All of the incidents in the article, which necessitated the use of deadly force, involved assaults with edged weapons. Anyone telling a law enforcement officer to negotiate with an aggressive person holding a knife is a fucking idiot.
Also, I've dealt with hundreds of violent mentally ill individuals at my present job. This includes people with homicidal ideations, and a number of people whose reality is just completely and utterly messed up. You can't negotiate a resolution with all of them (and we are only called in negotiate if the DOCTOR has already failed to).
I wasn't directing the angry ranting at you. "Jill Redden", on the other hand, is a "fucking idiot". She's a perfect example of the vast majority of Mental Health 'professionals' that we have to cope with. See below example, which comes up at least four times a week.
"Let's take the restraints off, guys. I mean, sure, he just tried to attack all of you and the nursing staff. But I'm sure he'll be fine now"
*Five minutes later, the panic alarm goes off again*
There was a government study some years ago that has been used as a training point with law enforcement and some military personnel. The study looked at situations where a skilled knife fighter started X number of feet away from a person with a gun. The situation was repeated with the gun pointed at the knife wielder, with the gun drawn but in a lowered, relaxed position, and with the gun still in the holster. The study came up with some larger than expected ranges at which a person with an edged weapon could kill or cripple the gunman in each scenario.
I was told that these findings formed the basis for a somewhat blanket ruling for the people trained. If you see a person with a knife and they start to do anything threatening within about 30 feet, shoot them, or get cut up.
Of course there are alot of variables about skill, weapon length, the comparative reaction speeds and fitness levels, distractions, lighting that can be debated after the fact in shootings like these.
Yeah. One of the major issues is with a lot of people not shooting well enough under stressful conditions. You have to dump a decent amount of lead into the CVT of a bad guy to them down, when you're using pistols. Doing that quickly, on a moving target, before they're on top of you is something that even extremely well trained individuals would have a hard time with.
When you compare how long it takes for an average person to cover a distance of 30 feet at a sprint, and then how long it takes someone to /accurately/ put half of their mag on said target... Well... Yeah.
This is going to sound highly politically incorrect but I've always wondered why they don't use dart guns in situations when the person is just there, not holding a knife to someone's neck just menacing people at a distance with a gun? Just pump some fast acting muscle relaxant in there and shoot the person into unconsciousness instead of killing them ... then back off waiting for it to take effect ... similar to a taser I guess but perhaps more accurate from a long distance.
There is always the risk of killing the person from a bad reaction but it sure beats five bullets in the chest.
"Fast acting" isn't, not in a crisis situation. Not from a sub-q dart, anyway. And using fast acting drugs that need intraveinous injection is a non-starter for a dart gun, where you have no idea whether it's going to hit a vein, a fleshy bit, or the guy sitting next to him.
-- Steve advocates taser use instead of lethal force, but knows it's controversial.
Too complex and unreliable. Using a dart gun with a sedative would put the LEO and any bystanders in danger, since no one just falls over right away.
The issue with things like tasers and other LTL, is that they are not perfect. In the use of force continuum, an attacker armed with a knife or a gun has escalated the situation to the point where lethal force is necessary to preserve the lives of the LEO or others.
In training, it is important to drill into the heads of law enforcement the importance of drawing the right tool at the right time. If you start telling them to immediately pull tasers, tranq guns, or another LTL tool in response to an attacker with a knife - then LEO's will start to get killed. I can cite one example that happened in the last month, in Ottawa, where a police officer was slashed with a knife because he deployed a baton instead of his pistol. Luckily, his backup was present. If they weren't, it could have ended very badly.
In situations where there is time to cordon off the area, and the guy with the taser is being covered by multiple people with firearms, then it is appropriate (in some circumstances) to make an effort to save the life of the bad guy.
"Berzerks" are frequently capable of ignoring or severely suppressing the effectiveness of some seriously hard-core sedatives. We're talking "lift a car" strong while on enough Thorazine to kill most normal people.
Honestly, I'm much of the opinion that those declared legally insane by reason of inability to control violent urges are best put down.
If a dog goes nuts and bites someone, we kill it. If a mentally handicapped person with a history of violent encounters flips out and stabs 5 people...we put him in a straitjacket and give him ic cream so he'll stop crying. Hell, in many cases, I think that keeping them alive is a greater act of cruelty.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-15 06:27 pm (UTC)Also, I've dealt with hundreds of violent mentally ill individuals at my present job. This includes people with homicidal ideations, and a number of people whose reality is just completely and utterly messed up. You can't negotiate a resolution with all of them (and we are only called in negotiate if the DOCTOR has already failed to).
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-15 06:33 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-15 07:46 pm (UTC)"Let's take the restraints off, guys. I mean, sure, he just tried to attack all of you and the nursing staff. But I'm sure he'll be fine now"
*Five minutes later, the panic alarm goes off again*
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-15 06:40 pm (UTC)I was told that these findings formed the basis for a somewhat blanket ruling for the people trained. If you see a person with a knife and they start to do anything threatening within about 30 feet, shoot them, or get cut up.
Of course there are alot of variables about skill, weapon length, the comparative reaction speeds and fitness levels, distractions, lighting that can be debated after the fact in shootings like these.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-15 07:53 pm (UTC)When you compare how long it takes for an average person to cover a distance of 30 feet at a sprint, and then how long it takes someone to /accurately/ put half of their mag on said target... Well... Yeah.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-15 06:55 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-15 07:13 pm (UTC)just a thought. =D
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-15 08:24 pm (UTC)There is always the risk of killing the person from a bad reaction but it sure beats five bullets in the chest.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-15 09:06 pm (UTC)-- Steve advocates taser use instead of lethal force, but knows it's controversial.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-15 10:40 pm (UTC)The issue with things like tasers and other LTL, is that they are not perfect. In the use of force continuum, an attacker armed with a knife or a gun has escalated the situation to the point where lethal force is necessary to preserve the lives of the LEO or others.
In training, it is important to drill into the heads of law enforcement the importance of drawing the right tool at the right time. If you start telling them to immediately pull tasers, tranq guns, or another LTL tool in response to an attacker with a knife - then LEO's will start to get killed. I can cite one example that happened in the last month, in Ottawa, where a police officer was slashed with a knife because he deployed a baton instead of his pistol. Luckily, his backup was present. If they weren't, it could have ended very badly.
In situations where there is time to cordon off the area, and the guy with the taser is being covered by multiple people with firearms, then it is appropriate (in some circumstances) to make an effort to save the life of the bad guy.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-18 01:23 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-05-18 01:21 am (UTC)If a dog goes nuts and bites someone, we kill it. If a mentally handicapped person with a history of violent encounters flips out and stabs 5 people...we put him in a straitjacket and give him ic cream so he'll stop crying. Hell, in many cases, I think that keeping them alive is a greater act of cruelty.