This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on February 23, 2010 10:52 PM. The previous post in this blog was "Green" economy may be a contradiction in terms. The next post in this blog is Nuthin' but a "T" thang. Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Chief Rosie repeats the mantra

"By the time you see the gun, you're dead."

As long as the chief of police continues joining in this chorus. unarmed people will continue to be shot dead, in the back, and there will be no consequences for the killers.

Comments (13)

What this really amounts to is the Doctrine of Preemptive Strikes: The officer can kill anyone at anytime and claim he or she thought they were going for a gun.
I think it's tragic that we've now gone back to before the Wild West where they at least waited for you to draw.
The righties get hysterical when I suggest this is all part of the same mindset as the Bush Doctrine - but it is. The granting of complete power to the authorities to kill someone - not in self defense - but because of something that may or may not happen next, is why we're in Iraq and ultimately why we're losing our moral compass.
Let's call the Bush Doctrine of Preemptive Strikes or this police policy what it really is: The Law of the Jungle. A repudiation of thousands of years of legal progress in the march towards civilization.

speaking of the "Old West", let's not forget that a lot of so-called "law-enforcement" in this area hail from multi-generational families where gun-toting is the "family business" and most were originally just gunslingers with no real redeeming human qualities, yet having a quicker draw than anyone else let them prevail in any disputes they were in- volved with "others" and they seemingly had no need to develop other human refine- ments.

As the generations rolled on, the "family business" was easily passed on down as it wasn't one requiring an investment in education, liberal thought, progressive thinking ((all qualities that require nurturing)), as mere INDOCTRINATION sufficed.

From what is known of Rosie, she hails from one of those sort of families, and it most likely that their MINDSET honed from the GUNSLINGERS CODE is what beclouds their rational judgment of today?

As for me, when I am called to Jury Duty and set on one, if a "King" or other similar known long time "police family" gives testimony in the trial, I total discount them and their testimony and give the benefit of the doubt to the hapless individual being charged.

Folks, we've grown as a society beyond the GUNSLINGERS mentality and we need to purge our Law-Enforcement Agencies of these types for they've done enough damage and brought enough heartbreak.

In all honesty's sake, Bill. I've found the only ones who get hysterical are the ones who think the Bush Doctrine was wrong.

As long as Scott "The Bull" Westerman, Rosie Sizer and Saltzman are in charge this will be the way: the police are right and can do no wrong. If in doubt they shoot. I'm sending some money over to NAMI, the people who are trying to fix this.


Certainly, those who think the Bush doctrine is correct won't get their panties in a twist! What's your point?

C'mon, Rosie! You mean to tell us that trained officers, with guns leveled from behind police cars are going to be out maneuvered as to the first shot by the perp? Who is not yet showing any weapon? With his back turned to the officers? I don't think so.

"The righties get hysterical when I suggest this is all part of the same mindset as the Bush Doctrine - but it is."

Not a rightie, more of an indie.

And not hysterical...

Just wondering how you can blame Bush when Portland Police have been behaving this way since before Bush was at Yale.

And as much as I hate Rosie's justification of the existing policy (of shoot before you see any real threat, only a possible threat), I am not sure what exactly I would propose to substitute for a policy. Is this better: "Shoot only after you see (and correctly ID) a real gun versus a fake gun, cell phone, wallet, etc?"

After shooting an unarmed suspect in the back the police should not approach the body until they can be absolutely certain that it has not been booby-trapped with a radio-controlled IED.

Just wondering how you can blame Bush when Portland Police have been behaving this way since before Bush was at Yale.

Blaming Bush for PPD behavior is not the same thing as drawing parallels between the Bush Doctrine and PPD behavior.

I would say they both derive from an authoritarian mindset. Look up Bob Altemeyer for a splendid read.

Does the PPB have ballistic shields?

MP97303 asked: Does the PPB have ballistic shields?

Answer: no, but they may be getting them sooner rather than later.

Context: after a suspect/victim has been shot and is down, there is no way to truly know whether he is incapacitated. With ballistic shields the officers can safely approach a suspect who has been shot.

I don't think there was any worry about an RC-controlled IED in this case.

It is truly sad that the final outcome was the death of Campbell. And that Campbell viewed "suicide-by-cop" as the only way to end his misery.

Our police force may change their training and operations to make this kind of death a less likely result, but who will be accountable for our citizens who choose to end things this way?

Excuse me, Rambo, but I think the guy paid with his life.

Uh Rambo stood up to cops... so I'd pick a different name.

AKA: By the time the gunsmoke has cleared, so are you.

Clicky Web Analytics