CA - Mario Woods, 26, shot by LE, San Francisco, 2 Dec 2015

Lets don't turn this into a gun control debate. I apologize for mentioning the word gun in a previous post.

My own thinking about this particular incident is, in light of the fact that the official story doesn't exactly coincide with the videos I have seen, brings me to a time when a person wielding a knife would not necessarily be shot and killed.

I question why, for instance, the police couldn't have shot the knife out of his hand? Are they not good enough shots? Do they practise shooting up close? I just don't get it.

BBM

Are you serious? I don't think that is very realistic. Cops are just normal men and women, with families they want to go home to. They are not Robocops or trained snipers. They are people who don't want to die trying to take down someone who is running from a stabbing. And they shouldn't have to. They shouldn't be asked to take them down with a wrestling hold or with some kind of fancy trick shooting which is probably not even possible.
 
Isn't that what the SWAT team is for?

The picture that you put up were Swat members.


/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/SWAT_team_prepared_%284132135578%29.jpg/350px-SWAT_team_prepared_%284132135578%29.jpg


so the picture that you used to say that 'cops should not look like that', was actually a SWAT team.
 
BBM

Are you serious? I don't think that is very realistic. Cops are just normal men and women, with families they want to go home to. They are not Robocops or trained snipers. They are people who don't want to die trying to take down someone who is running from a stabbing. And they shouldn't have to. They shouldn't be asked to take them down with a wrestling hold or with some kind of fancy trick shooting which is probably not even possible.

OK. But it does seem to me that LEOs used to be able to diffuse or deescalate situations. If they are no longer able to do these things, so be it. But do we still need to respect them or believe that they are heroes if their first recourse is to shoot lethally at a suspect? I don't know.

I am totally behind any effort to keep LEOs safe, but I have to question whether a shoot-first-ask-questions-later approach is morally or economically justifiable.

I want LEOs to come home safe and alive, but forgive me for hoping the same of citizens. There is a long history of policing that shows that suspects can be controlled without the use of lethal force -- and I have to say that it is a shame that protecting the public is no longer the priority that it once was.
 
OK. But it does seem to me that LEOs used to be able to diffuse or deescalate situations. If they are no longer able to do these things, so be it. But do we still need to respect them or believe that they are heroes if their first recourse is to shoot lethally at a suspect? I don't know.

I am totally behind any effort to keep LEOs safe, but I have to question whether a shoot-first-ask-questions-later approach is morally or economically justifiable.

I want LEOs to come home safe and alive, but forgive me for hoping the same of citizens. There is a long history of policing that shows that suspects can be controlled without the use of lethal force -- and I have to say that it is a shame that protecting the public is no longer the priority that it once was.

yes, they should try to deescalate. And they probably did. How long do you think they tried to convince Mario to drop his weapon? If they tried pepper spray and then bean bags then they spent some time doing so.

But if he just stabbed someone then he might not be in the mood to deescalate. He may have been more on the 'suicide by cop' mentality.

No one says their FIRST recourse is to shoot lethally. We only see the last moments of a stand off. There is a lot more to it that we don't see.

Protecting the public is still the priority. But the public is also being protected from the people running around stabbing and shooting people. Those perps are not the people being placed first in priority of safety. Cops save others from the perps, and then themselves. If they refuse to comply with orders to put down their weapon, then they might be shot.

This long history of policing that you speak of, in which lethal force is not needed. Does that include a time when the perps were on bath salts or PCP and wanting to kill the pigs because they wanted to put it on instagram?
 
Depends upon where they are patrolling. Why shouldn't they have vests and helmets and machine guns if the 'enemy' they are trying to arrest has them?

The gangs in LA have AK47's, armored cars, kevlar vests. Why shouldn't the gang unit cops be able to protect themselves the same way?

Did you ever see the Hollywood Bank Robbery shoot out? What about San Bernardino? Shoudlnt the responding cops have a way to take them on equally?

American citizens are not the enemy. We're not at war with law enforcement.

Or maybe we are and don't know it.
 
yes, they should try to deescalate. And they probably did. How long do you think they tried to convince Mario to drop his weapon? If they tried pepper spray and then bean bags then they spent some time doing so.

rsbm

While I appreciate how non-lethal physical violence is much better than shooting someone, I do know that the most powerful weapons of a LEO are his/her brain and mouth.

While it may not be quick, dealing with someone verbally is usually the best method. Sure, it may take some time -- so perhaps some folks may not get to go to bed when they want -- but it works. In this case, the subject was not aggressive. He did not attempt to assault any LEO. (Does anyone question this?) Even if it took all night -- and perhaps if that meant that some of the LEOs ended up earning overtime -- would it be too much to ask those who are paid to serve and protect a bit more time to negotiate with someone? Perhaps they were just not really qualified to do that. If so, I think that it's a crying shame.

I will say that if there had been ANY EVIDENCE of him TRYING TO STAB ANY LEO that I would not question his being shot -- and shot as many times as he was.

And as for the PCP -- so far as I've read, there were trace amounts in his system, so it doesn't suggest that he was high during his arrest -- or have you read something different? (I'm not at all trying to suggest that PCP use is irrelevant -- though perhaps it is -- but I don't know that there is anything to suggest that his behavior was related to it.)
 
The picture that you put up were Swat members.


/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/SWAT_team_prepared_%284132135578%29.jpg/350px-SWAT_team_prepared_%284132135578%29.jpg


so the picture that you used to say that 'cops should not look like that', was actually a SWAT team.

I don't care. Whatever or whoever they were that's not what cops should look like.
 
Cops should be cops and not soldiers. They don't need tanks, tear gas, armored cars, and machine guns.

They should look like this:
police_officers.jpg

http://careercolonel.com/images/police_officers.jpg


Not this:

350px-SWAT_team_prepared_%284132135578%29.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...jpg/350px-SWAT_team_prepared_(4132135578).jpg

That may be all well and good until they go up against someone better armed. Like in the 1930's when LE went up against much better armed felons. LE always doesn't have time to sit and wait for swat teams. Like in San Bernardino there was no time and the terrorists they were after had automatic weapons. They need to be prepared but I think LE needs to learn when to use extreme force and just as much as when not to.
 
Do US LE have asps? Not getting into any debate about this shooting, but a genuine question.
 
That may be all well and good until they go up against someone better armed. Like in the 1930's when LE went up against much better armed felons. LE always doesn't have time to sit and wait for swat teams. Like in San Bernardino there was no time and the terrorists they were after had automatic weapons. They need to be prepared but I think LE needs to learn when to use extreme force and just as much as when not to.

I think there's a big problem with outfitting and treating police officers like they're green berets going off to war against American civilians.

Maybe the mindset is what leads them to thinking innocent 12yo kids, unarmed people with mental illnesses, someone trying to shoot his OWN cow, or someone running away from them is the enemy who needs to be taken out, rather than the citizen they're sworn to protect and serve.
 
Do US LE have asps? Not getting into any debate about this shooting, but a genuine question.

If that is what is known in the US as Billy Clubs (funny name) or Baton,then yes we do. Or at least in my area they do.
 
It's an expendable baton, some kind of super steel. I am from the UK and live in the US. I do not get into US PD shooting good/bad, but I obviously compare to my home country.

If PD here (US) have the asp - or similar - I do wonder why they are not trained to use it when a perp with a knife/machete/whatever is in play.

ETA thank you Kimlynn for answering my qu.
 
It's an expendable baton, some kind of super steel. I am from the UK and live in the US. I do not get into US PD shooting good/bad, but I obviously compare to my home country.

If PD here (US) have the asp - or similar - I do wonder why they are not trained to use it when a perp with a knife/machete/whatever is in play.

Good question. Perhaps it's because people hit by a baton can answer questions afterwards.
 
Good question. Perhaps it's because people hit by a baton can answer questions afterwards.

Honestly, I feel that is the case. But - how does that work with USA LE? I grew up in a country where LE don't have guns. That's because the general population doesn't have guns. You know? UK PD use steel batons to disarm knife crime. If gun crime were equal to US gun crime, right now? The call for UK PD armed would be 100%.
 
Honestly, I feel that is the case. But - how does that work with USA LE? I grew up in a country where LE don't have guns. That's because the general population doesn't have guns. You know? UK PD use steel batons to disarm knife crime. If gun crime were equal to US gun crime, right now? The call for UK PD armed would be 100%.

I'm not sure if this was posted in this thread or a different one*, but funny you would mention it because someone brought this up:

U.S. Police Leaders, Visiting Scotland, Get Lessons on Avoiding Deadly Force

TULLIALLAN, Scotland — The United States and Britain are bound by a common language and a shared history, and their law enforcement agencies have been close partners for generations.

But a difference long curious to Americans stands out: Most British police officers are unarmed, a distinction particularly pronounced here in Scotland, where 98 percent of the country’s officers do not carry guns. For them, calming a situation through talk, rather than escalating it with weapons, is an essential policing tool, and one that brought a delegation of top American police officials to this town 30 miles northeast of Glasgow.

[Executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum] Mr. Wexler sees a historic opportunity for American police officers to shift their thinking on culture, tactics and training. Whatever ideas law enforcement leaders emerge with, he said, one thing is clear, “We must do better.”

*It might have been in the Sammy Yatim thread.
 
Honestly, I feel that is the case. But - how does that work with USA LE? I grew up in a country where LE don't have guns. That's because the general population doesn't have guns. You know? UK PD use steel batons to disarm knife crime. If gun crime were equal to US gun crime, right now? The call for UK PD armed would be 100%.

Ok -- well, I was tempted to split up your post by sentences (or groups thereof), but I resisted that. Here's my best response.

First, I lived in the UK for a while, in Lancaster. And from what I know, the LE do have access to guns, but only as a last resort. But something else they do have, is deep training, and a sense that their vocation is an avocation. Criminals in the UK do have guns, and the LEOs have access to whatever they need tactically, but I also know that they're very well trained in terms of deescalating situations. They're seen as professionals, and trained and respected as such. I knew a few folks from the local constabulary socially, and they were smart people, and they knew how to talk their way around a situation.

I have also had the opportunity to meet a number of LEOs where I work now, in small, isolated communities, in environments where the population is highly armed. The good ones prosper because they're smart and good people, on and off the job. They do have guns, but they rarely use them -- they rarely need to use them -- even when situations are dire...and that's because they're trained, and they're committed to serving the public.
 
You know every one has their opinion and so many believe so strongly in that opinion without ever wearing the badge. They then seek validation of these opinions by others who have not worn the badge. Of course some have worn the badge, myself included, and realize that the rigors of the career are easily judged by those who have never been in a tense situation such as this. We understand that many feel they could handle such situations so much better, and wonder then, why don't they join up if they are so deeply concerned with the issues. The suspect had many chances to obey commands and relinquish the knife. The ball was in his corner and he punted it. Personal responsibility is waning in this country and the effects will be much more devastating than the death of an armed suspect killed by police. The laws are different in this country and as such it is inappropriate to compare this to places like the UK or other world locations. It is also unfair to compare one situation of a man armed with the knife with other situations where a suspect was disarmed or complied. Every situation is different and the multitude of actions capable from a suspect are not transferable to every other suspect, they are unique. I cry no tears for individuals who do not comply with the law, do not comply with the police, and then do not act accordingly as to preserve their lives by doing the right thing. I cry no tears for them, regardless of their mental capacity.
 
Ok -- well, I was tempted to split up your post by sentences (or groups thereof), but I resisted that. Here's my best response.

First, I lived in the UK for a while, in Lancaster. And from what I know, the LE do have access to guns, but only as a last resort. But something else they do have, is deep training, and a sense that their vocation is an avocation. Criminals in the UK do have guns, and the LEOs have access to whatever they need tactically, but I also know that they're very well trained in terms of deescalating situations. They're seen as professionals, and trained and respected as such. I knew a few folks from the local constabulary socially, and they were smart people, and they knew how to talk their way around a situation.

I have also had the opportunity to meet a number of LEOs where I work now, in small, isolate communities, in environments where the population is highly armed. The good ones prosper because they're smart and good people, on and off the job. They do have guns, but they rarely use them -- they rarely need to use them -- even when situations are dire...and that's because they're trained, and they're committed to serving the public.

It is kind of hard to compare the UK to the US in terms of policing. Last weekend, in just two days, 27 people were shot in Chicago. Two of them died. That is probably more people shot in two days than have been shot in the UK in years.
 
It is kind of hard to compare the UK to the US in terms of policing. Last weekend, in just two days, 27 people were shot in Chicago. Two of them died. That is probably more people shot in two days than have been shot in the UK in years.


You are right! It is an unfair and inappropriate comparison.
 
It is kind of hard to compare the UK to the US in terms of policing. Last weekend, in just two days, 27 people were shot in Chicago. Two of them died. That is probably more people shot in two days than have been shot in the UK in years.

The statistics are out there, easy to find, and they prove that your statement is incorrect. But that doesn't explain why things are so different. And I don't think that the answer will be found just in policing, and I don't think that there are more bad people per capita in either country. So one has to wonder: why are the situations so different?
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
176
Guests online
2,475
Total visitors
2,651

Forum statistics

Threads
589,977
Messages
17,928,603
Members
228,029
Latest member
MichaelKeell
Back
Top