Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   Cultural pendulum

   

   dorpus, May 5th, 2003 @ 3:17pm

   
   

   Until about 30 years ago, people hit or slapped each other much more casually, a la Three Stooges style. We've since become a culture of lawsuits and ultra-violent movies where everyone feels much more queasy about violence, in which a punch is assumed to lead to murder. Due to the lack of release valves, it leads to more episodes of pent-up anger that is released in shooting rampages.
   
   If we have technology that guarantees nonlethal pain, then we may shift back towards a culture in which people hit each other more casually.
   
   
   

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

2.  

   Stopping Power

   

   dorpus, May 5th, 2003 @ 3:45pm

   
   

   Incidentally, the notion of law enforcement's "shoot to kill" is a common public misconception. Law enforcement talks about "stopping power". "Shoot to kill" is military.
   

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

3.  

   Lethal vs non-Lethal

   

   bish, May 5th, 2003 @ 11:36pm

   
   

   Compare plice use of Pepper Spray vs Pistols. I know a cop or two (okay, they're married) and I know they go through a LOT more pepper than bullets.
   
   I agree that they'd be a lot more willing to use them, even though I also agree that the US is suffering from the fact that it churns out three times as many lawyers per capita than any other G7+1 country.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

4.  

   troopers love "non-leathal" force...

   

   Anonymous Coward, May 6th, 2003 @ 6:12pm

   
   

   All you really need to do is watch what the
   Isralies do with non-leathal force. It's amazing
   how much damage you can actually inflict if
   you're a very good marksman or use the device in
   unexpected ways.
   
   Once non-leathal becomes instutionalized, an
   ever increasing death rate from the application
   of "non-leathal" force follows.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

5.  

   Re: Cultural pendulum

   

   Anonymous Coward, May 6th, 2003 @ 6:14pm

   
   

   ...oh you mean like Thomas Edison being boxed
   about the head and ears for falling a sleep on
   telegraph duty...
   
   ...Yeah, I'd like my boss to be able to beat me
   when he feels I'm not doing my job and, obviously,
   you would too...
   
   What are you? A cultrual ludite who wants to
   bring back the bad old days?

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

6.  

   Re: Stopping Power

   

   Anonymous Coward, May 6th, 2003 @ 6:20pm

   
   

   Stopping Power == Shoot to Kill
   
   Police training is very specific... If you feel
   that you're going to be threatened with physical
   harm that could lead to your death, empty the
   clip.
   
   Every year there are several cases that bring
   the training our "Peace Office" recieve to the
   surface. These include the two office who did
   empty their clips into a chair wielding man and
   the guy in NYC who had an entire revolver load
   empted into him for showing his wallet.
   
   It doesn't help that officers are armed, hence
   the tendancy to escalate any physical
   confrentation into a police shooting. My rule
   of thumb is to keep hands in plane site and
   below my waste, explaining where and why I am
   going to move them, whenever dealing with a
   police officer.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

7.  

   Re: Stopping Power

   

   SSgt , USAF, Security Forces, Feb 20th, 2004 @ 9:43pm

   
   

   Our doctrine teaches only shoot to prevent or stop the suspect from performing the action that caused you to shoot in the first place. Take a look at the use of force model, AFI 31-204 (Arming use of Force). War is different of course, most of the time you shoot at anything that shoots at you, for preservation of your life and the protection of you friends. Most of the military only shoots when shot at. Yes, some of the Special Forces actually seek to destroy, however, I have seen restraint even in those situations. Only eliminate the targets that will try to eliminate you. If they have a gun, yes, in those situations they will kill them. Shoot to kill is not accurate, Shoot to disable is better and yes "center of mass", is the target "Aim small, miss small", right? The goal is to take them out of the fight so that the critical objective is accomplished. Not necessarily to kill.
   EJK
   

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

8.  

   Re: troopers love "non-leathal" force...

   

   hfhiufd, Dec 14th, 2006 @ 5:55am

   
   

   not kil

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment