(no subject)

Date: 2007-05-15 06:27 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] aimisdirty.livejournal.com
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).

(no subject)

Date: 2007-05-15 06:40 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ianhess.livejournal.com
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.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-05-15 06:55 pm (UTC)
ext_195307: (Evil)
From: [identity profile] itlandm.livejournal.com
The headline certainly gives off a different vibe from, say, "Police shoot knife-wielding maniacs".

(no subject)

Date: 2007-05-15 07:13 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] squizzlzilla.livejournal.com
surely one way of identifying the mentally ill could be a refusal to surrender when faced with deadly force?

just a thought. =D

(no subject)

Date: 2007-05-15 08:24 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kookiemaster.livejournal.com
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.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-05-18 01:21 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] atlasimpure.livejournal.com
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.

Profile

theweaselking: (Default)theweaselking
Page generated Jul. 18th, 2025 05:48 pm