our country needs a new type of firearm for police

if hit it would disable the person immediately, but not kill them.
perhps something combining a physical hit with a neuro toxin that causes fast paralysis.
so the suspect isnt able to hurt anyone else,
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/24/2016 5:09 AM, bob haller wrote:

If you are going to be a dreamer, why don't you just dream that people behave themselves?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/24/2016 8:29 AM, Taxed and Spent wrote:

Lot of stuff has been tried and police also carry tasers but even they have killed people who had heart attacks afterwards. It is a pipe dream.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/24/16 8:09 AM, bob haller wrote:

Fast paralysis would most likely also stop the muscles that control breathing. You would have a non-zero number who would be allergic, croak, and thus cause uproars. There is a certain small number of people who die from Tazers, mostly those with unknown (at least to the cop) heart problems, high on various things (interactions with street drugs would likely be another concern of neurotoxins). Heck even just having someone hold them down can cause heart attacks or positional asphyxiation. If there was such a thing, the Defense Department would be working on it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I saw on a TV drama once where the police fired a "bean bag" shotgun which knocked the person down and stunned them. Not knowing, would that be something viable for any initial assault.
I'm not a LE officer but those I know who are even think that the incidence of this action is out of control.
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/24/2016 10:05 AM, snipped-for-privacy@worthless.info wrote:

BS! In the Tulsa situation two different officers deployed weapons - one chose a gun the other the Taser. Not second guessing which was the correct choice, but that comment makes it seem the police are trying to kill someone rather than stopping a threat which is the intent (or should be). If the police WANTED to kill those people, the surest way would be to just ignore them and their calls for help when their neighbors turn on them.

Depends. I have a friend who was on scene commander at a barricade situation involving a looney tunes 70+ year old woman. This went on for weeks and they attempted to take her down (after she'd fired upon sheriff's deputies with a commitment order from the court) with a bean bag round. Apparently she watched the same TV drama and had wrapped and taped newspapers to her torso and extremities as a crude sort of body armor. Hit her with the bean bag in the chest and it didn't do much other than piss her off. (they eventually took her without injury)
Another one, within 6 miles of me involved a drugged out idiot who knifed a family member and was running around with a knife. He refused to stand still and cooperate and unfortunately when they fired the bean bag round he ducked rather than zag, took it in the head and was killed.
What people either forget or choose to ignore is that the streets are not a testing lab. The officer has a split second to react to the threat (real or perceived) and there normally is no time to try Plan B.

No doubt there are cases such as that. However, until all the facts are in and everything has been thoroughly analyzed the ones that you know - if they are speaking of either the Charlotte or Tulsa incident - should pour themselves a large cup of STFU and wait until the investigation is completed. It what they would want if they were in those officer's shoes. Either that or they are just idiots - Hey! It happens even in the best of departments.<g>
BTW, could the Tulsa quick charging wind up being nothing more than an effort to placate the BLM crowd? Like Baltimore? Will the charges stand? Will there be a conviction? Stay tuned.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/24/2016 8:25 AM, Unquestionably Confused wrote:

Both were the correct choice and they were used in the proper sequence. Now the question is whether they should have been used at all.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Saturday, September 24, 2016 at 11:25:46 AM UTC-4, Unquestionably Confused wrote:

+1
And in another recent incident, the shooting outside the convenience store in Louisiana, the police apparently first used a taser and for whatever reason, it wasn't effective. They wound up wrestling with the perp on the ground and then shooting him. The perp had a gun in his pocket. Taser's aren't perfect, they rely on a dart with a wire sticking in the perp. Faced with an imminent deadly threat, they are not the solution.

Exactly. That's why it's so difficult to convict a cop in one of these shootings. If I was on the jury, even if the cop made a mistake, I'd have a tough time finding them guilty when they have a split second to make a decision in a volatile, toxic, dangerous situation that they did not create. The perp created it.

+1

+1
That seems to be the safest route these days. Charge knowing you have no case, then let the jury acquit a year or two later, when things have cooled down. What leads one to suspect that could be the case in Tulsa is how quick the charges were brought. It's hard to imagine they did a full, fair investigation of all the evidence in that short period of time.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Per Bob F:

And the latest one - where the wife was shooting video while telling the cops that her husband was on some sort of medication.... I can't figure out why on earth the cops, at that point, couldn't have just backed off and waited for things to settle down... it's not like the guy had a pump-action shotgun and was firing at people.
Same with a 15-year-old girl recently: they handcuffed her, got her mostly into the car and then, when she refused to pull her feet inside the door, they maced her. Geeze..... How about you just step back and tell her than you're getting paid by the hour and she can lay there until the cows come home... but sooner or later she's going to get tired of it?
They seem heavily biased or trained towards exacting total immediate submission no matter what - and escalating force until they get it.
And how about the wacko hiding in the boat after planting the Boston Marathon bombs? They had him surrounded, there was no way in the world he was going anywhere... Nobody knew how many other bombs he had planted - so it would seem like a really, really, *really* good idea to take him alive and able to talk..... Instead they poured fire into that boat for at least 20 seconds.... by some miracle, he survived and was able to be questioned but it was just that: a miracle....... My impression of that whole thing was "Keystone Cops in action".
--
Pete Cresswell

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/24/2016 9:35 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:

Just released information though, reveals a gun. You may want to hold off on your opinion. Video does not show him pointing it, but the gun had his fingerprints and dna on it.

Why was she arrested? I don't recall the case but it is easy to give your solution sitting at the keyboard. Don't know what was justified.

They have priorities, such as protecting their lives and others nearby. They are at risk while the perp is free to react in a negative way.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/24/2016 8:35 PM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:

Yeah. I agree with you!
--
Maggie

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 09/25/2016 04:34 AM, Muggles wrote:

Yah, just read a couple bible verses to the perp and they'd immediately confess and surrender.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Per Crybaby Liberal:

I think you are missing the points:
- There may have been more pressure bombs ready to go off.
- The wacko in the boat would know where those bombs were.
- It would be important to extract the location of those bombs from the wacko in the boat.
- The wacko in the boat was already totally under control of the I-don't-know-how-many (hundreds?) of armed LEOs surrounding the boat: he didn't need to surrender, he was already "Had".
- Killing the wacko in the boat would prevent extracting that information about the location of other bombs.
I note that the recent incident in NYC resulted in the capture of the perpetrator alive instead of his death.
In the interviews I have watched, Bratton seemed to have his head screwed on better than most - a *lot* better IMHO...and I have to wonder if maybe he has drilled it into the NYPD cops that we want to interrogate these guys and not kill them outright.
--
Pete Cresswell

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Its easy to Monday morning quarterback. The guy shot in the car had a gun. If they backed off, then he drove off and people were killed in a high sp eed chase,or he shot someone,then what? The cops told him to drop the gun, he didn't. They had the advantage,they ended it right there when he present ed a deadly threat.
The girl, they could have handled it differently,but I'm surprised you thin k waiting hours for her to comply is an option. They aren't babysitters an d if she was my kid I'd tell her that i hope she learned a lesson.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Per trader_4:

Why would waiting not be an option - especially considering the downside of video/news exposure?
Without being on Candid Camera, who cares..... beat the crap out of her....nobody would know or, at least, you would have plausible deniability.
But on camera ? A soft approach would seem to be a no-brainer.
I keep saying it: "Rodney King was over 20 years ago.... Hasn't anybody caught on yet?"
--
Pete Cresswell

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That would require engaging his brain and that happens only on rare occasions.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The undeniable reason is that they are about 3 times more likely to commit a crime than whites.

You're the one that is blind to the facts.

This is just a guess... because they were breaking the law.

Please enlighten us how things are so wonderful in Germany with all of their Muslim refugees.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/25/2016 3:17 PM, Gordon Shumway wrote:

That will be considered by many to be a racist statement. There are some socio-economic reasons behind it though.
http://www.dailywire.com/news/7441/7-statistics-you-need-know-about-black-black-crime-aaron-bandler# According to Mac Donald, "A straight line can be drawn between family breakdown and youth violence."
As economist Thomas Sowell points out, before the 1960s "most black children were raised in two-parent families." In 2013, over 72 percent of blacks were born out of wedlock. In Cook County –which Chicago belongs to – 79 percent of blacks were born to single mothers in 2003, while only 15 percent of whites were born to single mothers.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/25/16 3:42 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

As do others. The important part being that the stats stay pretty much the same whether you are talking about white, black or other ethnicity. The controlling factor is intact or not household. This has also been steady since the 70s. Research by Sara McLanahan at Princeton University and others tells us that boys are significantly more likely to end up in jail or prison by the time they turn 30 if they are raised by a single mother. She found that boys raised in a single-parent household were more than twice as likely to be incarcerated, compared with boys raised in an intact, married home, even after controlling for differences in parental income, education, race, and ethnicity. Research on young men suggests they are less likely to engage in delinquent or illegal behavior when they have the affection, attention, and monitoring of their own mother and father.
Another researcher, Bruce Ellis of the University of Arizona found that single female head of household also had a negative impact on girls. About one-third of girls whose fathers left the home before they turned 6 ended up pregnant as teenagers, compared with just 5 percent of girls whose fathers were there throughout their childhood. The divide marrowed when controlled for parents’ socioeconomic background—but only by a few percentage points. The research on this topic suggests that girls raised by single mothers are less likely to be supervised, more likely to engage in early sex, and to end up pregnant compared with girls raised by their own married parents.
For a good discussion of the topic, I send you to Slate (hardly a mouthpiece for the Right). http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/07/single_motherhood_worse_for_children_.html
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Per Kurt V. Ullman:

Sometime later on in Viet-Nam, the government conscripted virtually all males over a certain age into the army.
The result was whole villages with virtually no men.
Out of that emerged a class of youths they called "Cowboys": young punks that pretty much ran the show.... similar, I guess, to gangs in certain American cities.
My anecdotal takeaway is that whenever you have male teenage kids, you need men to keep order.
--
Pete Cresswell

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.