|
I'm not an LEO, so I may be pushing it by having the gall to post anything. I certainly think it's imperative to hammer in the inevitable consequences of shooting someone, whether you're a cop or a civilian (like me). That being said, the emphasis placed on not shooting needs to be balance with sufficient training to be able to shoot when your life depends on it. I see this same mindset manifested in many police departments' policies to not permit high-speed chases. Society wants to tie the LEOs' hands & then whine when the cops can't take get criminals off the street. As a civilian, I want to see the bad guy CAUGHT .... NOW. I don't want it to take a year, as it did in the Globe's example. I'm willing to live with the risk that comes along with letting cops chase the bad guys and to shoot to protect themselves, just as I'm willing to live with the risk of ending up in court (or even jail) if I have to shoot someone who invades my home. Shouldn't we emphasize that shooting is the last resort & then move on?
|