More infra promoters

On 8/5/2016 3:54 AM, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 13:34:02 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/2/2016 11:56 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:

On 8/1/2016 10:34 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
jbeattie writes:

We citizens have decided through our republican representatives that
cops should be given some slack when it comes to killing people. Now,
cops don't get a free pass -- they can't kill people willy-nilly with
ball-point pens like Jason Bourne or any character played by Liam
Neeson. They must follow the law and only kill according to the rules.
It's all about the rules.

What prevents them? Rules are great, enforcing them against the
enforcers is hard, and getting harder all the time.

Is there evidence that unjustified killings by cops has increased in
the past 50 years or so?

I'm not sure where you would find it. If you follow the Wikipedia link
that Mr. Beattie provided you'll see that US law enforcement has
resisted collecting statistics on the use of excessive force, although
legally required to do so.

My own intuition is that policing has always been a rough business, and
that the recent media interest is mostly due to the availability of
video.

Related: I'm pretty sure that the number of handguns in civilian
possession has increased. Many of those are in the possession of
rather unsavory characters, the kind police are forced to deal with.
Would that perhaps have an effect on the counts of people shot by
police?

I am afraid you are mistaken. Police may complain that they are
"outgunned", but there is little evidence of that. Most criminals, even
if armed to the teeth, would much rather be arrested than shot.

You might check out the following link:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoy...s-edition.html

http://goo.gl/EAJHqd

for some nice statistics and graphs on firearm-related police deaths in
the US. Those deaths have been falling consistently since the
mid-seventies.

That's good, but I was thinking of a different cause-effect chain. If
(say) the people pulled over by cops for certain offenses are more
likely to be carrying handguns (or are even perceived by cops to be more
likely to be carrying handguns) it seems to me that cops would be on
higher alert, so to speak. They'd be more likely to mistrust a person
who refused to show his hands, or who reached into his clothes or under
his seat.


As I thank I have mentioned, I knew a Maine State Policeman pretty
well and he was telling me about two instances that happened on the
Maine State Toll Road. In one case the guy in the auto jumped out,
knocked the cop on his butt, stole his gun and left him handcuffed to
a tree on the side of the road. In the second case the cop walked up
to the car and the guy in the car shot him and killed him.

I was told this as part of en explanation why I could expect a bit
more "formal" treatment from the State Police in the future.



That could both lead to more shootings of people who were unarmed, and
to shooting of people who actually were reaching for a weapon.

In the latter case, it would probably help reduce the number of cops
killed while on duty.

In the current climate, with well-publicized ambushes of police
occasionally popping up, I imagine a great many cops are very worried.
Some will be on hair trigger, so to speak. And even though we'd like
them to be perfect, I can understand their emotions.

For us non-criminals, the usual protocol for a traffic stop
is window open (regardless of weather), interior lights on,
hands splayed at top of steering wheel and license between
fingers. Whatever is charged can be adjudicated later, but
provoking a cop on the side of the road is inadvisable.
Police are not attacked every day, but those stories are
uppermost in his mind when he walks toward your car.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Fri, 05 Aug 2016 07:43:23 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 8/5/2016 3:54 AM, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 13:34:02 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/2/2016 11:56 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:

On 8/1/2016 10:34 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
jbeattie writes:

We citizens have decided through our republican representatives that
cops should be given some slack when it comes to killing people. Now,
cops don't get a free pass -- they can't kill people willy-nilly with
ball-point pens like Jason Bourne or any character played by Liam
Neeson. They must follow the law and only kill according to the rules.
It's all about the rules.

What prevents them? Rules are great, enforcing them against the
enforcers is hard, and getting harder all the time.

Is there evidence that unjustified killings by cops has increased in
the past 50 years or so?

I'm not sure where you would find it. If you follow the Wikipedia link
that Mr. Beattie provided you'll see that US law enforcement has
resisted collecting statistics on the use of excessive force, although
legally required to do so.

My own intuition is that policing has always been a rough business, and
that the recent media interest is mostly due to the availability of
video.

Related: I'm pretty sure that the number of handguns in civilian
possession has increased. Many of those are in the possession of
rather unsavory characters, the kind police are forced to deal with.
Would that perhaps have an effect on the counts of people shot by
police?

I am afraid you are mistaken. Police may complain that they are
"outgunned", but there is little evidence of that. Most criminals, even
if armed to the teeth, would much rather be arrested than shot.

You might check out the following link:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoy...s-edition.html

http://goo.gl/EAJHqd

for some nice statistics and graphs on firearm-related police deaths in
the US. Those deaths have been falling consistently since the
mid-seventies.

That's good, but I was thinking of a different cause-effect chain. If
(say) the people pulled over by cops for certain offenses are more
likely to be carrying handguns (or are even perceived by cops to be more
likely to be carrying handguns) it seems to me that cops would be on
higher alert, so to speak. They'd be more likely to mistrust a person
who refused to show his hands, or who reached into his clothes or under
his seat.


As I thank I have mentioned, I knew a Maine State Policeman pretty
well and he was telling me about two instances that happened on the
Maine State Toll Road. In one case the guy in the auto jumped out,
knocked the cop on his butt, stole his gun and left him handcuffed to
a tree on the side of the road. In the second case the cop walked up
to the car and the guy in the car shot him and killed him.

I was told this as part of en explanation why I could expect a bit
more "formal" treatment from the State Police in the future.



That could both lead to more shootings of people who were unarmed, and
to shooting of people who actually were reaching for a weapon.

In the latter case, it would probably help reduce the number of cops
killed while on duty.

In the current climate, with well-publicized ambushes of police
occasionally popping up, I imagine a great many cops are very worried.
Some will be on hair trigger, so to speak. And even though we'd like
them to be perfect, I can understand their emotions.

For us non-criminals, the usual protocol for a traffic stop
is window open (regardless of weather), interior lights on,
hands splayed at top of steering wheel and license between
fingers. Whatever is charged can be adjudicated later, but
provoking a cop on the side of the road is inadvisable.
Police are not attacked every day, but those stories are
uppermost in his mind when he walks toward your car.

Years ago I was stopped by a cop. I was in the Air Force, going home
on leave and was at the end of a long line of cars traveling at less
than the speed limit. Passed a State Trooper and as I went past the
lights came on, and he roared out in pursuit. I pulled over and he
stopped behind me. When he got out he was in the sort of blind spot
behind and to the left side of my car and when he came into my view he
had this humongous great cannon pointed at me. HANDS ON THE WHEEL!
DON'T MOVE! He pulled the door open, KEEP YOUR HANDS UP, OUT OF THE
CAR. UP AGAINST THE CAR!

As he was patting me down he must have seen my uniforms hanging in the
back of the car and asked if I was in the service and when I said I
was he asked what I was doing and when I told him I was going home on
leave he asked to see my leave orders and when I showed him the orders
he put the gun away and told me I could go.

Well, with the gun in the holster I got real brave and asked him what
he was doing with all this gun waving and all that and he told me that
about 20 minutes earlier some guy driving a green car had robbed a
convenience store "down the road" and shot two people. And, of course,
my car was green.

I really cannot remember what my immediate feelings were, relief I
suppose, but in retrospect I do not believe he acted improperly.
--
cheers,

John B.

On 08-05-2016 03:47, John B. wrote:
something like 11 years of New York police static tics. And I am able

I hope no static tics with a gun in hand. :-)
Damn auto-correct!


--
Wes Groleau