It's a cop's job to place themselves in harm's way

[SHRED]

If they can't do that without overreacting then they shouldn't be cops.

Pretty simple.

..

[msongs]

1. even given that its not in the top ten most dangerous jobs lol nt

[gladium et scutum]

5. True, but

Death or injury in logging, fishing, mining etc. are from inanimate objects. In police work your risk is that the person facing you is going to try and kill you.

[MindPilot]

10. I think the stats show that most police injuries and deaths

are motor vehicle accidents.

[gladium et scutum]

24. You are correct

in 2015, 92 police officers were killed in the line of duty. 52 died in traffic accidents. 42 died from gunshot wounds.

[ColemanMaskell]

29. 52+42=94 (not 92)

So there were no other causes of death at all -- just cars and guns? Hunh. Suprising.

[Glassunion]

44. I think they posted figures in mistake.

The #92 of total fatalities in 2015 is from a comparison of TY vs LY, using the Jan 1 to Sept 29 date range.

Total Fatalities for that time period last year is 92
Firearms Deaths = 29
Traffic = 38
Other = 25

Source: http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/

Not sure where their figures came from.

[NightWatcher]

2. And if cops are scared of black people, they should get a job at Panera.

It's full of nothing but white people and cops all day long.

[MindPilot]

3. That would explain the exceptional blandness of that place. n/t

[former9thward]

4. No it is not.

We don't ask anyone to put themselves in situations where they will be harmed.

[unblock]

6. speaking as a former emt who has rushed into dangerous situations, BULLSHIT!

[former9thward]

18. Were you ordered into a "dangerous situation"?

Sometimes I have violated safety procedures at work. That does not make it policy.

[unblock]

23. well i volunteered to *be* an emt, but once i made that decision,...

there were times when we'd get to a scene, we'd open the ambulance doors and there we were, smack in the middle of a situation where and unstable person was wielding a knife; or we entered a house to treat a patient and the family got beligerant; or the time when the patient *in the rig* assaulted me.

it's part of the job you sign up for.

same for firefighting, same for police.

if you can't handle that, don't sign up for the gig.

[Rex]

8. .

[former9thward]

16. .

[Rex]

17. Thankfully people put you in your place.

You must love being wrong all the time, that is the only explanation.

[former9thward]

20. Who "put me in my place"?

[DLevine]

9. Firefighters? nt

[former9thward]

14. Firefighters are not supposed to go into areas that they know

may collapse, etc. That some do is besides the point.

[Travis_0004]

32. They go into controlled situations

They have basically let buildings burn because it was far too dangerous to go inside. They will hit it from the outside kowing that it will be a total loss.

[MindPilot]

11. Military? n/t

[former9thward]

13. We don't ask our military to go on suicidal missions.

That is just the movies.

[MindPilot]

21. "in harm's way" and "suicidal missions" are two entirely different things...that's a big leap

Many things one has to do in the military, even in peacetime, are extremely dangerous.

[former9thward]

22. You have a very broad definition of "in harm's way"

I don't. With your definition there are hundreds or thousands of jobs it could apply to.

[Go Vols]

30. Would you consider this in harms way?

I did every day I was at work.
Saw 9 die in just one summer years ago.

[former9thward]

31. Is the employee properly tied off as OSHA requires?

I can't tell from the picture. If so he is not in harms way.

BTW where and when did "9 die in one summer". As someone who used to work for OSHA I follow occupational death statistics. Nine dying in one area in one occupation in a short time would have jumped off the page.

[Go Vols]

34. Dosen't look like he's tied off,as no one was most of my working lifetime.

The nine died between PCB,Fla and Perdido Key,Fla,and in B'ham,Ala in '82 or '83,.

I never saw OSHA on a job until the late '80s at the earliest.

[Go Vols]

36. Saftey man making a video here in '99

when a crane goes over killing 3 Ironworkers.I wasn't there,but shit happens(in harms way) if you are OSHA compliant or not.
The dead Ironworkers were compliant.

first 0.30 sec is enough.

[Stinky The Clown]

27. Firefighter much?

[LanternWaste]

38. Creative, though inaccurate bumper-sticker you've made.

Creative, though inaccurate bumper-sticker you've made. I hope the font makes up for its lack of truthfulness.

[MindPilot]

7. I wish that in my job if someone frightened me,

I could just put a bullet in their head and then go on a paid vacation.

Actually no I don't; but then I have no desire to be an authoritarian.

[branford]

12. No one has to expose themselves to needless or gratuitous deadly risk.

Police officers don't need to be shot before defending themselves, real life is not like television and the movies, and we have a well-established body of jurisprudence concerning when and under what conditions an officer may use deadly force to protect themselves or the public.

Under what circumstances do you believe a police office can employ force, lethal or otherwise?

Define "overreacting," and provide some context or examples.

I used to have a similar attitude about encounters between police and the public. However, I then studied the subject in a professional capacity when I worked for the National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice, prior to law school. In addition to general criminal justice and law enforcement policy and tactics research, I participated in a number of different ride-along programs in both Washington, D.C. and New York City. The experiences were enlightening, and solidly put to bed ignorant stereotypes and assumptions about police officers and expectations of law enforcement. Most officers are neither saints nor psychopaths, heroes or villains. However, they are not suicidal, and despite your protestations, there will never be a policy implemented to achieve such an end.

[Rex]

15. Wow hyperbole much? Who mentioned suicidal?

Cops take a job that promises to put them in harms way, sometimes daily. If they cannot mentally handle the job, then they need to get lost and let someone more qualified do the task.

[mythology]

37. But you haven't defined the terms

You haven't defined what you mean by "in harm's way". You haven't defined what you mean by mentally handle the job.

You assume everybody knows/agrees with your definition of what those things mean.

I think you also greatly underestimate the role that our larger societal biases play in why cops think black guys are such a threat. Somebody the other day posted that in preschool black males are substantially more likely to be suspended than white males. Repeated studies have shown that all people are more likely to perceive a gun if shown a black face followed by a tool or a gun and the inaccuracy goes up in time controlled studies. That bias is there long before somebody becomes a cop.

http://www.psych.uncc.edu/pagoolka/cdps287.pdf

[Flyboy_451]

25. sounds pretty simple...

but it's not. "Suicide by stupid" is an unrealistic expectation of law enforcement. Putting one's self in harms way is very different from assuming risks that are disproportionate to benefits and good sense.

Personal risk on the job is a sliding scale. Actions and reactions of all parties involved in a situation move the weighting of that scale. Priority of life in any given situation is fluid. Using Keith Scott as an example, if all of the information we now know about Mr. Scott were known by the officers at the time of the altercation (convicted violent felon, subject of a restraining order, felon in possession of a firearm and a controlled substance, etc.) would you truly expect the approach method used to be the same as for a well known, liked and respected civic leader?

It's perfectly likely that the officers had called in his license plate prior to approaching and were aware of his background. It's pretty much standard procedures for every department I am aware of, to advise dispatch of pending interactions unless it is a unexpected/surprise event, and attempt to find out who you may be dealing with prior to initiating contact. IF this was done, and they had information on his background, the priority of life scale is not in favor of Mr. Scott.

Failing to comply with repeated and clear instructions to drop a weapon and then exiting his vehicle with weapon in hand (if that is what happened) pushes that scale even further away from favoring Mr. Scott. Eventually, priority of life tips fully in favor of the officers and reaches the zero point for a suspect in such situations.

In contrast, if Mr. Scott were the innocent victim of some altercation and the antagonist has a gun to his head with indicated intent to murder him, the scale tips heavily the other direction. Now it is the cops job to place himself at increased risk attempting to intervene.

Perfect personal example; six years ago I was shot protecting the asshole that I was in the process of wrestling to the ground and handcuffing. The person who shot me was the girlfriend that he had just beat to a bloody pulp. As I gained control of him, she retrieved a gun and attempted to exact revenge. She scored one hit on him and two on me. all while screaming "You'll never hit me again, Mother Fucker!"

Almost no situation is as simple as they often seem.

JW

[Skittles]

28. again, excellent response

I get so tired of the silly, er, "black and white" assessments I read here, as if everything is SOOOOO simple.

[Flyboy_451]

33. thanks...

But it will be ignored by those who refuse to accept any possibility that doesn't support their views.

Just as they will ignore that the number of deaths related to a job, is not always a true reflection of the danger levels of that job. In their view, it simply isn't possible that the reason there are a relatively low number of officer deaths is because of the level of training with regard to dangerous situations and the tools that are employed to reduce danger.

JW

[bighart]

40. I have been curious if there are statistics available

concerning the number of officers shot but not killed in the line of duty but have not found any.
Having had that very thing happen to you, do you know of any stats on this subject?

[Flyboy_451]

41. Google

Bureau of Justice Statistics. Lots of statistics there on a variety of law enforcement related subjects. Careful though, there is enough variety of information available to easily fall into the trap of cherry picking data to "prove" an idea.

JW

[bighart]

42. Thank you for the direction.

Just curious how often it occurs.

[Flyboy_451]

43. Another question seldom asked...

Is "How many police officers are violently assaulted/resisted that are not injured because they we able to prevail in the situation due to training and tools?"

When you start digging deep into the data, one of the things that starts becoming clear is that a small percentage of law enforcement interactions result in violence of any type. Then you have to start asking why this is the case, particularly when a significant portion of interaction occur with violent elements of our society.

Could it possibly be that through trial and error, policies, procedures and tools have been refined to the point that officers are able to nullify a great deal of violence through such actions as establishing command of situations quickly and decisively? There is always a balance that must be struck between community relations and protecting the safety of all parties (including the officer's) involved.

Any time such a compromise takes place, there is going to be damage to both sides. Sometimes the cops get it wrong and that mistake is payed for with a tragedy. Sometimes the cops get it right, and a segment of society chooses to ignore that they were right.

JW

[randome]

39. Yes, excellent response.

In addition, a cop risking his life unnecessarily endangers innocent bystanders because a shooter is then free to "go about his business" of shooting others.

If Scott was as unbalanced as it sounds, and he'd shot a cop trying to stop him, he could easily have turned the gun on his wife next.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[cheapdate]

26. Yes. Thank you.

[Row_the_boat]

35. It's about acceptable risk and mitigation of that risk...