41–50 of 123 posts
I'd personally trust that far more than Facebook.
[1] https://www.aclu.org/feature/aclu-apps-record-police-conduct
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The police could have left her alone and come back later. They were in her house, and she was only threatening to harm the officers, not her child.
Again, I love that Monday morning quarterbacking. Crazed gunman? Come back later. Crazed gunman with a kid? Come back later. Crazed fugitive gunman with a warrant out, with a kid, threatening to kill police? Let them settle down, come back later. There was outrage in my town over a standoff with a guy (with kids) who was having attempted to be served on him by the cops for the dozenth time after a year on the lam, fo…
It's also worth thinking about what factors lead someone to become "crazed", and whether killing them is the right way to deal with the problem.
Tragic and unfortunate, all around. I wonder what FB's policy on this will be going forward. In many ways, these livestreams are a public good and provide transparency and additional accountability in these situations. If people elect to stream them, it seems wrong to shut it down. On the other hand, perhaps there is a public good in not showing an ongoing live police operation? I think I'd lean toward not agreeing t…
> perhaps there is a public good in not showing an ongoing live police operation? Fair enough, but maybe just delay any posts of an active operation, instead of censoring them?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The police could have left her alone and come back later. They were in her house, and she was only threatening to harm the officers, not her child.
Again, I love that Monday morning quarterbacking. Crazed gunman? Come back later. Crazed gunman with a kid? Come back later. Crazed fugitive gunman with a warrant out, with a kid, threatening to kill police? Let them settle down, come back later. There was outrage in my town over a standoff with a guy (with kids) who was having attempted to be served on him by the cops for the dozenth time after a year on the lam, fo…
Considering her followers were encouraging her to not give in to police demands, this was entirely justified.
I wonder if there was a way to resolve this standoff without her death. I.e. letting her shoot all the shotgun shells she has, or just waiting until she gets tired and slips up, gets hungry, etc. Yeah, it requires a lot of patience but hey, you can save a human life. I don't think she would have harmed her kid so waiting in cover seems like a relatively safe thing to do?
A [dead] poster commented this, but I think it bears repeating that there is an ACLU app specifically for recording police. [1] I'd personally trust that far more than Facebook. [1] https://www.aclu.org/feature/aclu-apps-record-police-conduct
Slight concern that the developer on ACLU's behalf is something called Quadrant 2, Inc, which seems to be owned by an individual operator as opposed to a larger established company. Not sure what the company's track record or policies are.
But just an aside there. This is cool to see and great to have as a reminder.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
if police are about to shoot, and have good cause to, then it would seem reasonable that they be allowed to use sleep gas or tranquilizer, similar to what doctors use during operation. Seems better than killing them. Downside could be lawsuites against the police for "damages" that the sleep gas caused.
As nice as it would be to have a reliable nonlethal alternative to firearms, there simply are no nonlethal weapons capable of stopping someone who is presenting an immediate threat. Tranquilizers and anesthesia are administered by an anesthesiologist, a doctor trained to determine a dosage based on a person's body mass. Too much of a dose, or even administering it too quickly can cause serious complications, or even…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Again, I love that Monday morning quarterbacking. Crazed gunman? Come back later. Crazed gunman with a kid? Come back later. Crazed fugitive gunman with a warrant out, with a kid, threatening to kill police? Let them settle down, come back later. There was outrage in my town over a standoff with a guy (with kids) who was having attempted to be served on him by the cops for the dozenth time after a year on the lam, fo…
Answer me this. Honestly. Is people getting served really more important than people's lives?
This seems entirely appropriate. It would be consistent with the practice of news outlets sometimes not showing an ongoing police operation live.
What is the rationale for news outlets not showing an ongoing police operation? Is it so that the suspects / perpetrators can't use the external information against the police? If so, does that rationale applicable when it is the suspect / perpetrator broadcast their own available information? I don't know the background for these policies, so asking the first question non-rhetorically.