Talk:Police

Weapons

I'm not sure I'd really consider taser misuse to be a major issue in the U.S., certainly in comparison with deadly force. To complicate the latter, there are "arms race" situations, exemplified by a pair of Los Angeles bank robbers that wore bullet-resistant vests and carried automatic rifles. (no, not "assault rifles"). There is also a huge discussion about high-speed car chases in less than life-and-death situations, which frequently get out of control.

More than the weapons is the issue of training. I've known police that do no more than fire their annual or semi-annual target qualification, and never touch their guns. In contrast, a high-quality hostage rescue member may fire a hundred rounds a day, in a stress training environment where constant decisions have to be made if a given person is a threat or an innocent. Many, if not most, U.S. police shootings take place at a range of a few feet, often with both parties missing each other.

There are both philosophical and operational questions about the use of guns. Warning shots rarely make a difference. The FBI used to have the rule, "never draw your weapon unless you intend to fire; never fire unless you intend to kill." In the antiterrorist role, once the decision is made to fire on a potential suicide bomber, the reality is that overkill is necessary to prevent triggering a device. Howard C. Berkowitz 01:08, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, on the taser stuff - I just happen to read a blog that complains about taser abuse quite a bit. I'm not sure how prevalent a problem that is - I'll leave that to your judgment. Certainly over here, the de Menezes killing brought some pretty big questions into the public eye about shoot-to-kill in terrorism situations and how quickly the command structure can respond when they see someone they think is a suicide bomber wandering towards a train carriage. We should probably have a section or a page where the various weapons used in different countries can be listed. –Tom Morris 01:14, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

The problem is that if one does conclude a situation is a suicide bomber, the only realistic response is shoot to kill, and by head shot to defeat reflexes. This is why dedicated counterterror units train so intensively. A friend of mine is a U.S. Army public affairs specialist, but, when she was in Iraq, her unit made it a point of honor to take guard, casualty handling, and other tasks that headquarters troops could avoid. She was very eloquent in how she agonized, while on a checkpoint, whether to fire her machine gun at a speeding car; her instincts said it was civilian, and it was -- but she had decided that if it passed another checkpoint and got into car bomb range, she would shoot to kill. It's not easy. Howard C. Berkowitz 01:28, 25 June 2009 (UTC)