The continuing militarization of the police starting to gain press attention

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by iraiam

Instead, law enforcement and virtually any government agency is being exempt from any weapon restriction, leading us inexorably to a state where the government as a whole is armed in a far superior fashion than the citizenry that it derives it's power from.

Which, of course, is exactly the opposite of what the founders had in mind when they wrote the Second Amendment.

[johnwilliamson062]

Just ran across this story and thought I should share it.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2...t-police-taser
96 year old using a walker refuses medical attention. Police first tase him. When he fails to comply at that point they shoot him in the stomach with a bean bag round. What kind of idiot things you can shoot a 96 year old in the stomach with a bean bag round and not kill them?

I was in a situation where a twelve year old girl had a butcher knife and was making threats once. I was able to disarm her without as much as a bruise for either of us and I didn't even have a riot shield. I doubt the 96 year old had much on her.
I am sure they followed their training for entry of a room with a knife wielding maniac perfectly though. Too bad they didn't take time to think.

[Conn. Trooper]

You disarmed a person armed with a butcher knife single handedly and with no injuries? You must be Chuck Norris. Or lucky.

Good for you, lots of cops have died trying to take sharp pointy things away from people.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...hoots-suspect/

http://www.ktva.com/home/outbound-xm...corder=reverse

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2007...nd_clinic.html

Thats what I came up with in 2 minutes of Google searching. I am not going to take knives away from anyone bare handed. Not happening, anyone who tries it is a fool.

Could the police in the above situation done something else, or handled things another way? Maybe, I was not there. But going into the room and taking a knife away from someone, anyone (even a 95 year old), no way.

[MLeake]

Conn. Trooper, in this case you defend the indefensible.

Victim was 96, and used a walker. Are you really going to claim they could not have either backed away and evacuated others from the immediate area, or easily barricaded the person in a room? This scenario screamed for waiting out the 96yo, but it sounds like the police wanted to take immediate charge.

Against a mobile person, I would agree that taking a knife would have been risky. In this case, they just needed to wait until she nodded off.

[Conn. Trooper]

That's not what I said. I'm talking about the post above where john claimed he took a knife away from a 12 year old girl without any injuries. A 12 year old can stab you pretty easily.

I actually didn't comment about the other story except to say I wasn't there and they possibly could have done things differently.

[Revoltella]

96 year old using a walker refuses medical attention. Police first tase him. When he fails to comply at that point they shoot him in the stomach with a bean bag round. What kind of idiot things you can shoot a 96 year old in the stomach with a bean bag round and not kill them?

I give them credit for at least trying "non-lethal" alternatives. I can think of a few places he would have just been shot 41 times.

[MLeake]

I am just trying to imagine an attempt to mount a self-defense claim, if I as a private citizen were to shoot a 96yo, walker-using, knife-armed assailant.

I can't imagine it would go well.

It might work in a SYG state, but it would not in a duty to retreat state.

The only reason I could think of that would cause me to do such a thing would be if there were innocent third parties who could not retreat or be evacuated. (For instance, if the 96yo disabled person were threatening the premature babies in the incubator room, or the unconscious patient on the operating table.)

That all this stemmed from a refusal to accept medical treatment makes me think of, "We destroyed the village to save the village."

And back to militarization we go...

[Conn. Trooper]

What did he require medical treatment for? A stroke? Heart attack? Something that required immediate treatment and they couldn't wait until he fell asleep?

Holy heck!!! We don't know, but lets just jump on the bad cops bandwagon!! I love how every time one of these threads come up, people are immediately able to state facts about how the bad cops did everything wrong just from reading a three paragraph news article. Love it.

[MLeake]

Conn. Trooper, would waiting to administer heart medication have had worse effects than the steps taken had?

Do Tasers not have a history of, and come with warnings as a result of, serious injuries or death to the elderly and to cardiac patients?

Is the use of bean bags at close range recommended against the extremely elderly?

I love how every time one of these threads comes up, you leap to the defense of LE.

There would have to be some extreme, unreported circumstances to make this incident anything other than a charlie foxtrot, and you should agree.

Edit: Going back to your theory about heart medication... My wife is an RN, and I seem to recall her saying the first Hippocratic rule is: Do No Harm.

So medical protocol should not have indicated the use of a Taser...

[Conn. Trooper]

Conn. Trooper, would waiting to administer heart medication have had worse effects than the steps taken had? No idea, I am not a DR. I don't believe anyone on scene intended to kill the man.

Do Tasers not have a history of, and come with warnings as a result of, serious injuries or death to the elderly and to cardiac patients? Also no idea, I do not have a Taser, and have not been trained in Taser use.

Is the use of bean bags at close range recommended against the extremely elderly? I don't use them, so no clue as to their deployment.

I love how every time one of these threads comes up, you leap to the defense of LE. I am not defending them. I am offering a counter viewpoint with other thoughts and ideas. I am also not ready to condemn anybody, LE or otherwise, based on a three paragraph news article.
There would have to be some extreme, unreported circumstances to make this incident anything other than a charlie foxtrot, and you should agree. I was not there, neither were you. Do you truly believe that a bunch of cops all decided to just kill this guy? Or maybe, just maybe, the situation led them to think this was the best course of action. Keeping in mind that everybody there was going to be writing reports for hours about the use of force. And I would guess there was a supervisor on scene calling the shots. They all decided this was the way to handle things, yet you know better after reading a news article?
Edit: Going back to your theory about heart medication... My wife is an RN, and I seem to recall her saying the first Hippocratic rule is: Do No Harm.

So medical protocol should not have indicated the use of a Taser...
You know this how? Your experienced with Taser use and protocol?

[maestro pistolero]

Do you truly believe that a bunch of cops all decided to just kill this guy?

Nobody suggested that but you. All the discussion I have seen centers around questioning the judgment of treating a 95-year-old to not one, but two less-than-lethal weapons.

Regardless of training, certifications, or anything else, a person with half a brain should understand the dire risks of deploying these weapons on a 95 year-old man. If this is not, on its face, bad judgment, then what on earth is?

[Conn. Trooper]

Put the shoe on the other foot. Don't you think maybe there is more to the story when the Taser didn't work? Or when threatened with bean bag rounds he still didn't drop the knife? Maybe there is more to the story.

[maestro pistolero]

I'm certainly open to any relevant facts. With police officers, it seems to be a knee-jerk response to afford every imaginable benefit of the doubt. For the record, I believe that is how it should be, giving their charge.

I just wish citizens (absent relevant facts coloring the case) could get the same benefit of the doubt that police officers afford their own.

[MLeake]

Conn. Trooper, for a brief period I got to sit on the arming board for a base's security department. At a later time, I was a training officer for a reserve unit that was 50% MAA.

So, while I myself was not LEO, I did have to be at least somewhat up to speed on the force continuum, and do some reading on theoretically LTL options. I have read up on such periodically, since, out of general interest.

I would be curious as to some specific circumstances where you would think use of force against a severely mobility-limited person, not armed with a ranged weapon, would be appropriate.

I have listed a couple, myself, but I would be surprised if the article's writer omitted mention of immobilized potential victims in the immediate area.

[Conn. Trooper]

I have no idea. Did they try to wait him out? Was there another patient in the room? Did he need immediate medical attention? Was he threatening to harm himself? Does that PD have adequate personnel to sit there for hours in the hope that he falls asleep or gives up? There are a million things we don't know. That's the point I'm trying to make. I'm just not ready to throw anyone under the bus based on a news story. If a gun owner was condemned immediately based on a news report, posters would be howling bloody murder.

I am very surprised it ever came to end the way it did. Putting the shoe on the other foot, if I am of sound mind and was tasered and threatened with bean bags, I would give up.

[MLeake]

Conn. Trooper, I am not so sure a 95 or 96 yo refusing treatment is going to be what you would call, "of sound mind;" that is, of course, unless they were of sound mind and refusing treatment because they were tired of life in current condition.

So I would not be quick to assume such a person, in either case, would react as you or I would.

Meanwhile, I will normally defend officers who use deadly force against melee weapons, or against infirm or crazed persons armed with ranged weapons, unless reported facts really change the story (such as the Philadelphia drug raid, based on bogus documents, that resulted in the death of a grandmother).

I have a very hard time conceiving of circumstances that would justify the scenario we are discussing. I certainly don't think undermanning of or inconvenience to the department are valid justifications.

[Conn. Trooper]

I'm not disagreeing. I can't picture the scene in my head either. I've been in LE for 17 years and I've never had to go hands on with a 95 year old. There has to be more to the story.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Review of Balko's book from a police source:

http://www.policeone.com/patrol-issu...r&nlid=6389572

Take away point that police should understand the basis for concerns.

[MLeake]

Conn. Trooper, re bean bag rounds and knife, did you ever see the video of the apparently crazy man with the katana in Seattle?

Guy is half naked, threatening passing motorists with a katana. SPD arrives, sets up containment, and is ready to use bean bags followed by lethal force if necessary. Containment holds, SFD arrives with a pumper truck, and when the guy won't drop the weapon the firemen hit him with a jet of water.

Now, I am not saying we should hit old people with water cannon. I am saying that if containment can be set, it should be, but I suspect people were not thinking ahead to "what if this 95 or 96 year old resists?" My guess is they focused more on the knife, and less on the extreme lack of mobility.

Of course, that is only a guess, and further reports may provide facts that identify other key concerns.

[Conn. Trooper]

I agree. I would like to know more of the details.

[Levant]

I give them credit for at least trying "non-lethal" alternatives.

"non-lethal"? Then how come the guy is dead? Tasers are lethal weapons. Bean bag rounds are lethal weapons. This story proves that but so have dozens or hundreds of stories before these.

Some call these "less lethal" but they are not "non-lethal" or "less than lethal" as many refer to them as. But then, the American hero killed in this case and his family don't care about the "less lethal" distinction. Neither should America. This guy was America's hero. They killed something in all of us when they killed him.

[teeroux]

Me thinks this thread has turned from militarization of police to cop bashing. Tasers are a very thourouly tested devises. Thousands if not tens of thousands of people are subjected to the deployment of tasers with no ill effects every year. I also wouldn't blame an officer using one even against an elderly person, even one who served our great country. Just think that man is old for a reason and probably knew his way around a knife very well given his service. I don't know about any of you but my ability to defend myself and fight certainly won't go with the use of my legs. When faced with a potentially lethat threat the officer's did respond with a non-lethal option. JMHO.

[MLeake]

teeroux, he used a walker.

Knife plus walker equals retreat, and what's he going to do to you?

[Levant]

Originally Posted by Conn. Trooper

What did he require medical treatment for? A stroke? Heart attack? Something that required immediate treatment and they couldn't wait until he fell asleep?

Holy heck!!! We don't know, but lets just jump on the bad cops bandwagon!! I love how every time one of these threads come up, people are immediately able to state facts about how the bad cops did everything wrong just from reading a three paragraph news article. Love it.

Now this made me bust out laughing. Yep. That'll teach people who need surgery to save their life - if you refuse to cooperate in extending your life for hours we'll just end it in seconds. You go, trooper.

Reminds me of a case years ago where a lady in LA was threatening to shoot herself in the head. Had the revolver pressed against her temple and the hammer pulled back. The LAPD showed up. When she refused to put the gun down, even though she never moved it or even flinched, an LAPD officer put a bullet in her head.

You are not allowed to hurt yourself in America; that's the job and privilege of the police and any attempt to do it yourself will be dealt with harshly.

[Levant]

Originally Posted by teeroux

Me thinks this thread has turned from militarization of police to cop bashing. Tasers are a very thourouly tested devises. Thousands if not tens of thousands of people are subjected to the deployment of tasers with no ill effects every year. I also wouldn't blame an officer using one even against an elderly person, even one who served our great country. Just think that man is old for a reason and probably knew his way around a knife very well given his service. I don't know about any of you but my ability to defend myself and fight certainly won't go with the use of my legs. When faced with a potentially lethat threat the officer's did respond with a non-lethal option. JMHO.

There's that non-lethal option again - yet the guy is quite dead. Anyone who is afraid of a 92-year-old man in a walker that doesn't have a gun is a coward.

Me thinks this thread has turned from militarization of police to cop bashing.

Ummm. No. No one is saying all cops would do kill 92-year-old men in wheelchairs. We're just opining that these cops should not have killed this man.

Just think that man is old for a reason and probably knew his way around a knife very well given his service.

Sure. Every 20-something in the police should tremble in their boots every time a 90-something vet hobbles by with their walkers. Maybe they should all be shot on sight just to ensure the safety of those defenseless cops.

Tasers are a very thourouly tested devises. Thousands if not tens of thousands of people are subjected to the deployment of tasers with no ill effects every year.

Now we're testing devices on the public? They're tested on the elderly and infirm? Have they been tested on one-year-olds? Diabetics in shock? The deaf? School children? How were the tests performed? In what lab? Because they have been used against each of these on the streets of America. And what the streets of America testing has shown is that over 500 times, tasers are lethal weapons.