Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How should police respond to combative suspects?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How should police respond to combative suspects?

    There seems to be no shortage of armchair know it all's in the past 11 days of rioting. So let's cut to the chase and hear just how you would recommend police respond to combative, non compliant suspects who resist arrest regardless of color.
    Que up, pepper spray? Batons ? Tasers? Hugs? Free Beer?
    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.

  • #2
    Star Trek always comes to mind, stun them :-)

    I don't have a good answer but it is a good question.
    We hunt the hunters

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
      There seems to be no shortage of armchair know it all's in the past 11 days of rioting. So let's cut to the chase and hear just how you would recommend police respond to combative, non compliant suspects who resist arrest regardless of color.
      Que up, pepper spray? Batons ? Tasers? Hugs? Free Beer?
      You only noticed the high percentage of know-it-alls here due to the rioting? They might as well change the name of this forum to Armchair Know-It-Alls, or I-Learned-Everything-I-Need-To-Know-In-High-School-Don't-Bother-Me-With-New-Ideas-Or-Alternative-Points-Of-View.com.

      Your question is still fair.

      I think the thing that's tipped things over this time was the timing of the Floyd incident immediately after the Arbery incident.

      A lot of people have danced around it, but c'mon: No one, and I repeat NO ONE, should die as the result of a misdemeanor crime against property, regardless of whether or not the people doing the detaining were in the right or not.

      In the case of Arbery, they should have let the guy go. End of story.

      Now, they were only "kinda" peace officers as only the father was a retired officer.

      In the case of the Floyd incident, I'm not sure that there would have been as much of an issue with the take down had Floyd not died. Again, someone dying over a (alleged? I've never seen confirmation of the counterfeit bill allegation) fake $20 bill should concern everyone.

      I would think that, as a start, if a detainee says "I can't breathe", you could get off his neck/back, even if you think he's faking it. I don't see that as being a difficult training change.

      But I would suggest that most of the issues the police face can be addressed with an injection of plain old common sense:

      1. This is the age of cell phones. EVERYONE has a 10 megapixel camera and the means to disperse images immediately. The police should be aware of this and act as if they are under scrutiny 24/7. I don't really care if its fair or not, it's the way it is.

      2. Since everyone else has cameras, there is absolutely NO reason why peace officers should not be required to wear one at all times.

      3. Your litigious society makes this virtually impossible, but police forces should own up when they **** up. An apology wouldn't hurt, either. In Canada, an apology is not a legal admission of guilt. Perhaps the US should consider adopting this?

      4. If they don't already, every jurisdiction should have an independent investigative body for police involved deaths. These investigations should be well funded so that investigations can be completed quickly. No innocent police officer deserves to be under a cloud for long. Establish the facts, present the facts to the district attorney, and either lay charges or clear them as soon as possible.

      5. When officers are cleared of wrongdoing and charges are not to be filed, all the facts should be immediately released to the public.

      Comment


      • #4
        How should police respond to combative suspects?

        Police should respond by arresting them.

        The few Celebs that decry the police wont win...in some time the protests and covid 19 will be behind us. We live in a country that people dream of coming to. The USA is immigrants worldwide # 1 choice destination. Sure the US justice system has flaws, but not like say Egypt or Mexico where bribery among cops is a concern.
        Long live the Lionheart! Please watch this video
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=jRDwlR4zbEM
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3DBaY0RsxU
        Accept the challenges so that you can feel the exhilaration of victory.

        George S Patton

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by DingBat View Post

          You only noticed the high percentage of know-it-alls here due to the rioting? They might as well change the name of this forum to Armchair Know-It-Alls, or I-Learned-Everything-I-Need-To-Know-In-High-School-Don't-Bother-Me-With-New-Ideas-Or-Alternative-Points-Of-View.com.

          Your question is still fair.

          I think the thing that's tipped things over this time was the timing of the Floyd incident immediately after the Arbery incident.

          A lot of people have danced around it, but c'mon: No one, and I repeat NO ONE, should die as the result of a misdemeanor crime against property, regardless of whether or not the people doing the detaining were in the right or not.

          In the case of Arbery, they should have let the guy go. End of story.

          Now, they were only "kinda" peace officers as only the father was a retired officer.

          In the case of the Floyd incident, I'm not sure that there would have been as much of an issue with the take down had Floyd not died. Again, someone dying over a (alleged? I've never seen confirmation of the counterfeit bill allegation) fake $20 bill should concern everyone.

          I would think that, as a start, if a detainee says "I can't breathe", you could get off his neck/back, even if you think he's faking it. I don't see that as being a difficult training change.

          But I would suggest that most of the issues the police face can be addressed with an injection of plain old common sense:

          1. This is the age of cell phones. EVERYONE has a 10 megapixel camera and the means to disperse images immediately. The police should be aware of this and act as if they are under scrutiny 24/7. I don't really care if its fair or not, it's the way it is.

          2. Since everyone else has cameras, there is absolutely NO reason why peace officers should not be required to wear one at all times.

          3. Your litigious society makes this virtually impossible, but police forces should own up when they **** up. An apology wouldn't hurt, either. In Canada, an apology is not a legal admission of guilt. Perhaps the US should consider adopting this?

          4. If they don't already, every jurisdiction should have an independent investigative body for police involved deaths. These investigations should be well funded so that investigations can be completed quickly. No innocent police officer deserves to be under a cloud for long. Establish the facts, present the facts to the district attorney, and either lay charges or clear them as soon as possible.

          5. When officers are cleared of wrongdoing and charges are not to be filed, all the facts should be immediately released to the public.
          None of which answers the question.
          We hunt the hunters

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post

            None of which answers the question.
            Oh?

            Well, in the first case, I thought the answer was: Let him go. You know who he is, so no need to chase him once he starts running.

            In the second case the answer is: Don't kneel on the neck and back of a suspect for 8 minutes and 30 seconds.

            If the police had done everything except the kneel-on-the-neck-and-back-of-a-suspect-for-8-minutes-and-30-seconds part, we likely wouldn't be having this discussion.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by DingBat View Post

              Oh?

              Well, in the first case, I thought the answer was: Let him go. You know who he is, so no need to chase him once he starts running.

              In the second case the answer is: Don't kneel on the neck and back of a suspect for 8 minutes and 30 seconds.

              If the police had done everything except the kneel-on-the-neck-and-back-of-a-suspect-for-8-minutes-and-30-seconds part, we likely wouldn't be having this discussion.
              What does that have to do with the question?
              We hunt the hunters

              Comment


              • #8
                What is being ignored in this discussion is that a large segment of the population for a variety of reasons are intellectually, emotionally, or due to mental illness not able to care for themselves. They become addicted to drugs or adopt criminal lifestyles for other reasons. The vast majority of these are not minorities and are represented across the social economic spectrum.
                We hunt the hunters

                Comment


                • #9
                  The Arbery case doesn't really apply, the two who killed him were not police officers, one had been an investigator and was once a deputy sheriff, but they were the guy who pulled the trigger was the son who had no police training.
                  The issue with that case is the investigation by the local agency and the prosecutor.
                  When a officer, or officers are sent to the scene of a crime, as in the case of Floyd (going by the limited information we have, as we don't have the transcript of the conversation between Floyd and the officers), what are they to do when the suspect is combative, uncooperative and under the influence of meth and fentanyl?
                  If you have never had to deal with such a situation, its's not nearly as fun as it sounds. And as Floyd had been a long time user who had struggled with drugs most of his life, his health would be compromised and they are not rational.

                  So how does an officer take control of chaotic situations without doing so?
                  Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
                    The Arbery case doesn't really apply, the two who killed him were not police officers, one had been an investigator and was once a deputy sheriff, but they were the guy who pulled the trigger was the son who had no police training.
                    The issue with that case is the investigation by the local agency and the prosecutor.
                    When a officer, or officers are sent to the scene of a crime, as in the case of Floyd (going by the limited information we have, as we don't have the transcript of the conversation between Floyd and the officers), what are they to do when the suspect is combative, uncooperative and under the influence of meth and fentanyl?
                    If you have never had to deal with such a situation, its's not nearly as fun as it sounds. And as Floyd had been a long time user who had struggled with drugs most of his life, his health would be compromised and they are not rational.

                    So how does an officer take control of chaotic situations without doing so?
                    I think we should move on past the Floyd case because it is an example of an aberration. Most cops albeit to many are not as miserable as the officer in the Floyd case. I wouldn't be surprised if he had a drug problem (alcohol) himself.
                    We hunt the hunters

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post

                      What does that have to do with the question?
                      Do you still beat your wife? Aka loaded question. The riots are not about how police respond to combative, non-compliant suspects. It's more about the fact that apparently all who come their way , peacefully or not, are to be seen as combative, non-compliant suspects no matter what, and to be treated with extreme police brutality if necessary. US cops are like the archtype of a bully.
                      Wisdom is personal

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Karri View Post

                        Do you still beat your wife? Aka loaded question. The riots are not about how police respond to combative, non-compliant suspects. It's more about the fact that apparently all who come their way , peacefully or not, are to be seen as combative, non-compliant suspects no matter what, and to be treated with extreme police brutality if necessary. US cops are like the archtype of a bully.
                        Respectfully, that is an exaggeration,. And it is actually about how police deal with suspects who resist and are combative.
                        Few people are treated with extreme brutality, but arguing that point is futile.
                        But the question remains. How should officers respond to combative suspects?
                        I can tell you from personal experience, situations can escalate and spin out of control in an instant, an officer has to make judgement calls in a fraction of a second,.
                        Three times I have watched as one person took on six or more officers, in one case the suspect broke a pair of handcuffs, and was tossing cops around like rag dolls, I have watched a suspect take a night stick (baton) right to the jewels and laugh before clawing an officers face..
                        So, what would you do?
                        Last edited by Urban hermit; 06 Jun 20, 23:52.
                        Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Karri View Post

                          Do you still beat your wife? Aka loaded question. The riots are not about how police respond to combative, non-compliant suspects. It's more about the fact that apparently all who come their way , peacefully or not, are to be seen as combative, non-compliant suspects no matter what, and to be treated with extreme police brutality if necessary. US cops are like the archtype of a bully.
                          What does that have to do with the question?

                          He is simply asking how do you safely restrain people who are a danger to themselves and others. People that in many cases are physically stronger than the people trying to safely subdue them.

                          Among other things not being considered is that many people the police have to deal with are on drugs or are mentally ill. Then there are domestic disturbances that are very dangerous for officers. In most places police are required by law to subdue the male partner in domestic disturbances.

                          Police brutality is a separate issue.
                          We hunt the hunters

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
                            There seems to be no shortage of armchair know it all's in the past 11 days of rioting. So let's cut to the chase and hear just how you would recommend police respond to combative, non compliant suspects who resist arrest regardless of color.
                            Que up, pepper spray? Batons ? Tasers? Hugs? Free Beer?
                            Verify and substantiate the 'suspicion' with evidence and arrest without killing, same as everywhere else.

                            Bunch of drama queens, you're like a nation full of Ljadws
                            Lambert of Montaigu - Crusader.

                            Bolgios - Mercenary Game.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Karri View Post

                              Do you still beat your wife? Aka loaded question. The riots are not about how police respond to combative, non-compliant suspects. It's more about the fact that apparently all who come their way , peacefully or not, are to be seen as combative, non-compliant suspects no matter what, and to be treated with extreme police brutality if necessary. US cops are like the archtype of a bully.




                              I've been on 'riot' duty for the last 7 days. I've had some interesting conversations with protesters. I've been in full kit the whole time. I haven't so much as touched anyone.

                              Lumping 'the police' together.....is precisely the same thing as pointing at the local news crime report and saying 'see....black people are bad' just because a bunch of gangbangers decided to go shoot up a house.

                              I've been rather vocal about big city departments, and unions. Ironically, some of the worst police departments in the country sit squarely in the middle of the most left-leaning cities. Smaller, mid-size departments, which are small enough to have accountability and large enough to have a training budget worth a damn, are the best overall.
                              Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X