morriswalters wrote:The thing is this. However you say this, however you might think about it. Once they put on a gun, this is going to happen. He didn't beat the kid with a pipe, nor is it likely that he would have. That's BS and you know it. It's a distraction. It implies that he went there with murder in his mind. Nothing I read indicates that is true. If this is how you see it fine, more power to you. Just one more point. Emptying your gun is a sign of poor training.Tyndmyr wrote:I doubt the rate of kids killed would be at zero even if the police lacked guns. This same guy, in this same situation, with a club instead, dya think he'd have used it? Probably. Do you think he would have shown restraint and only hit a little bit? Well...he fired eight bullets. I'm gonna go with no. Also, those suckers break bones. You have only to read through this thread to find other instances of police brutality where firearms were uninvolved. Removing firearms will NOT set these incidents to zero.
Why is it BS? I've already pointed out that this very topic includes instances of police using unjustified violence without firearms. I also note that you changed it to pipe. I said club because billy clubs, batons, etc are police issued weapons. Pipes are not. Changing the example to make it ridiculous is a poor argument.
Emptying your gun is not necessarily a sign of poor training. I see no indication that he was lacking in training. I see plenty of indication that his mentality was uncomfortably aggressive.
And yeah, enforcement on police seems to trend towards leniency and a lack of unaccountability. This would seem to give the aggressive attitude more room to become a problem.