Topic: VOTE Are you offended by these police officers? (Read 1478 times)

The officer didnt know what to do at that exact moment when the woman swung her bat, so with a sudden impulse he shot her twice which later on, caused her death. What he did was wrong, shooting her wasnt the only option that he had, It could have been done without creating much casualties, like countering the bat with his hands or knocking it off her grip. She's a 66 year old woman for crying out loud and the officer's much stronger than the woman considering his age and the training that he has been through.

Not really because we are not on that very day that that incident happened.  We cannot judged the police officer based only on the report made because we are not on the place where that incident happened.  First what will be the motive of the police in the first place why he would do that.  It could really be possible that the woman will beat the police but I also think that shooting her is right.

They think they are above the law

You should research and you will get a better idea of what actually happened. Your first sentence is right, but from there you stray.

What he did was wrong. And no one is condoning a murder here. But you need to look at the circumstances. The police officer in question was inexperienced, and the lady was charging at him with a baseball bat. It was a split-second decision.

The only solution, is the same punishment for each person according to the law, regardless whether they have a badge or not.

If a person without a badge shoots somebody unnecessarily the law comes down hard on them. If a cop shoots somebody in the same situation there is generally no punishment.

If a person steals repeatedly then eventually they will face some punishment. If a cop steals there is almost no chance of punishment.

If a person commits a rape or similar crime they can trust absolutely they will be dealt with severely. If a police officer commits a rape he knows almost beyond doubt that he will never face any punishment.

If a person simply does a bad job at work, they will be fired. If a police officer cannot even do the simple tasks of that job, very often they are protected by a job security that does not exist in most other professions.

Police often use chaos. Perhaps this feature of their profession. Agree that every day they are faced with the outrage against themselves. Perhaps in this case manifested in an inadequate response. Probably to serve in the police force needs a few years and then send another job. Then such cases will be less.

LOL

A policeman shots a 66 years old lady to death and some people try to defend that???

If the guy isn't able to handle hand to hand a 66 years old lady with a baseball bat the correct thing to do is to NOT LET HIM IN THE POLICE!

Stop defending murderers, the guy is guilty of willingfull homicide and that's all.

Police in all climes of the society have several excesses on their hands and its even worse in countries like mine where police officers response to being angry is to shoot at the slightest provocation and there is nothing that can happen. What follows is a plea to the deceased family member especially if they are from the low income earners and try to bribe then to drop the case after all killing or sentencing the officers cannot bring back the dead. This and many other reasons will create a gap between the police and the entire populace. I commend the doggedness of the people to ensure justice is served.

Yep, highly offended by police brutality.

The lady was no physical threat.

There was zero chance of her doing any physical damage whatsoever to any of the cops.

Zapping her with a tazer would have been as enjoyable to the cop as killing her though and he would have faced less paid vacation.

Taze them. They have those right? If not then they should.

In cities where police receive much higher salaries than they as individuals could otherwise receive, their focus is on keeping their job rather than doing their job. They often form gangs to protect themselves from losing their job, and actually doing what they are paid to do falls far down in terms of priorities.

As for getting money so they won't take bribes, the nypd is probably known for stealing more than for anything else. Almost any object of value at any crime scene will disappear when cops arrive in many cases, and most people in nyc know cops steal a lot.

1) It is a myth that police work in the United States is dangerous. There are housing projects where it is 100 times more dangerous to be a resident than to be a police officer in the worst city. Being poor and/or homeless is dangerous, being a cop is not. Truck drivers have higher mortality than cops in the U.S.

2) In many U.S. cities police avoid areas with crime and react very slowly when sent to a crime, so they don't get hurt. Chicago is famous for being one of the most violent U.S. cities at the moment. Virtually every job category in Chicago is dangerous. If you are a barber you run the risk of being shot. If you are a cabbie you run the risk of being shot. If you are a bank teller you run the risk of being shot. There is only one job category in Chicago that has had zero fatalities in the last 5 years. Police officer. The last fatality on the Chicago Police department was December 2011. It is the safest job in that city and police officers run away whenever there is any danger at all.

   

I don't see how the amount of money NYPD cops recieve correlates with such an unfortunate incident
things happen,the police recieve strict instructions on how to behave in certain situations
that cop estimated amount of threat and acted accordingly,whether he used excessive force and is guilty or not
it is up to the judge and jury to decide or whatever,maybe internal investigation and no trial at all
IMHO the police officers MUST recieve good money so they can't be bribed or take their job lightly

The fact is that the situation is constantly different. Perhaps the new police did not understand the whole danger and thought that it was too big, because the police always meet armed bandits with whom they need to fight. And they need to initially react correctly. Every policeman is afraid of being late with the reaction. Therefore, he does not all act automatically. All accidents happen Just by chance.

Maybe not like, shoot them? I'm pretty sure a trained police officer should be able to handle a little old lady with a baseball bat. And even if she were Babe Ruth with that thing, I'm also pretty sure they could have restrained her, tased her, or even shot her non lethally. Basically, unless we are dealing with a trained, professional fighter in decent shape, firearm not= melee weapon. And this was a blunt, not a sharp.

If your mom got off her meds (hypothetical) or was startled awake by the sound of unknown men entering, and grabbed a bat to defend herself, well, I hope no one splatters her brain all over your living room carpet. You'll need new carpet, for one. New moms sold separately.

Edit: you mentioned a Taser in a later post. Still, stuff like this is a no brainer. Cops shouldn't be going into situations that passionately, and with that little situational awareness. If they were entering the residence, they should have been aware of who could possibly be there;; her condition would have been known and accounted for. The police behave like special forces nowadays is the problem. And the fact that they don't get prosecuted for shooting first.

React to what? A 66 year old woman, in her own apartment, having commited no crime. A bunch of guys bang into her apartment and address her aggressively. She has been robbed multiple times, probably including by police.

Would it be too much to tell the police to step back, just a few paces.

They were attacking her, she was not attacking them.

How much time they had to react? It depends on the experience and skills of the cops. Perhaps the cops in question were a bunch of inexperienced newbies? Ideally, they would have used a taser. But it is a tough call.

Most people who become police officers do it for two reasons.

1) They like the feeling of power, sometimes they word it as "I like to help", etc but the root of it is power.

2) They could not earn as much money in any other job. There are exceptions, but the vast majority of nypd officers would take at least a 50% pay cut if they went to the private sector.

---

If police officers were held to the same standards as other citizens, rather then a much lesser standard, I personally would not oppose giving them extra money, since they are more in a position to make mistakes, but the pay levels of some police departments, including the nypd, is far beyond reason and derived from extortion only.

I am not a fan of strict punishments for any nonviolent crimes, but honestly the nypd is famous for cooking cases and attacking innocent people. They need to eat their own food. There are literally thousands of nonviolent new yorkers whose lives were ruined for much less serious offenses, not to mention the statistically high number of innocent people they have done that to. You can argue this or that, but the bottom line is at least the same level of accountability for cops as they impose on others. That lady did not get much of a chance, and it isn't necessary to charge that cop full price, but if his buddies want to play some gangster punk bullshit I say burn them.