LaxPower Back-Up Stick

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 12:12 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 11:05 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 10:55 am

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 10:41 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 10:33 am

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 9:47 am

DMac wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 8:24 am First time I've seen that video and I sure don't see how the cops could have been any nicer or more patient with this guy than they were. What are they supposed to do when the guy turns violent on them? You can't see what happens once the guy turns violent, so how do you know what the cops should have done? This guy was had and needed to be taken fom behind the wheel of that car. Had he just said yeah, I'm all phukked up and cooperated with these two cops who had treated him fairly, none of this happens.

The police are not allowed to shoot people in the back. His training should have kicked in. The first cop should not be punished. The cop that came on and shot the guy should be fired. It’s odd how being drunk excuses a lot of things but not this when the guy was clearly drunk and not thinking straight.

And drunk drivers are not allowed to drive on the road. Who kills more people TLD, cops or drunk drivers? Maybe what these cops need is a shepherds hook. You open the door, hook em and drag their ass out of the car. Then you taze em, roll em and cuff em. The cops are in a no win situation. No matter what response they choose it will never be the right one. When any suspect becomes combative and violent, the games changes. How many of you folks out there in fan lax world think you could have done a better job? Raise your hands and be counted? Tell us all how you would have handled it. I have my own opinion. I would have tailed the guy and let him run until he fell over and passed out. Was he a direct threat to the lives of these officers? I doubt it very much. Did they have to shoot him, I don't think so, they had better options. If they had better training and situational awareness they would have known that. The problem so soon forgotten is how the police should respond once the suspect becomes violent and combative. They do not have a whole lot of resources available to them. What should be done is use the technology we have available today to develop the best non lethal restraining devises that we can find.

He was driving when he was shot in the back?

This police officer is well trained:

Nooooooo, that is not the point. He was drunk and could have easily came to and drove off. You tell me the best method for getting a drunk and belligerent and combative suspect from behind the wheel of a car? Go ahead sport, I am all ears, I wanna hear how TLD makes that happen. There is no disagreement between us that the cop should not have shot him. If you don't know how the cops could have safely got him out of that car, then what you have were scared cops who were not trained properly to handle the situation. Is that not the point of this conversation? This is just my opinion. We have too many cops that are not trained well enough and are just flat out scared of doing their job. That is a terrible combination and we are seeing how that plays out every day. I am not talking about that POS cop in Minny. I am talking about too many cops that just have not been trained well enough in the use of force and restraint to be patrolling the streets.

Did someone say the police should not have been called? I remember my first train ride into NYC after my son was born. I was dead tired from being up all night. I took the train in. The conductor finally woke me up. The train was empty. He said he had been trying to wake me up and they finally called the police. I left before they arrived. I was exhausted. Anyway, the police could have follow led the guy until he conked out. I am sure someone will say “ what if he killed had someone after he ran”....you know because that’s what black people do.

The brother of a girl I dated feel asleep on the 1/9 (don’t recall which train between the two specifically but the longer one north into w Bronx) and woke up at the end with a hole cut out of his pocket (late 90s) where his wallet was...

ggait wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 12:34 pm The Brits do train their cops differently.

And lots of USA police folks make the pilgrimage there to observe, learn and copy their de-escalation training and techniques.

The Atlanta shooting is a textbook case of how bad things can go once you start down the escalation path.

Sleepy drunk guy. Unarmed. Talked quietly with the cops for 45 minutes. Then it all goes south in seconds. Very very avoidable. Very very unjustified.

So it is a very very good thing that this cop and police chief were immediately canned. TBD if the cop will be convicted (likely), but completely righteous to to tell the cop that this was a career limiting move.

IMO, immediate terminations are going to be the most effective tool to incent the cops and their managers to do better.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/12/nyre ... force.html

ggait wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 12:34 pm The Brits do train their cops differently.

And lots of USA police folks make the pilgrimage there to observe, learn and copy their de-escalation training and techniques.

The Atlanta shooting is a textbook case of how bad things can go once you start down the escalation path.

Sleepy drunk guy. Unarmed. Talked quietly with the cops for 45 minutes. Then it all goes south in seconds. Very very avoidable. Very very unjustified.
Certainly agree with the observation. But, you claim it avoidable. Agree. Interested in the specific methods YOU would train cops to take .
So it is a very very good thing that this cop and police chief were immediately canned. TBD if the cop will be convicted (likely), but completely righteous to to tell the cop that this was a career limiting move.

IMO, immediate terminations are going to be the most effective tool to incent the cops and their managers to do better.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/12/nyre ... force.html

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 12:44 pm

ggait wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 12:34 pm The Brits do train their cops differently.

And lots of USA police folks make the pilgrimage there to observe, learn and copy their de-escalation training and techniques.

The Atlanta shooting is a textbook case of how bad things can go once you start down the escalation path.

Sleepy drunk guy. Unarmed. Talked quietly with the cops for 45 minutes. Then it all goes south in seconds. Very very avoidable. Very very unjustified.

So it is a very very good thing that this cop and police chief were immediately canned. TBD if the cop will be convicted (likely), but completely righteous to to tell the cop that this was a career limiting move.

IMO, immediate terminations are going to be the most effective tool to incent the cops and their managers to do better.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/12/nyre ... force.html

People here watch too many cops shows on TV. The police don’t have the right to shoot an American citizen in the back because he is unruly. Find a new job.

Certainly agree with the observation. But, you claim it avoidable. Agree. Interested in the specific methods YOU would train cops to take .

I also don't think a suspect fleeing from a cop has the right to pull a handgun out of his belt and shoot the pursuing officer in the head.

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 12:44 pm

People here watch too many cops shows on TV. The police don’t have the right to shoot an American citizen in the back because he is unruly.

kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 1:56 pm A dishonest conversation about race in America is preventing us from having an honest conversation about race in America.

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 2:02 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 12:44 pm

ggait wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 12:34 pm The Brits do train their cops differently.

And lots of USA police folks make the pilgrimage there to observe, learn and copy their de-escalation training and techniques.

The Atlanta shooting is a textbook case of how bad things can go once you start down the escalation path.

Sleepy drunk guy. Unarmed. Talked quietly with the cops for 45 minutes. Then it all goes south in seconds. Very very avoidable. Very very unjustified.

So it is a very very good thing that this cop and police chief were immediately canned. TBD if the cop will be convicted (likely), but completely righteous to to tell the cop that this was a career limiting move.

IMO, immediate terminations are going to be the most effective tool to incent the cops and their managers to do better.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/12/nyre ... force.html

People here watch too many cops shows on TV. The police don’t have the right to shoot an American citizen in the back because he is unruly. Find a new job.

There probably would not be too many cop shows on TV if there were not too many crooks to have shows about? One feeds the other. I also don't think a suspect fleeing from a cop has the right to pull a handgun out of his belt and shoot the pursuing officer in the head. That is just my crazy opinion. Chit happens right TLD?


https://www.odmp.org/officer/22174-poli ... -r-pierson

was life without parole too harsh a sentence for this murderer? I'm sure he really did not mean to shoot that cop in the head. Chit happens you know?

ggait wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 2:15 pm

I also don't think a suspect fleeing from a cop has the right to pull a handgun out of his belt and shoot the pursuing officer in the head.

Except that:

1. Guy didn't have a gun -- the cops had frisked him during the 45 minutes they talked to him.

2. The cop's swiped taser is non-lethal force. And only has a range of 10 feet. Stay 11 feet away and the guy is unarmed.

3. Why do you need to pursue the guy then and there? Not justified to shoot a guy in order to make a misdemeanor DUI arrest. You can follow him at a distance calmly. Or collar him later -- you have his car, license, name and address.

So in what way does your post apply to the instant situation? Seems completely irrelevant.

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 2:59 pm

ggait wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 2:15 pm

I also don't think a suspect fleeing from a cop has the right to pull a handgun out of his belt and shoot the pursuing officer in the head.

Except that:

1. Guy didn't have a gun -- the cops had frisked him during the 45 minutes they talked to him.

2. The cop's swiped taser is non-lethal force. And only has a range of 10 feet. Stay 11 feet away and the guy is unarmed.

3. Why do you need to pursue the guy then and there? Not justified to shoot a guy in order to make a misdemeanor DUI arrest. You can follow him at a distance calmly. Or collar him later -- you have his car, license, name and address.

So in what way does your post apply to the instant situation? Seems completely irrelevant.

I was talking about officer Daryl Pierson.

6ftstick wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 3:09 pm

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 2:59 pm

ggait wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 2:15 pm

I also don't think a suspect fleeing from a cop has the right to pull a handgun out of his belt and shoot the pursuing officer in the head.

Except that:

1. Guy didn't have a gun -- the cops had frisked him during the 45 minutes they talked to him.

2. The cop's swiped taser is non-lethal force. And only has a range of 10 feet. Stay 11 feet away and the guy is unarmed.

3. Why do you need to pursue the guy then and there? Not justified to shoot a guy in order to make a misdemeanor DUI arrest. You can follow him at a distance calmly. Or collar him later -- you have his car, license, name and address.

So in what way does your post apply to the instant situation? Seems completely irrelevant.

I was talking about officer Daryl Pierson.

Theres something I don't understand.

Every black talking head on TV says they've had to have that terrible and unique conversation about the relationship those racist murderous police have with their children. They've told their children for years and caution them everytime they go out to respect the authority don't resist. Those cops will kill you.

And yet they resist fight kick scratch tase and run.

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 3:17 pm

6ftstick wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 3:09 pm

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 2:59 pm

ggait wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 2:15 pm

I also don't think a suspect fleeing from a cop has the right to pull a handgun out of his belt and shoot the pursuing officer in the head.

Except that:

1. Guy didn't have a gun -- the cops had frisked him during the 45 minutes they talked to him.

2. The cop's swiped taser is non-lethal force. And only has a range of 10 feet. Stay 11 feet away and the guy is unarmed.

3. Why do you need to pursue the guy then and there? Not justified to shoot a guy in order to make a misdemeanor DUI arrest. You can follow him at a distance calmly. Or collar him later -- you have his car, license, name and address.

So in what way does your post apply to the instant situation? Seems completely irrelevant.

I was talking about officer Daryl Pierson.

Theres something I don't understand.

Every black talking head on TV says they've had to have that terrible and unique conversation about the relationship those racist murderous police have with their children. They've told their children for years and caution them everytime they go out to respect the authority don't resist. Those cops will kill you.

And yet they resist fight kick scratch tase and run.

And every time you turn around, a Black talking head’s son gets gunned down. Go figure.

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 9:51 am The first cop was a decent guy. The cop that shot him was just the type you run across. Already a bad disposition when he arrived. He needed a new job. So the guy tussles with the cops so they can shoot him? Like I said, I know two high school lacrosse players that punched cops and nothing much happened to them. Wrestled to the ground. No weapons drawn. Of course both had been drinking.

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 3:17 pm I haven't heard any national media or Al Sharpton crying in anguish over Officer Julian Keen Jr. being executed last night by three thugs.

Maybe his life doesn't matter as much as someone who can help their racial division narrative?

https://www.tampabay.com/news/breaking- ... uestioned/

Ironically, Julian clearly led an exemplary life, was beloved by all, and was actually helping out at a hit and run and he wasn't even on duty. Selfless. Good guy. He wasn't passed out drunk in a drive through Wendy's take out lane. He was actually helping others, off duty.

And then there are his murderers. Pure 100% thug-life.

Where is the national outpouring of disgust for those that would so callously take a life? Where are the riots? Where is the looting? Who in our fearless media will excoriate the thugs who did this?

Will our Fanlax colleagues of the left dedicate a thread to Julian? Does HIS life matter?

old salt wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 3:42 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2020 9:51 am The first cop was a decent guy. The cop that shot him was just the type you run across. Already a bad disposition when he arrived. He needed a new job. So the guy tussles with the cops so they can shoot him? Like I said, I know two high school lacrosse players that punched cops and nothing much happened to them. Wrestled to the ground. No weapons drawn. Of course both had been drinking.

Nice job Dad, living up to your screen name. Did you coach those 2 lax bro knuckleheads too ?
No big deal, of course they'd been drinking. That makes it ok. Sad.

Did your 2 drunken lax bro proteges throw off 2 cops, punch them, take their weapon & flee.
...& the problem was the cop's attitude ?
I can't believe how casual you all are about Brooks drunk driving. No prob. Call him a cab. He won't do it again.

Rolfe patiently & professionally questioned & tested Brooks. He did not escalate a very difficult, potentially dangerous situation. He gave Brooks every opportunity. Brooks just keep digging his hole deeper. Brooks was a risk who needed to be arrested, removed from the road & his driving privileges revoked before he killed someone on the road, maybe his daughters.

You think Brooks posed no immediate risk ? He was drunk out of his mind. He overcame 2 trained police officers who had the advantage on him, injuring one in the process (Brosnan was limping noticeably & having difficulty pursuing). Rolfe had to make a split second decision. He had no way of knowing what Brooks would do. Would he drag someone out of a car & try to escape or enter someone's home & try to hide. Rolfe had to make an immediate, instinctive decision. He eliminated the threat when he was still within close range, before he got away. In situations like that, you instinctively revert to your tactical training. Hesitation can be deadly. It was an "awful but lawful" split second adrenaline fueled decision Rolfe had to make in an instant. Brooks created the situation which cost him his life.