Is America a Police state?

[Apex]

HAHAHAHAHA really you give this to me HHAHAHA have you even looked at my profile im MP so I can tell you that Bull**** we have the same level of authority as local PD if you look at engagement oversea that ways different its called ROE and that the Geneva convention not even close to connected with what we do in the states.

Are you saying lethal force against foreign citizens (in Iraq and Afghanistan) could be used by American military if they only felt threatened?

 

[bluegoo300]

It would very likely would make me worried. But under no circumstance would I be delusional enough to think it was reason enough to kill the person until I saw a legitimate threat. And I was going to post a video as an example. It is some dashcam footage of police shooting a man who used a cellphone and deliberately pointed it at police as if it were a gun. It shows what a legitimate shooting looks like. Where the "perceived threat" was legitimate. Unfortunately, and I think this kind of explains the current state of things, I could not find it as every single search hit was of police shooting and killing unarmed civilians under questionable circumstances. And the biggest kicker, I am pretty certain the guy in the video I am looking for survived.

It would very likely would make me worried. But under no circumstance would I be delusional enough to think it was reason enough to kill the person until I saw a legitimate threat. And I was going to post a video as an example. It is some dashcam footage of police shooting a man who used a cellphone and deliberately pointed it at police as if it were a gun. It shows what a legitimate shooting looks like. Where the "perceived threat" was legitimate. Unfortunately, and I think this kind of explains the current state of things, I could not find it as every single search hit was of police shooting and killing unarmed civilians under questionable circumstances. And the biggest kicker, I am pretty certain the guy in the video I am looking for survived.

I would love for it to be that easy if you waited until you saw the weapon guess what your already dead because even saying you have your weapon pointed at the person you still have to switch the weapon off safe and pull the trigger you will be dead in the time it takes you to do that.

 

[Revoltingest]

I would love for it to be that easy if you waited until you saw the weapon guess what your already dead because even saying you have your weapon pointed at the person you still have to switch the weapon off safe and pull the trigger you will be dead in the time it takes you to do that.

I wonder what percentage of the time a cop feels threatened, & then shoots, but the victim didn't actually pose a threat?
And of course, compare this to shootings where there was an actual threat.
Given that being a cop isn't even in the top 10 most dangerous jobs, it could be that they're being trained to react with inappropriate violence.

 

[Apex]

I would love for it to be that easy if you waited until you saw the weapon guess what your already dead because even saying you have your weapon pointed at the person you still have to switch the weapon off safe and pull the trigger you will be dead in the time it takes you to do that.

I would rather take that risk than potentially kill an innocent person. Also, I wouldn't be that concerned considering that statistically police are safer than they have ever been in living memory.
https://www.aei.org/publication/is-...ne-of-the-safest-years-in-history-for-police/

According to data available from the “Officer Down Memorial Page” on the annual number of non-accidental, firearm-related police fatalities, 2015 is on track to be the safest year for law enforcement in the US since 1887 (except for a slightly safer year in 2013), more than 125 years ago (see top chart above). And adjusted for the country’s growing population, the years 2013 and 2015 will be the two safest years for police in US history (see bottom chart above), measured by the annual number of firearm-related police fatalities per 1 million people.[\quote]

 

[bluegoo300]

Are you saying lethal force against foreign citizens (in Iraq and Afghanistan) could be used by American military if they only felt threatened?[/

Are you saying lethal force against foreign citizens (in Iraq and Afghanistan) could be used by American military if they only felt threatened?

yes and no once again ROE dictates that if a legitimate threat is identified you can engage for example locals are allowed to carry AK-47 but if they point them at America troop you can engage allow RPG are automatic engagements

 

[Apex]

yes and no once again ROE dictates that if a legitimate threat is identified you can engage for example locals are allowed to carry AK-47 but if they point them at America troop you can engage allow RPG are automatic engagements

So if you could only engage after a weapon was pointed the answer is no, American troops could not use lethal force simply because they felt threatened. There needed to be a demonstrable threat (pointed weapon). Meanwhile police here in the US can kill civilians simply because they thought the person might have had a weapon, maybe, hidden in their pocket.

 

[bluegoo300]

I wonder what percentage of the time a cop feels threatened, & then shoots, but the victim didn't actually pose a threat?
And of course, compare this to shootings where there was an actual threat.
Given that being a cop isn't even in the top 10 most dangerous jobs, it could be that they're being trained to react with inappropriate violence.

do you know why its not in the top ten its because they define dangerous as work place injury's an injury in law enforcement = death but yes I will like to see that statistic too

 

[freethinker44]

if that's the problem then its not police at all that's what you learn at the academy so the problem must lie in the academy teaching which are given by government officials.

Make no mistake, the problem with police is the entire government, the judicial system, and all the cop suckers out there, but police aren't blameless. The US decided a long time ago that "just following orders" wasn't an excuse for criminal behavior.

 

[Apex]

do you know why its not in the top ten its because they define dangerous as work place injury's an injury in law enforcement = death but yes I will like to see that statistic too

Even if you count only deaths, I believe police still don't even crack the top 10 list. But I would need to double check.


EDIT: Here is a list compiled by Forbes using 2012 data, law enforcement is not on it: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacquelynsmith/2013/08/22/americas-10-deadliest-jobs-2/

 

[David1967]

[QUOTsaid"bluegoo300, post: 4500014, member: 54589"]exactly I just ask that people take into account the things others have to do to protect us.[/QUOTE]

exactly I just ask that people take into account the things others have to do to protect us.

Well said brother.

 

[bluegoo300]

So if you could only engage after a weapon was pointed the answer is no, American troops could not use lethal force simply because they felt threatened. There needed to be a demonstrable threat (pointed weapon). Meanwhile police here in the US can kill civilians simply because they thought the person might have had a weapon, maybe, hidden in their pocket.

once again the UN sets in place ROE not the united states government it a war crime if you violate it however the U.S. government set in place local PD laws

 

[Apex]

once again the UN sets in place ROE not the united states government it a war crime if you violate it however the U.S. government set in place local PD laws

That is irrelevant to the point being made. The point being that American soldiers are expected to show far more restraint when dealing with potential terrorists in war than our own police officers are expected to show with our own civilians here at home. Which is the basis for the satirical article I posted earlier.

 

[bluegoo300]

Make no mistake, the problem with police is the entire government, the judicial system, and all the cop suckers out there, but police aren't blameless. The US decided a long time ago that "just following orders" wasn't an excuse for criminal behavior.

perceived threat is not "just following orders" its policy and no jury will convict if the officer feels threatened

 

[Apex]

perceived threat is not "just following orders" its policy and no jury will convict if the officer feels threatened

It is a policy that is wide enough to sail a carrier through and deserves to die a swift death.

 

[freethinker44]

once again the UN sets in place ROE not the united states government it a war crime if you violate it however the U.S. government set in place local PD laws

And this is a big problem. I think you're missing the point here. It's easier for a cop to kill an American citizen than it is for a soldier to kill an enemy combatant. Think about it for a moment. The standard for killing the US killing US citizens is lower than the standard for killing the enemies of the US.

 

[freethinker44]

perceived threat is not "just following orders" its policy and no jury will convict if the officer feels threatened

I feel like you're not arguing against me and instead you're just also pointing out problems with police in the US. Which is great if you are, the problems are numerous and an inside opinion would certainly be welcome, I was just under the impression that you're trying to defend the police.

 

[bluegoo300]

That is irrelevant to the point being made. The point being that American soldiers are expected to show far more restraint when dealing with potential terrorists in war than our own police officers are expected to show with our own civilians here at home. Which is the basis for the satirical article I posted earlier.

no both are following policy

 

[bluegoo300]

I feel like you're not arguing against me and instead you're just also pointing out problems with police in the US. Which is great if you are, the problems are numerous and an inside opinion would certainly be welcome, I was just under the impression that you're trying to defend the police.

I'm not defending I'm not attacking I'm point out facts

 

[bluegoo300]

And this is a big problem. I think you're missing the point here. It's easier for a cop to kill an American citizen than it is for a soldier to kill an enemy combatant. Think about it for a moment. The standard for killing the US killing US citizens is lower than the standard for killing the enemies of the US.

well that may be however that's a national and international problem not an officers fault.

 

[freethinker44]

I'm not defending I'm not attacking I'm point out facts

So we're in agreement then, this "perceived threat is not "just following orders" its policy and no jury will convict if the officer feels threatened" is a major problem?