pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 7 replies \ @Public_N_M_E 13 Feb \ parent \ on: ABORTION and GUNS poll culture
So why is that not the absolute default? Non lethal rounds, it's called law enforcement not law, skip trial and execute. You don't need to use lethal force to neutralise an aggressor.
In the US, anyway, employing any firearm in the encounter is considered using deadly force…whether it kills or not. Doesn’t matter if you use a pink AR-15 or a ma deuce.
Non lethal is OK in a few situations, but not as a primary defensive tool.
Civilians and law enforcement both need the option of deadly force. If the threat is wearing explosives, armed, etc…do you think the people at Charlie Hebdo just failed to de-escalate?
reply
These are the not the normal types of daily situations.
Civilians don't want to end up in that situation, that's not a failure to de-escalate that's a failure to call in the right people. Those situations should be handled by professionals not some cop or a well meaning civvie.
My thoughts are that civilians in most (and yes there are extremes) circumstances either non lethal force would be sufficient or they're in over their heads and should find someplace else to be.
reply
Option of deadly force = truth
reply
This is the “shoot him in the leg” strategy advocated by progressives.
Have you seen the movie Heat (1995)? There is a bank robber scene that degenerates into a shoot out like the ok corral.
That scene was the inspiration for a similar shoot out in 1997 in Los Angeles.
reply
No I’m probably the only person that hasn’t seen Heat. I do remember the north Hollywood shootout. Demonstrated that shotguns are woefully underpowered for incapacitating anyone, especially if armored.
Now everyone has ceramic plates, so even 7.62 isn’t gonna do much without tungsten carbide AP. 8.6 blackout shows some promise for armor penetration though, I have yet to see a test.
reply
I meant to direct the bank shoot out question to @Public_N_M_E as an example of when law enforcement needs a lethal option. If are trying to kill you, a lethal weapon is necessary
reply
That is an example of an extreme event. These aren't common occurrences, and law enforcement isn't qualified to handle that. You call in professionals for that. Same as hostage situations. The issue isn't that not having the right guns in that situation was the problem. The problem was not having the right people with the right tools.
Where non lethal force is no longer enough... As a civilian you should no longer be involved. That's time to call in professionals. Those professionals are not average law enforcement.
reply