Yeah. They probably believe rubbish like this:GMTom wrote:Nope, the problem is people who feel "entitled" and do not comply!
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Or
"No person shall ... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law"
So how do you get a seriously ill person, a deaf person or a severely autistic person to comply? Or someone under the influence of drink or drugs, even?Notice I said we would have FEW problems if they complied, there will always be a few problems of course, but the vast majority would simply go away.
Refusal to comply is not the same as being a deadly threat. And perhaps it's the assumptions that officers make that is the problem. If they are assuming greater threat than there really is, then they will overreact.Of course we all agree the two sides should work together, of course we agree force should be proportional, etc but the cop must assume some things and their life is on the line. What we have are those who refuse to listen to officers and are getting shot because of it.
So no suggestions from you as to how the police can improve trust in them individually and as a body? No suggestions that they use respect rather than fear? No looking into whether behaviour on the part of officers contributes to escalating situations from a simple traffic stop to violence?What do we do?
Get people to comply!
I would have no problem with educating people WHY they need to comply and the reasons for it, let it be known that citizens do have recourse for unlawful demands and the police are accountable but compliance is paramount. we currently have a lot of thugs who think they are above having to listen to an officer, they also have no problem assaulting an officer. That behavior will get you shot, armed or not yet they keep doing it and when harmed we hear how an unarmed man was shot by a cop, nothing more. Disobeying these orders does not give police carte blanche to do as they will, nobody ever said that but it certainly puts that person at risk of having serious consequences follow and depending on the circumstances, yeah, it could include being shot. Police sometimes go too far, absolutely and again, you have recourse for this!
How about moving away from traffic stops and increasing the use of cameras and other detection for speeding or minor offences?
It is not retaliation if it is pre-emptive.as far as the link and feeling the cops had 'stab proof" shirts...really?
You want to let them lunge at an officer before being stopped? I don't believe their faces are stab proof nor their necks, arms, legs, etc.
any sort of "armor" is for protection only and not meant to actually welcome attack. If a cop is wearing a bullet proof vest should he allow himself to be shot at before retaliating? ...absolutely not!
This may not be a popular position, but to me, the police have a job to protect society, including with their lives. Similar to soldiers. Of course we should not support cop killers. And any time someone kills a cop the law should be applied fully. When seven cops confront a guy with a knife, they have an upper hand even without guns. Don't self-defence classes include the scenario of having to deal with a knife wielding attacker any more?