethal.
Click to expand...

I went hands on knowing an inmate (or 2) had a knife probably about a dozen times while I was in the prison, and about an equal number of times not sure if they had a weapon or not.

I'm not saying I'm braver or more badass than any cop is, but when basically all training revolves around utilizing the gun, that's what they'll default to.

I can almost guarantee that, unless they stomped dude out like they were Memphis PD, there wouldn't be national level media on this right now.
 
We’re soldiers. We have to do risky stuff. We know that going in. Cops need to know that, too. Sometimes you have to expose yourself to danger to get the job done. Just like a firefight. Sometimes you have to expose yourself in order to get your rounds on target. Chances have to be taken. You suck it up because it goes with the job.

@JedisonsDad I get what you’re saying, sir. It’s a matter of interpretation. I just think the cops in this situation should’ve closed in and take the risk of a knife wound.
 
"My point is, being a cop is a risky job. You accept that when you take the oath. But if you're so risk averse you're going to just gun down every threat--even if it's running away--then you shouldn't be a cop. Have the balls to take a few risks."

This is so true.....the new "generation" are very quick to go guns....to the point we are having to train back to de-escalation...freaking talking to people....you old timers will remember the training "Verbal Judo". It seems like no one goes hands on anymore....or talks the situation down.

I'm generalizing of course....but, it seems truer overall. For example, I don't know how many times I had responded to a business alarm, arrive and see glass down and go in. Now, it's pull back, surround, slow search....sure, it's safer, but you can't do that for every burglary call.

Sorry, rant over.

 
Cookie_ said:
I couldn't agree with this more.

This situation with stumpy reminds me of the one in AZ(?) a few years back.

Dude In a motorized wheelchair stole something from a store and was riding around with a knife.

Cop shot him in the back (with civilians in the line of fire) because the knife was a deadly weapon.

Like fuck dude, put a stick in his tires or tip his wheelchair over first. Dude doesn't exactly have the mobility advantage.
Click to expand...

Let me first say I have not seen the video of the wheelchair dude.

That said, this falls into the category of what we call ‘lawful but awful’.

I’m OK with the police killing anyone who needs killing. I’m not OK with using a legal technicality to justify lethal force when other options were available.

On another note, this is why every officer should have access to less than lethal tools like 40mm launchers with impact rounds or beanbag shotguns.
 
policemedic said:
Let me first say I have not seen the video of the wheelchair dude.

That said, this falls into the category of what we call ‘lawful but awful’.

I’m OK with the police killing anyone who needs killing. I’m not OK with using a legal technicality to justify lethal force when other options were available.

On another note, this is why every officer should have access to less than lethal tools like 40mm launchers with impact rounds or beanbag shotguns.
Click to expand...
Agreed and Agreed.
 
Last edited:
ThunderHorse said:
At some point I want some "No Justice, No Peace" protesting because crime has actually gotten out of control. But wondering how many have to be murdered before that happens.

Person Of Color Runs Over Doctor, Then Stabs Him To Death Over 'White Privilege': Witness
Click to expand...

Crickets. Does not fit race baiting agenda.

Oh, ban cars and knives.

Imagine, just imagine if this were reversed. Fucking shame no matter who it is, innocent folks don't deserve this but, if this were reversed, the cities would burn..... again.
 
Muppet said:
Crickets. Does not fit race baiting agenda.

Oh, ban cars and knives.

Imagine, just imagine if this were reversed. Fucking shame no matter who it is, innocent folks don't deserve this but, if this were reversed, the cities would burn..... again.
Click to expand...
Nothing will happen because Liberal Whites (looking at you Antifa) don't care.
 
Muppet said:
Crickets. Does not fit race baiting agenda.

Oh, ban cars and knives.

Imagine, just imagine if this were reversed. Fucking shame no matter who it is, innocent folks don't deserve this but, if this were reversed, the cities would burn..... again.
Click to expand...

Really good example of what happens if it's a minority was the Ahmaud Arbery killing. Although I have to say he's been forgotten but they still somehow celebrate St Floyd.
 
Don't know where else to post this, I searched and found nothing. The Army sergeant that killed the protester with an AK in downtown Austin back in 2020 was just convicted.

I didn't even know this trial was going on, caught this story today. There wasn't a lot of details about the trial in the papers but I watched a YouTube video showing a legal breakdown on a local Austin channel.

It turns out this guy Daniel Perry had a few texts talking about shooting looters or killing protesters outside his building, don't know if it was a joke, personal texts, or whatever but it does look bad in light of what eventually happened.

I for one don't care and hope he does get pardoned by Greg Abbot. Most of us know this is also a hatchet job by this Soros backed DA.

Army SGT. Convicted of Killing BLM Protester in Austin
 
It doesn't have shit to do with a "Soros-backed" DA, because the DA isn't part of the jury.

How'd a bunch of Texans decide this dude was guilty, even though Texas has strong stand your ground laws?

Maybe because the dude legit had a plan for how he wanted to get away with it.

In addition, Perry speculated about how he might get away with such a killing – by claiming self-defense, as he is now doing. Prosecutors presented a Facebook Messenger chat between Perry and a friend, Michael Holcomb, which occurred two weeks before he shot Foster. In it, Perry argued that shooting protesters was legal if it was in self-defense. Holcomb, who was called to the stand Wednesday afternoon, seemed to try to talk Perry down. "Aren't you a CDL holder too?" he asked, referring to the men's licenses to carry concealed handguns. "We went through the same training ... Shooting after creating an event where you have to shoot, is not a good shoot."
Click to expand...
“Might Have to Kill a Few People”


It's not a good shoot, no matter how you slice it.
 
Cookie_ said:
It doesn't have shit to do with a "Soros-backed" DA, because the DA isn't part of the jury.

How'd a bunch of Texans decide this dude was guilty, even though Texas has strong stand your ground laws?

Maybe because the dude legit had a plan for how he wanted to get away with it.


“Might Have to Kill a Few People”


It's not a good shoot, no matter how you slice it.
Click to expand...

It has plenty to do with the DA though. The Austin Police Department said it was justifiable homicide, no?
 

Similar threads

Board and Seize
Rationality and Erisology
2
Replies
29
Views
5K
Gunz
Gunz
Marauder06
Full Spectrum Ops in the Homeland- a "Vision for the Future?"
Replies
2
Views
2K
Red-Dot
Red-Dot
Ravage
SOF LEADER: A Salute to Special Operators, with Concern for Fraying of the Forces
Replies
0
Views
4K
Ravage
Ravage
Ravage
NIGHT STALKER LEAD: From the Air, Delivering, Protecting and Extracting SOF Warriors
Replies
0
Views
8K
Ravage
Ravage
B
Counterinsurgency Redux
Replies
4
Views
3K
CQB
CQB
Back
Top