Should police officers act is someone is threatening them?

[Suburbia]

I want to know what the far left, some on the far left, and even some far-right libertarians feel on this.

Some on the far left and far right feel that you should "resist" a police officer and "fight back".

Apparently, a man in Crown Heights, Brooklyn (I know the area well) allegedly was pointing a pipe at police officers.

Should police officers act if someone is threatening them?

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

Look up the phrase “proportionate response”.

[Mr. Reactionary]

It depends on the skin color of the person threatening them.

[Green Line]

Do not second guess an officer.

[fluffypanther19]

Do not second guess an officer.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Look up the phrase “proportionate response”.

[ProudModerate2]

Look up the phrase “proportionate response”.

[MasterJedi]

It depends on the skin color of the person threatening them.

Sadly true, if you're white, and especially white in a middle to upper class neighborhood you'll likely be ok. If not you basically need to fully comply right away and have nothing in your hands at all and even then you might get shot and killed.

[GoTfan]

Look up the phrase “proportionate response”.

[Rookie Yinzer]

It's cute how police officers are allowed to be frightened and act irrationally, but citizens are supposed to be calm and collected when officers fling them around like rag dolls and curse in their face threatening to arrest them.

[Horus]

Look up the phrase “proportionate response”.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

I believe it should be a moral obligation for any police officer to place his or her safety secondary to the people they swore to serve and protect, regardless of the people involved at a given situation.  Police work is a very safe profession, especially in comparison to other forms of manual work, but in the United States cops put their own safety at the expense of innocent people who are disproportionately people of color.

Police in other countries rarely use deadly force against anyone, including armed perpetrators.  Here they'll kill you for holding a book or iPhone.  And the legal system protects them by design.

[ProudModerate2]

It's cute how police officers are allowed to be frightened and act irrationally, but citizens are supposed to be calm and collected when officers fling them around like rag dolls and curse in their face threatening to arrest them.

There is truth to this.
One thing I don't understand is that when they are stunning an individual, they expect you to "physically comply" to their commands (like put your arms out, or put them behind your back).
If you don't (cant),  they continue to zap you, and they start beating you or twisting you like a pretzel to get you into handcuffs (all while they are screaming "stop resisting!")

When you are being zapped by who knows how many volts, your body (and mind) are not in a position to "comply" with any orders. You have no control over what the body is doing. It's all a normal reaction for your body to "go crazy" (squirm) while being subjected to their portable-electric-chair.
So what the hell do they expect? I never understood this, and I see it all too often in videos that are released to the public.
(Are there any people in law enforcement, here in Atlas, that can explain this?)

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

It's cute how police officers are allowed to be frightened and act irrationally, but citizens are supposed to be calm and collected when officers fling them around like rag dolls and curse in their face threatening to arrest them.

There is truth to this.
One thing I don't understand is that when they are stunning an individual, they expect you to "physically comply" to their commands (like put your arms out, or put them behind your back).
If you don't (cant),  they continue to zap you, and they start beating you or twisting you like a pretzel to get you into handcuffs (all while they are screaming "stop resisting!")

When you are being zapped by who knows how many volts, your body (and mind) are not in a position to "comply" with any orders. You have no control over what the body is doing. It's all a normal reaction for your body to "go crazy" (squirm) while being subjected to their portable-electric-chair.
So what the hell do they expect? I never understood this, and I see it all too often in videos that are released to the public.
(Are there any people in law enforcement, here in Atlas, that can explain this?)

Victim blaming.

That's really all it is. I expect it's the sort of behavior you see in any abusive relationship. "Why are you making me hurt you!"

It's also a great example of the sad charade our legal system has become. Law officers (peace officers, haha) scream the magic words like "stop resisting" so that they can get away with abuse.

[Adam Griffin]

For all the talk about cops being brave and whatnot, the opposite is increasingly on display. It seems many cops in this country need to undergo extensive fear management training in order to perform their day-to-day duties...either that or pick a new profession.

How many times each month do we hear about somebody being shot or killed because they had something that - with even a cursory glance - clearly isn't a gun or bomb, because the cop went all Barney Fife in a split-second after they felt "threatened"?

Everyday people have to learn how to deal with fear and certainly don't get carte blanche to act out of line because they can't. Not only should cops not get an exception on this, they mustn't, as their job requires them to be able to handle fear effectively above and beyond what most deal with on a daily basis in order to do their jobs properly.

I thought one of the implicit understandings for anybody becoming a cop was that you might one day have to lay your life on the line in the name of law and order. Increasingly, it seems that many cops think others must lay their lives on the line if they dare cross their paths - even when they're completely innocent - all in the name of feeling safe while on the job.

[dead0man]

One problem here is that we only ever see cops acting horribly.  We don't see the millions of interactions cops have with Americans every day where cops DON'T just walk up and shoot a black guy holding a cell phone.  Of course everytime it happens is tragedy and the cops doing it should be punished, but it doesn't mean all cops always act the way you guys are describing.  Most cops are good people people doing the Lords work most of the time.

There are some huge problems with the system protecting bad cops, the Supreme Court added to th at this week as I pointed out here.  I think every cop should have multiple cameras on them and their cars.  I also think they should be given the benefit of the doubt in iffy situations because it is such a tough job....but, when they clearly screw the pooch (or shoot the pooch for no reason) they need to be fired, charged and jailed and not moved around to a different department like a pedophilic Catholic Priest.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I can't heavily fault the officers in this case. They'd been called in to deal with someone who'd been reported as acting dangerously with what might be a gun, and the guy pointed that metallic pipe thingy at them. I don't see it at all unreasonable that they would act under the presumption that it actually was a gun. At most, they might should've shown more restraint, but I certainly can't say they should've waited for him to actually fire his gun before shooting themselves.

[BoAtlantis]

I can't heavily fault the officers in this case. They'd been called in to deal with someone who'd been reported as acting dangerously with what might be a gun, and the guy pointed that metallic pipe thingy at them. I don't see it at all unreasonable that they would act under the presumption that it actually was a gun. At most, they might should've shown more restraint, but I certainly can't say they should've waited for him to actually fire his gun before shooting themselves.

Your logic would make sense if the reverse was allowed. Can a peaceful citizen do the same if a crazy police officer pointed a gun at him for no reason? You probably know the answer to that. So why, then, should citizens be expected to take the same risk that police officers must not take?

What happened to All Lives Matter? Self-defense rights in accordance to risk aversion apply to everyone.

[SteveRogers]

I can't heavily fault the officers in this case. They'd been called in to deal with someone who'd been reported as acting dangerously with what might be a gun, and the guy pointed that metallic pipe thingy at them. I don't see it at all unreasonable that they would act under the presumption that it actually was a gun. At most, they might should've shown more restraint, but I certainly can't say they should've waited for him to actually fire his gun before shooting themselves.

Your logic would make sense if the reverse was allowed. Can a peaceful citizen do the same if a crazy police officer pointed a gun at him for no reason? You probably know the answer to that. So why, then, should citizens be expected to take the same risk that police officers must not take?

What happened to All Lives Matter? Self-defense rights in accordance to risk aversion apply to everyone.

The legal right to self-defense does not extend to resisting arrest, even if the arrest is unlawful. The use of force against someone that one knows is a peace officer is only justified when the officer uses excessive force.
(That’s not me philosophizing. At least here in Texas that’s laid out explicitly in the self-defense statute).

[Associate Justice PiT]

I can't heavily fault the officers in this case. They'd been called in to deal with someone who'd been reported as acting dangerously with what might be a gun, and the guy pointed that metallic pipe thingy at them. I don't see it at all unreasonable that they would act under the presumption that it actually was a gun. At most, they might should've shown more restraint, but I certainly can't say they should've waited for him to actually fire his gun before shooting themselves.

Your logic would make sense if the reverse was allowed. Can a peaceful citizen do the same if a crazy police officer pointed a gun at him for no reason? You probably know the answer to that. So why, then, should citizens be expected to take the same risk that police officers must not take?

What happened to All Lives Matter? Self-defense rights in accordance to risk aversion apply to everyone.

The legal right to self-defense does not extend to resisting arrest, even if the arrest is unlawful. The use of force against someone that one knows is a peace officer is only justified when the officer uses excessive force.
(That’s not me philosophizing. At least here in Texas that’s laid out explicitly in the self-defense statute).

     As it happens, the state reserves a certain monopoly on force. Those acting with the consent of the state to preserve the rule of law also receive additional protections in the performance of their duties. It makes little sense for someone to want the state to enact various laws, but then not endue the executors of those laws with special protections for the police. Hence also why resisting arrest is a crime, even if you were doing nothing wrong when the officer decided to arrest you.

     Anyway, Ernest is right; based on what the police understood of the situation, their actions were fundamentally reasonable, and I am surprised that it took that many posts in this thread for someone to point it out. It is unfortunate that someone was shot and killed unnecessarily, but this isn't an Eric Garner-type case where the officers were clearly in the wrong.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Do not second guess an officer.

[Joey1996]

The trigger happy, poorly trained, racist meglomaniacs shouldn't have guns.

[Mr. Reactionary]

The trigger happy, poorly trained, racist meglomaniacs shouldn't have guns.

But how will the left overthrow Nazi Fascist Hitler Trump if they shouldn't have guns?

[Joey1996]

The trigger happy, poorly trained, racist meglomaniacs shouldn't have guns.

But how will the left overthrow Nazi Fascist Hitler Trump if they shouldn't have guns?

Voting him out of office?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I don’t think any reasonable person is arguing that officers shouldn’t act. The question is how they should act.