or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › WTF over-zealous police?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

WTF over-zealous police? - Page 401

post #6001 of 6082
Are not police and military given extensive training to help them overcome these issues? If someone is using this as a defense for a killing I would say that he/she is also saying I'm not fit to ever serve again. I mean, one killing is understandable, right?

Also, still saying the claim of sensory loss therefore could not hear sirens means she cannot simultaneously say he said something to trigger the killing.
post #6002 of 6082
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post

My comment was that in stressful environments such as shootings, people claim sensory loss.  Even books written by soldiers talk about how they couldn't even hear the gun shots or noticed they were shot/hit by fragmentation.  I don't find it hard to believe that someone who has never been in a shooting claims to have sensory loss due to the high stress/adrenaline rush. 

Then it was just semantics - never mind. fing02[1].gif
post #6003 of 6082
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Also, still saying the claim of sensory loss therefore could not hear sirens means she cannot simultaneously say he said something to trigger the killing.

Your argument is just so bizarre, I don't know where to start. Have you never focused your eyesight on something and missed something else within your field of vision? Are you conscious of the sensation of feeling of your entire skin at all times? What were you tasting five seconds ago? How 'bout smelling?

Hearing can be focused just like all the other senses. Haven't you ever heard of tuning something out?
post #6004 of 6082
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ataturk View Post

Your argument is just so bizarre, I don't know where to start. Have you never focused your eyesight on something and missed something else within your field of vision? Are you conscious of the sensation of feeling of your entire skin at all times? What were you tasting five seconds ago? How 'bout smelling?

Hearing can be focused just like all the other senses. Haven't you ever heard of tuning something out?

"Part of what made me shoot the man and kill him was I had temporary deafness and could not hear the multiple cruiser sirens blasting in to back me up. I thought I had no backup due to this temporary deafness. I did however hear the dead man say, "I'm reaching into my vehicle to get a gun and shoot you" which is why I decided I needed to shoot him first."

Yeah, it's a completely plausible narrative.
post #6005 of 6082
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

If someone is using this as a defense for a killing I would say that he/she is also saying I'm not fit to ever serve again.
 

I agree with this part - if something like this has been known to happen to you, out of safety and security for our citizens, you cannot be on the beat again (maybe you can ride a desk). 

post #6006 of 6082
Quote:
Originally Posted by venividivicibj View Post

I agree with this part - if something like this has been known to happen to you, out of safety and security for our citizens, you cannot be on the beat again (maybe you can ride a desk). 

That works until you and someone else decide to get Chinese carry out and then you shoot a fellow officer on the way back to the office.
post #6007 of 6082
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Are not police and military given extensive training to help them overcome these issues? If someone is using this as a defense for a killing I would say that he/she is also saying I'm not fit to ever serve again. I mean, one killing is understandable, right?

Also, still saying the claim of sensory loss therefore could not hear sirens means she cannot simultaneously say he said something to trigger the killing.

 

Sure they are, but again, read books like Red Platoon or any of the books written by SEALs and many of them write about sensory loss.  I think that is unavoidable.  What is or at least should be avoidable is the bad decision making.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rumpelstiltskin View Post
 

 

I would think the person facing the gun barrel would have a spike in stress, not the person with the deadly weapon in control of the situation

 

Have you even held a gun?  I can easily imagine how someone pointing a gun at someone else would get a huge adrenaline and/or stress bump from doing so.

post #6008 of 6082
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

That works until you and someone else decide to get Chinese carry out and then you shoot a fellow officer on the way back to the office.

Sounds like systemic culinary racism to me.
post #6009 of 6082
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawyerdad View Post

Sounds like systemic culinary racism to me.

Worse yet, Prezbo is white and the cop he shot was black.
post #6010 of 6082
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Worse yet, Prezbo is white and the cop he shot was black.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

I don't get it. Why don't they 'cuff the dead guy?
post #6011 of 6082
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDFS View Post

I don't get it. Why don't they 'cuff the dead guy?

That's how the roll in the West Side.
post #6012 of 6082
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post
 

 

Have you even held a gun?  I can easily imagine how someone pointing a gun at someone else would get a huge adrenaline and/or stress bump from doing so.

 

Yes I have held a gun but I have never pointed it at anyone.  I have also had a gun pointed at my head and believe you me it was much more stressful situation when I was moments away from dying.  


Edited by Rumpelstiltskin - 10/4/16 at 5:17pm
post #6013 of 6082

Judge rules a no-knock raid with ~30 SWAT which resulted in a charge of drug possession in the 5th degree, unconstitutional.

 

What's interesting is a judge signed the warrant.  I'm surprised to see the charge will be invalidated.  I don't think what the police did was reasonable or necessary, but how were his 4th amendment rights violated if a judge signed off on the no-knock search warrant?

http://www.startribune.com/judge-says-county-search-was-unconstitutional/396326211/

post #6014 of 6082
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post

Judge rules a no-knock raid with ~30 SWAT which resulted in a charge of drug possession in the 5th degree, unconstitutional.

What's interesting is a judge signed the warrant.  I'm surprised to see the charge will be invalidated.  I don't think what the police did was reasonable or necessary, but how were his 4th amendment rights violated if a judge signed off on the no-knock search warrant?

http://www.startribune.com/judge-says-county-search-was-unconstitutional/396326211/

...and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause...

Also, I only skimmed, but one could have a warrant that's valid as issued but still find that the police acted unreasonably in the way they executed the search. If, for example, they burst in with 30 SWAT commandos when there appeared to be no need for such intrusive and dangerous force. Not that that would ever happen.
post #6015 of 6082
Quote:
Jim Franklin, the executive director of the Minnesota Sheriffs’ Association, said Bransford’s ruling was dangerous and limited the ability for police to protect themselves when going into potentially dangerous situations.

“My question to her is: Are you going to attend the dead cop’s funeral?” he said.

Standard reply.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › WTF over-zealous police?