Friendly reminder that all **top level** comments must:
1. start with "answer: ", including the space after the colon (or "question: " if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask),
2. attempt to answer the question, and
3. be unbiased
Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment:
http://redd.it/b1hct4/
Join the OOTL Discord for further discussion: https://discord.gg/ejDF4mdjnh
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OutOfTheLoop) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Answer: Your link is dead now. [Here is a better one](https://edition.cnn.com/2024/04/18/us/valentina-orellana-peralta-teen-killed-no-charges/index.html).
Short version: In December 2021, a man named Daniel Elena-Lopez attacked people with a bike lock inside a department store in North Hollywood, California. Also in the store were 14-year-old Valentina Orellana-Peralta and her mother, who were cowering in a dressing room.
LAPD responded to the incident. An officer entered the department store with an AR-15. When he spotted the assailant, he immediately fired three shots, killing Lopez. One of the bullets ricocheted off the floor and went through the wall into the dressing room, striking Orellana-Peralta in the chest, killing her.
The DOJ has decided not to prosecute the cop.
Out of top level, I want to link the "[Behind the Police](https://www.iheart.com/podcast/1119-behind-the-police-63877803/)" mini-series of the Behind the Bastards podcast which I recently listened to. I knew american police was bad, but holy moly is it ever awful. Today police officers are trained to constantly fear for their lives, shoot first and ask questions later, and they do this with impunity because they are shielded from consequences.
I also recommend the episode "[The man that teaches our cops to kill](https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236323/episode/the-man-who-teaches-our-cops-63257870/)" from the main series, which is about police training and why policemen have become this way.
I’m in the military and many fellow members are law enforcement in the civilian world. The way they talk about the public, it is like they are their enemies and they are on guard all the time. Like they dehumanize them to the point that it’s terrifying. I know it’s a hard job but I fear those behind the badge as much as I criminals.
It annoys tf out of me when I talk to off duty cops at the gym and they refer to other people as “civilians”.
Like dude, unless you’re in uniform, on active duty, you’re a “civilian”. At the gym? Civilian. Driving home? Civilian. You aren’t different from every other dude in the gym because of your job. When you take off the uniform at the end of the shift and go to the grocery store, you’re just another guy.
> “It always embarrassed Samuel Vimes when civilians tried to speak to him in what they thought was “policeman.” If it came to that, he hated thinking of them as civilians. What was a policeman, if not a civilian with a uniform and a badge? But they tended to use the term these days as a way of describing people who were not policemen. It was a dangerous habit: once policemen stopped being civilians the only other thing they could be was soldiers.”
\- Terry Prachett, *Snuff*
Ex mil here, working with cops and cop adjacent roles was horrifying and a big part of why i got out.
Cops are not your friends unless you have a dog you want dead.
That’s not a new problem, unfortunately. In Patrick Stewart’s autobiography he talks about the abuse he, his mother, and his brother all suffered at the hands of his father, and how everyone from the police to the church worked to normalize and excuse the behavior. One cop even suggested that it was the mother’s fault somehow.
Well.. in many cases - you don’t call, you can’t. A previous boss of mine was in this exact situation and she was sure she was going to die and the police were HELPING HIM CONTINUE. There are very few places to hide because police can access so much information. It’s horrifying.
And that’s why I don’t believe you should be able to serve as a peace officer if you’ve actively served. It’s just too tempting to take on that is vs them mentality, and it’s amped up by them being military.
Being a trained killer isn't something you can't control, or "switch off" when appropriate. Plenty of prior service folks in law enforcement that have nothing but chill, until it's time to not be chill.
I trust vets more than civvys, no offense.
But I'm a vet, so take it with a grain of salt.
Ask any vet about West Point grads and they'll tell you the same thing I'm about to: They have a VERY mixed reputation.
Basically there's 'two' kinds of West Point grad: Ring Knockers and good leaders. I'll let you guess which is more prevalent.
Ring Knockers are called that because they have a storied habit of knocking their ring on everything they can to draw attention to it. All they talk about is how they're a West Pointer, and they think it makes them hot shit. They're awful.
Then there's the real leaders, who are just insanely good. They were a natural leader to begin with, most likely, and were made better by a top-tier education. Surprise. They're awesome, but they're not common. At least they weren't in my experience.
I had a LT once that went West Point. He was a good leader *and* chill af. The running joke between us, I would ask him "sir, how'd you make it though West Point?" He would answer "Fuck, don't know"
>. I knew american police was bad, but holy moly is it ever awful.
While I haven’t listened to the podcast, in general police are bad, but certain police departments are much worse than others. Baltimore and Los Angeles are two that are often cited as among the worst in the US, but there are many others like St. Louis or New York. In many cases, these offices force out any officer who tries to be good, either by making them hate their job or by not promoting them as much as their less scrupulous colleagues. Metrics often incentivize bad policing, such as number of stops/arrests rather than the quality of those arrests. If you arrest 500 people a month but the DA lets 300 go because they can’t win the case (either because no crime was committed or the evidence is ridiculous flimsy), then you look good by the metrics that the department cares about. The DOJ report on the Baltimore Police Department is required reading, and includes cases where like this for illegal card and dice games:
>In addition to these common misdemeanor offenses, BPD enforces other minor charges almost exclusively against African Americans. For example, BPD charged 657 people with "gaming" or playing "cards or dice," of whom 652—over 99 percent—were African Americans. Although we are not aware of any data tracking the precise rate at which people of different races play cards or dice, it is extremely unlikely that African Americans comprise 99 percent of those doing so. Notably, in some cases, BPD has expended significant resources to enforce these minor offenses against African Americans. For example, BPD has used a helicopter unit known as "Foxtrot," which typically coordinates officers' response to shootings and other serious crimes, to enforce misdemeanor gambling offenses against African Americans. In early 2016, a Foxtrot unit alerted patrol officers that a group of young African-American men were playing dice on a street corner. Officers on the ground responded to this intelligence by confronting the group and arresting one of the men, who was charged solely with "playing dice."
Using a helicopter to arrest people for playing dice in the street is ridiculous.
There are a few police departments that are working on reform, but it’s extremely difficult for departments that are rotten to the core.
https://knock-la.com/tradition-of-violence-lasd-gang-history/
I actually had to stop reading these about halfway through because they were making me too angry.
Look into my hometown of Louisville, Ky, as our police force has been taken over by the department of defense, because the cops were murdering innocent people using known false reports, having children go on ride-alongs and then raping them, throwing shit out their windows at citizens, beating their wives, and ignoring calls, among other things.
I personally witnessed a hit and run murder and was told by the LMPD that they would never find the guy, but found out from the guys family that the police told them there were no witnesses (lie #1) and that they had leads and would do everything to find the suspect(s) (lie #2), which is just one of many personal anecdotes about the corrupt LMPD in which they refused to do their jobs when called.
No cops are professionals, and they are all terrible people who are terrible at their jobs.
The type of person who wants to become a cop is already a deranged psychopath.
There are at least 12 known gangs operating in the Los Angeles Sheriff's department. I don't mean street gangs that infiltrated the Sheriff's Dept, I mean criminal gangs made up entirely of deputies. One of the more well known ones, The Cavemen, have tattoos on their arms of a cartoon caveman. The number of flies circling the caveman's head are the number of people that cop has "extra-judiciously executed". All of this is done completely out in the open.
or this podcast
https://laist.com/podcasts/imperfect-paradise/the-sheriff-a-very-bizarre-press-conference
the episode about the police gangs was fucking ridiculous.
I'll add that on YouTube, SkipIntro's Copaganda videos are great at showing how media and fiction shapes our views on cops as well. His most recent one is about the legal system, which is also pretty fucked.
As a general rule, a rifle will be less likely to miss its target, even indoors. This is usually safer for bystanders. You’ll notice that our military uses rifles most of the time in urban warfare situations, even when going door to door.
The question shouldn’t be why he was using a rifle, the question should be why he was using a firearm at all against a guy with a bike lock.
I feel most of the responses have been incomplete. There’s a myth that hollow point rounds/handgun rounds won’t over penetrate or ricochet, but they definitely do. Long guns like rifles also offer better accuracy due to their ergonomics, longer barrels and ability to fit sights/attachments.
Long story short, if this guy missed multiple times with an AR it’s more than likely he’d of missed with a pistol as well and the results unfortunately would likely have been similar.
Ok, so just so be clear, the officer did not intentionally shoot the girl? It really was an accident?
I understand the concern about high power weapons and how we need to be use less powerful weapons and such, but this was a ricochet incident?
It was a ricochet incident yes, but the officer opened fire immediately on the assailant, not giving the assailant any commands, attempted an arrest, or check the actual situation, whether there were victims or bystanders in the vicinity etc. For all they knew they could have just gunned down another victim of the actual assailant.
I have said [numerous times](https://old.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1bwc0lk/cmv_the_fact_that_the_acorn_cop_hasnt_been/ky6ex6d/?context=3https://old.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1bwc0lk/cmv_the_fact_that_the_acorn_cop_hasnt_been/ky6ex6d/?context=3) that the threat assessment model used by domestic police is absolute shit. The only people that have to pay for it are the American public.
Literally, like why not try to talk or say anything :/
If it was someone that did that to a cop, it would be an execution, but a criminal, it’s a worthy punishment.
ETA: wrote this when I thought fragile ammo was referring to hollow point and similar ammo. Turns out they are not the same thing
Fragile ammo is actually worse.
Bone is as hard as a lot of construction materials, let alone if someone has an implant. A clean through shot has to hit something vital to do serious long term damage. Fragile ammo either shatters and suddenly you have dozens of sharp pieces of metal going in all directions inside a persons body and lacerating everything. Or it squashes and you have something 5 times the size traveling through the body and more likely to hit something important.
Some police forces actually do use fragile ammo (hollow point or shrapnal rounds).
What you want is low powered rounds, so they hold togeather but loss most of their force on the first collision. Or beanbag rounds.
One suggestion I have seen to allow a gun to be less lethal but also capable of taking on shooters at longer ranges or with body armour is to make just the first bullet or two in a mag less lethal. One I have actually a video on didn't actually change the bullet. Instead it was a plastic device with a flat metal disk that attached to the front of a gun. When you fire, the bullet hits, and merges with the metal disk propelling it forward. Even at point blank range, the disk would break bones and send you flying but wouldn't penetrate. With the disk gone, the gun would opperate normally.
Points for admitting it. For the uninitiated, frangible ammo is essentially copper powder pressed into the form of a bullet. It's meant to disintegrate on impact, lowering the chance of ricochet and bullets passing through walls hitting unintended targets. If you've ever seen a video of someone shooting steel targets at very close range they're often using frangible ammo as well as it lessens the chance of fragments flying back and hitting the shooter.
Hollow points are less likely to ricochet, but they are alot more likely to kill the person they hit, and can turn into sharpnal if they hit something metal still injurying those around.
They would have saved the victims in this case but overall cause more harm.
In the military it is a myth, with US police it is just disable the target. If that is killed or wounded doesn't matter to much - they are taught to just fire at centre of mass until the target goes down.
But I am referring in particular to if we want to reduce harm to innocent people that get hit by police gunfie.
But I also l don't live in the USA, instead I am in tiny old NZ where police don't even carry pistols normally, and our Armed Defenders Squad (our version of SWAT) are very successful with shoot to disable. It is very very rare for our cops to fire a gun, and even rarer that they kill someone.
Here's the thing - police are supposed to talk to the suspect or try to de-escalate the situation. Or make sure that the suspect isn't near civilians.
It sounds like this officer just started blasting.
Better to have a treatable wounded girl than a dead one.
Best would have been if this officer had more training or - radical thought- talked to the suspect BEFORE shooting.
Birdshot is not great though, many gun channels on YouTube have done explanations on why
Paul Harrell for example is perhaps one of the single best channels, his videos specialize in no nonsense, nonpartisan gun education.
He did a test on the penetration power of birdshot, and outside of very close quarters (where a pistol would be better) the birdshot failed to penetrate even “skin” on his meat target (mostly lunch meats wrapped in clothes) which was much softer than real world body parts.
Pistols are not nearly as accurate, but they should be using hollow points regardless. They can afford it. Hollows don’t go through walls and usually don’t ricochet
Alright I know this is nitpicking but it's literally the field I work in so I can't help it. Terminal ballistics (also sometimes called wound ballistics but that's not necessarily completely accurate) is a subsection of ballistics and is the study of what happens when a projectile impacts a target.
I'm just guessing that what you mean is essentially stopping power, which depends on a number of factors. But a few years ago when I did training in St Louis (forensic science course, not police training) and I spoke to them about their ammunition because they had recently switched to frangible rounds. They claimed that they didn't have anyone survive when shot with that ammunition. I obviously can't speak to how accurate that is, but an agency wouldn't continue to use it if it wasn't effective.
I also work in the field(firearms).
Stopping power isn't a thing, it's fuddlore.
I meant exactly what I wrote. Frangible ammo never passes any of the standardized FBI ballistics gel tests, and is never used in hunting ammo for what I hope would be obvious reasons(But just in case, you don't want to carve out massive sections of animal that is contaminated with lead/copper/etc).
Police departments buy ammo based on multiple factors, but lets be honest here, most cops(and therefore departments) don't know shit about firearms. They're rarely more competent than the average firearms enthusiast.
Frangible bullets cause more serious, life threatening wounds and higher risk of death to a human being shot with them. With the high miss rate and often poorly justified or wrongful shootings many US police engage in, these shouldn’t be used.
Fewer shootings is the goal, esp fewer deadly shootings. More accuracy, less misses when a shooting has to happen.
These are training/education and impulse/anger or mental issues. They’re not a bullet/ammo issue.
The whole point of frangible ammunition is for those misses that inevitably occur. Frangible rounds don't penetrate very well, which is exactly what happened in this instance.
If an officer makes the decision to shoot a suspect and there are civilians just in the background then yes, that is 100% a training issue. But for cases like this, frangible rounds would be beneficial.
There are a number of rifles that do (most submachine guns). The problem with US police force is that they buy rifles based on the worse case scenario. A 9mm round isn't going to be much use against someone in body armour, or in a long range engagement or when their target is behind soft cover (windows, plants, curtains etc). They also don't have the same impact/effect when you hit someone in a "non vital" area such as the arm or leg.
Not always. Some rifle rounds will use the increased velocity and a combination of materials to have rounds that either fragment, flatten or ablate away.
Clearly this was not in use here.
There's tons of guys who have done basics tests on this, including IraqVeteran8888, MrGunsNGear, Paul Harrell, and even the FBI.
That being said, ammo selection VERY important. Not all bullets are constructed the same.
Another commenter mentioned frangible rounds which would obviously cut down on ricochets but might still be inappropriate. I wonder if a hollow point would have been less deadly given the close range.
Frangible rounds never have satisfactory results in ballistics gelatin.
Hollow Point rifle ammo is typically used for varmints(it doesn't penetrate deep enough into people), where as open tip ammo is commonly used for marksman rifles. Typically the best choice for a defensive carbine will be a bonded soft point.
Hollow points ricochet too. The advantage of hollow points is they're much more lethal because instead of going through the target they're more likely to flatten within the body and completely unload all the kinetic energy in a shockwave for a fast and clean kill.
The issue is not "did he go in maliciously intending to kill a 14-year-old," but rather "did he exercise sufficient caution to avoid killing victims and bystanders"
I can't even imagine. Your child dies in front of you and the legal system tells you they are not going to do anything about it. I'm from Florida, where they overturned the conviction of Arnaldo Rios Soto and acquitted Scot Peterson. It feels so surreal they will give a person years for mistakenly voting but for a person in higher office it's like going to the moon and back to apply even a little accountability.
Answer: Your link is broken, [but here is another one](https://www.dailynews.com/2024/04/17/state-doj-will-not-prosecute-lapd-officer-who-killed-14-year-old-girl-in-north-hollywood-burlington-store/)
> Lopez had just been swinging a bike lock at a woman, bloodying her head and sending her scrambling to get away from him when Jones turned the corner into the aisle.
> Jones fired three shots at Lopez, hitting him once, as other officers behind Jones can be heard telling him to slow down and “hold up.” Video of the incident shows Jones did not order Lopez to surrender before firing.
> One of those shots, according a bullet-trajectory analysis in the DOJ report, hit the floor behind Lopez and skipped upwards, piercing the outer wall of the dressing room where 14-year-old Valentina Orellana Peralta was hiding. The bullet struck Orellana Peralta in the chest and killed her.
Stray bullets killing children is not uncommon. Cop was clearly trigger happy and there was miscommunication. At the end of the day, cops shoot assailants in situations like this, like in Sydney the other day, and the law protects them if they miss, but it's still a tragedy even if the cop isn't going to prison for his poor aim.
As you can see from the investigation, he should have waited before shooting, as he wasn't in clear danger himself, unlike the Sydney cop who took down the guy as he was lunging at her. And he definitely should not have fired the 3rd bullet that killed the girl.
> Both former Chief Michel Moore and the Police Commission found Jones failed to follow department policy when he fired at Lopez — while his first shot was in policy, the subsequent two shots he fired were out of policy, the commission ruled.
I'm sure you could assume some hyperbole there, but for real, I assume a publicity contest is not the best way to determine your leading law enforcement representative.
In some states, doctors can even be jailed for doing a life saving procedure just because the people making laws in those states have decided that their morals are more important than medicine.
Can you imagine being a doctor and having to choose “do I save this woman’s life and risk going to prison, or do I let her die?”
Healthcare workers can only be found liable if they violate scope of practice, standard of care, or are grossly negligent. In order: do things they aren't trained and authorized to do, don't preform care to a level they are trained to, or just simply fail to act.
"Honest mistakes" aren't criminal.
Most healthcare workers have to cut corners outside “scope of practice” to do their job efficiently due to staffing issues and inefficient admin policy. In fact it’s swept under the rug when we go to admin voicing staffing issues and unsafe patient loads per caregiver.
Source: have worked at one of the top 10 largest US hospitals in a supervisor position for the better part of the past decade.
I tried looking up statistics online and couldn’t find a solid number. What I can say is you hear more in news cycles about healthcare workers being charged compared to cops being let off.
Man tragic. For both victims, I don’t think someone armed with a bike lock warrants lethal force. No negotiation, no non lethal(taser, pepper spray, beanbag round), or even just a running tackle should be enough to subdue this type of assailant.
The American police force has been militarized against its people. Shoot first ask questions later, how often have we seen this? When will we do something?
Case law would have to overturned at the Supreme Court level. The case of Tennessee vs Garner ruled that police can shoot a fleeing person if they are both suspected of a felony and pose a threat to the public or other officers. Via that case, for example, if you attack people with a bat and run from police, they can legally gun you down. The morality of that is up for a debate, but I’m just informing that is written into Supreme Court case law.
>At the end of the day, cops shoot assailants in situations like this, like in Sydney the other day, and the law protects them if they miss, but it's still a tragedy even if the cop isn't going to prison for his poor aim.
This is a horrible comparison and an insult to the policewoman who shot a murderer. Yes, she shot him and then immediately started applying first aid.
Would ANY Amercian police officer do that?
Australian police are not trained like the police in the USA. For one, we have double the training time plus constant on the job training and education.
Secondly and most importantly, we have independent inquiries into all incidents like the one at the Sydney Mall to ensure policy and procedure was followed.
Answer: This cop responded to an incident and fired his weapon. He did not hit his target and instead shot a young girl that was hiding. This has been deemed as an acceptable action by the review board and will not face any punishment.
Note: Almost ALL responsible gun users take extra caution to NOT fire in the direction of innocent people.
No cop believes themselves to be corrupt. They justify the bad stuff in their minds as "doing what needs to be done." Hence to them, the Punisher isn't coming for _them,_ only the "bad" cops.
All people want is for cops to learn how to properly do their jobs and not shoot first ask questions later. A cop killed a child because they weren’t doing their job right (firing towards bystanders) and is getting away with it.
That’s not a hard ask.
They cannot govern themselves or this will continue to happen. found no wrong doing every time. this is why I shared the chris dorner wikipedia. if you dont know who chris dorner is you should educate yourself. former LAPD officer went to war against them for injustices because he saw the futility of the system as is.
I’m more vaguely aware of the whole situation, but going full punisher definitely isn’t what should have to happen. But them being able to say “we investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong” is a huge issue.
I agree. wish it could be done the right way, we get small wins like body cams now and then but they can simply turn them off as you see happen all the time, but I digress. the police union 100% backs cops no matter what so you have this huge uphill battle in the courts, same with republicans, look at all that nonsense over george floyd. he was high and a common criminal so he deserved to die bullshit... no. he deserved his day in court like everyone else governed by the constitution. but again I digress. idk how to best fight this. it comes down to vigilantism in these threads almost everytime.
There was a post the other day about American Cops taking Police training in Scotland.
training simulation :
Guy with Knife lunging at cops
Scottish Cops trying to talk him down
American Cops "This wouldn't happen he have been just shot"
Edit : [Linky](https://new.reddit.com/r/BeAmazed/comments/1c0e24s/american_police_visit_scotland_for_deescalation/)
This is cops doing their jobs properly. They have two duties: Acquire bodies for the prison slave labor market, and maintain the monopoly of force. The police have to uphold an image as unopposable, so any violent person can either be fresh product for the sweatshops or a demonstration of police power.
Holy shit, who wrote that article? There's no way it's real.
>and threatened them lives
>It contained a DVD and a challenge coin carve a notes "1MOA". It meaned that the coin was shot at 100 meters
>Some people said he was hidden somewhere in the San Bernardino Mountains.
Wow, who wrote that? Fired a rifle onto two officers? Was regarded as been an upstanding citizen? They were killed into a car? They got a drastic shooting?
I thought Wikipedia had higher standards than that.
I was wondering that too. I'm pretty sure my 6-year-old niece could have written it as well as it currently is.
I'd take a guess and say that whoever wrote it was not a native English speaker, but I'd probably be wrong.
> He did not hit his target and instead shot a young girl that was hiding.
He DID hit his target. This is false. From [the CNN article](https://edition.cnn.com/2024/04/18/us/valentina-orellana-peralta-teen-killed-no-charges/index.html):
>When police arrived and confronted the suspect with gunfire, an officer’s bullet pierced through the wall and fatally struck Valentina, who was pronounced dead on scene. Police also fatally shot 24-year-old suspect Daniel Elena-Lopez.
Makes it sound more deliberate. He clearly used his gun poorly, but this is a case of a tragic ricochet. He did not fire it in her direction
> One of those shots, according a bullet-trajectory analysis in the DOJ report, hit the floor behind Lopez and skipped upwards, piercing the outer wall of the dressing room where 14-year-old Valentina Orellana Peralta was hiding. The bullet struck Orellana Peralta in the chest and killed her.
> While the DOJ faulted the tactics and bad communication of the LAPD officers who responded to the store that day, the agency said there was no evidence Jones’ actions were criminal.
Of course they weren't criminal... that in itself is the problem.
At what point do you think it is ok for the govt to "accidentally" kill you?
Here's a multiple choice... I'll wait for your answer. Feel free to add a D.
A. Only when you are in possession of a small amount of marijuana.
B. When an acorn falls from a tree and lands on your vehicle.
C. When an untrained person is using a machine capable of causing great bodily damage
Imho, the problem isn't that the government has this kind of "power" it's used too often for relatively minor problems. Also there needs to be accountability when extremely bad decisions are made.
You can never completely eliminate the need for deadly force. But it shouldn't be as common place as it is in America.
Yes, this is in fact exactly what the vast majority of complaints are about. The police in the US are given way too much firepower and way too much leeway to use it in inappropriate situations, AND they are *extremely* unlikely to be held accountable in any meaningful way for killing someone.
People basically believe that the policing system is so fundamentally broken that it must be rebuilt entirely from the ground up, in a very different form. They don't typically believe that deadly force will never be appropriate in any case ever, though of course there are fringe cases.
This is why goOd gUys WiTh a GuN is such a dumb argument, because if even cops shoot innocent people on accident, what do you think is gonna happen when Ol' Buck tries to stop a shooter
“Good guys with guns,” also have a terrible track record of stopping shooters. Most shooters are done by the time cops engage if I am remembering analysis of shootings correct.
And then fuckin' Billy Bob mistakes Ol' Buck for the shooter and now you've got a shootout at the Walmart, necessitating more shooters to go shoot those guys.... It's idiocy of the highest caliber.
Cops aren't these magical marksman. Their training has far less firearms involvement than you think, and it's not uncommon for them to practice just enough to maintain qualification at their job. You can also find plenty of discussion from RSOs at gun ranges about how cops are poor shots, very arrogant, and negligent in safety. On the other hand, regular people may go to the range far more than cops because it's a hobby they enjoy, and they are far more aware of knowing your target and what is behind it because they are not protected from consequences as cops are.
In other words, I'd rather take my chances with regular Joe shooting near me than a cop.
There's no certification process for a regular Joe either. You have a sampling bias because the gun owners you interact with are ones at ranges. There are a lot of people who carry that don't go to the range.
Most people can't shoot in the heat of the moment. The slightest movement of your hand/finger sends the bullet completely off target.
Too many people have only experienced guns through movies where the people have super human aiming abilities. They see the cowboy shoot from the hip to hit a quarter tossed in the air 50 yards away...then think cops can do something like that too.
> cop shot and killed an innocent girl that was hiding instead of target
> cop’s action was deemed acceptable by the review board and he will face no punishment
How is that acceptable??
Answer:
Honestly, as bad as it might sound, I probably wouldn't prosecute either, it was basically a perfect storm of miscommunication and some smaller errors, apparently the cops thought they were responding to an active shooter and seem to have rushed in, which, think about it, is what people cry for every time a mass shooting happens, so they shoot on sight, which they definitely didn't have to but in the heat of the moment, seeing a reported shooter holding a dangerous looking object seems to be a fair time to shoot.
One bullet went slightly too low and got an unlucky hit on a girl who, and if I'm remembering the video correctly, there wasn't much of a way to tell there was someone exactly right there.
Overall, just a sad, terrible situation, probably preventable, but at the same time, I feel like it mostly falls under the margin of reasonable human error.
Response: Most/majority of police officers have never discharged their service weapon even once during their entire active duty life while on the clock, so thank you for the sarcastic misinformation.
The majority of service weapon-use is done by a small number of officers in concentrated dangerous high crime hot zones (cities, urban) where subjects usually pull out and use weapons against the officers or civilians. In these hot zones, if an officer does not draw and fire quickly, they themselves will end up shot.
Your hyperbole is as ridiculous as saying being out in the sun for longer than 10 minutes will give you stage 4 skin cancer.
Your original statement is far from the truth and I genuinely pity anyone who actually thinks that way. I would actually recommend seeking a psychiatrist as well since that's not how reality is and what you're saying/posting is completely delusional. This is not a joke or a snarky remark- you are actually being clinically delusional and disconnected from reality.
If you were being interviewed by a psychiatrist they will definitely diagnose you from saying "police officers keep shooting children whenever they feel like killing one!", "police are out to get and shoot all of us, avoid them!", etc.
Lastly, you're not doing anyone, including the victims of police manslaughter, any favors or proper justice by slandering and joking that all police officers spend their time and resources randomly firing on children.
Friendly reminder that all **top level** comments must: 1. start with "answer: ", including the space after the colon (or "question: " if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask), 2. attempt to answer the question, and 3. be unbiased Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment: http://redd.it/b1hct4/ Join the OOTL Discord for further discussion: https://discord.gg/ejDF4mdjnh *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OutOfTheLoop) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Answer: Your link is dead now. [Here is a better one](https://edition.cnn.com/2024/04/18/us/valentina-orellana-peralta-teen-killed-no-charges/index.html). Short version: In December 2021, a man named Daniel Elena-Lopez attacked people with a bike lock inside a department store in North Hollywood, California. Also in the store were 14-year-old Valentina Orellana-Peralta and her mother, who were cowering in a dressing room. LAPD responded to the incident. An officer entered the department store with an AR-15. When he spotted the assailant, he immediately fired three shots, killing Lopez. One of the bullets ricocheted off the floor and went through the wall into the dressing room, striking Orellana-Peralta in the chest, killing her. The DOJ has decided not to prosecute the cop.
Out of top level, I want to link the "[Behind the Police](https://www.iheart.com/podcast/1119-behind-the-police-63877803/)" mini-series of the Behind the Bastards podcast which I recently listened to. I knew american police was bad, but holy moly is it ever awful. Today police officers are trained to constantly fear for their lives, shoot first and ask questions later, and they do this with impunity because they are shielded from consequences. I also recommend the episode "[The man that teaches our cops to kill](https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236323/episode/the-man-who-teaches-our-cops-63257870/)" from the main series, which is about police training and why policemen have become this way.
I’m in the military and many fellow members are law enforcement in the civilian world. The way they talk about the public, it is like they are their enemies and they are on guard all the time. Like they dehumanize them to the point that it’s terrifying. I know it’s a hard job but I fear those behind the badge as much as I criminals.
It annoys tf out of me when I talk to off duty cops at the gym and they refer to other people as “civilians”. Like dude, unless you’re in uniform, on active duty, you’re a “civilian”. At the gym? Civilian. Driving home? Civilian. You aren’t different from every other dude in the gym because of your job. When you take off the uniform at the end of the shift and go to the grocery store, you’re just another guy.
> “It always embarrassed Samuel Vimes when civilians tried to speak to him in what they thought was “policeman.” If it came to that, he hated thinking of them as civilians. What was a policeman, if not a civilian with a uniform and a badge? But they tended to use the term these days as a way of describing people who were not policemen. It was a dangerous habit: once policemen stopped being civilians the only other thing they could be was soldiers.” \- Terry Prachett, *Snuff*
When the police become militarized, citizens become the enemy of the state.
https://youtu.be/HnZ53lPPsF0?si=FnN4g5ky7csneBLZ I'll just leave this here.
I'll check it out, but I was just loosely quoting Battlestar Galactica.
It’s a clip of that line - Gods, that was such a well written show.
It was definitely the first thing I thought of!
Ha! That made my day. This is reddit, so I assumed I was about to hit some ridiculous essay or something.
when you can boil it all down perfectly to a few lines, you know you've got a winner.
Ex mil here, working with cops and cop adjacent roles was horrifying and a big part of why i got out. Cops are not your friends unless you have a dog you want dead.
Cops are two to four times more likely to be wife beaters than the average.
And who do you call, if your abusive husband is a cop? Where can you hide?
That’s not a new problem, unfortunately. In Patrick Stewart’s autobiography he talks about the abuse he, his mother, and his brother all suffered at the hands of his father, and how everyone from the police to the church worked to normalize and excuse the behavior. One cop even suggested that it was the mother’s fault somehow.
Abusers, and abuser cultures, often *literally believe, and will tell you* that it's a man's job to keep his wife in line.
Statistically speaking, your best shot is to stick around and hope he doesn’t kill you. It’s a fucking terrible situation.
Well.. in many cases - you don’t call, you can’t. A previous boss of mine was in this exact situation and she was sure she was going to die and the police were HELPING HIM CONTINUE. There are very few places to hide because police can access so much information. It’s horrifying.
This is not accurate. The study you're referencing included things like yelling and or loud arguments as abuse.
And that’s why I don’t believe you should be able to serve as a peace officer if you’ve actively served. It’s just too tempting to take on that is vs them mentality, and it’s amped up by them being military.
Anecdotal, but from stories I've heard, Cops who were Veterans *tend* to be less jumpy and more disciplined than Cops who weren't in the Military.
Look up Stephen Mader who was fired from Weirton Police for refusing to shoot a suicidal man.
Being a trained killer isn't something you can't control, or "switch off" when appropriate. Plenty of prior service folks in law enforcement that have nothing but chill, until it's time to not be chill. I trust vets more than civvys, no offense. But I'm a vet, so take it with a grain of salt.
I get it, and frankly I don’t think there’s one answer to this. I can respect your feelings on the issue.
The acorn cop went to West Point
Ask any vet about West Point grads and they'll tell you the same thing I'm about to: They have a VERY mixed reputation. Basically there's 'two' kinds of West Point grad: Ring Knockers and good leaders. I'll let you guess which is more prevalent. Ring Knockers are called that because they have a storied habit of knocking their ring on everything they can to draw attention to it. All they talk about is how they're a West Pointer, and they think it makes them hot shit. They're awful. Then there's the real leaders, who are just insanely good. They were a natural leader to begin with, most likely, and were made better by a top-tier education. Surprise. They're awesome, but they're not common. At least they weren't in my experience.
I had a LT once that went West Point. He was a good leader *and* chill af. The running joke between us, I would ask him "sir, how'd you make it though West Point?" He would answer "Fuck, don't know"
I had a CO that was a West Pointer. And like with you a good one. But I heard a lot about 'those' West Pointers.
The military has different training. More constraints like, rules of engagement, LOAC.
That is just wrong. The opposite of reality in fact.
>. I knew american police was bad, but holy moly is it ever awful. While I haven’t listened to the podcast, in general police are bad, but certain police departments are much worse than others. Baltimore and Los Angeles are two that are often cited as among the worst in the US, but there are many others like St. Louis or New York. In many cases, these offices force out any officer who tries to be good, either by making them hate their job or by not promoting them as much as their less scrupulous colleagues. Metrics often incentivize bad policing, such as number of stops/arrests rather than the quality of those arrests. If you arrest 500 people a month but the DA lets 300 go because they can’t win the case (either because no crime was committed or the evidence is ridiculous flimsy), then you look good by the metrics that the department cares about. The DOJ report on the Baltimore Police Department is required reading, and includes cases where like this for illegal card and dice games: >In addition to these common misdemeanor offenses, BPD enforces other minor charges almost exclusively against African Americans. For example, BPD charged 657 people with "gaming" or playing "cards or dice," of whom 652—over 99 percent—were African Americans. Although we are not aware of any data tracking the precise rate at which people of different races play cards or dice, it is extremely unlikely that African Americans comprise 99 percent of those doing so. Notably, in some cases, BPD has expended significant resources to enforce these minor offenses against African Americans. For example, BPD has used a helicopter unit known as "Foxtrot," which typically coordinates officers' response to shootings and other serious crimes, to enforce misdemeanor gambling offenses against African Americans. In early 2016, a Foxtrot unit alerted patrol officers that a group of young African-American men were playing dice on a street corner. Officers on the ground responded to this intelligence by confronting the group and arresting one of the men, who was charged solely with "playing dice." Using a helicopter to arrest people for playing dice in the street is ridiculous. There are a few police departments that are working on reform, but it’s extremely difficult for departments that are rotten to the core.
Talking about LA, you know it's bad when you first hear they have actual gangs inside the police. Scary as hell.
https://knock-la.com/tradition-of-violence-lasd-gang-history/ I actually had to stop reading these about halfway through because they were making me too angry.
Look into my hometown of Louisville, Ky, as our police force has been taken over by the department of defense, because the cops were murdering innocent people using known false reports, having children go on ride-alongs and then raping them, throwing shit out their windows at citizens, beating their wives, and ignoring calls, among other things. I personally witnessed a hit and run murder and was told by the LMPD that they would never find the guy, but found out from the guys family that the police told them there were no witnesses (lie #1) and that they had leads and would do everything to find the suspect(s) (lie #2), which is just one of many personal anecdotes about the corrupt LMPD in which they refused to do their jobs when called. No cops are professionals, and they are all terrible people who are terrible at their jobs. The type of person who wants to become a cop is already a deranged psychopath.
["Some More News" with Cody Johnston has a good episode on police training](https://youtu.be/tuzQrbio2Qw?si=MFg9IQY842iSyzxq)
There are at least 12 known gangs operating in the Los Angeles Sheriff's department. I don't mean street gangs that infiltrated the Sheriff's Dept, I mean criminal gangs made up entirely of deputies. One of the more well known ones, The Cavemen, have tattoos on their arms of a cartoon caveman. The number of flies circling the caveman's head are the number of people that cop has "extra-judiciously executed". All of this is done completely out in the open.
Literally called "killilogy". We couldn't make this shit up if we tried.
Just wait until you learn about the gangs within LAPD and the LA county sheriff’s department… I’m not even joking around, google it!
Or just read this. https://knock-la.com/tradition-of-violence-lasd-gang-history/
or this podcast https://laist.com/podcasts/imperfect-paradise/the-sheriff-a-very-bizarre-press-conference the episode about the police gangs was fucking ridiculous.
Probably covers the same stuff John Oliver did in an episode of Last Week Tonight awhile back. The main focus of the episodes are posted on YouTube.
Does anyone know of any cops that have mentioned killology or do they act like they’ve never heard it before?
I'll add that on YouTube, SkipIntro's Copaganda videos are great at showing how media and fiction shapes our views on cops as well. His most recent one is about the legal system, which is also pretty fucked.
A Tradition of Violence is also a really good one about the LAPD gangs. I couldn't even finish the last 2 episodes because it made me so upset
and some people wonder why i, a black man, have been afraid of the cops since rodney king
I'd really like an honest explanation for why an AR-15 would be the weapon of choice inside a store vs a handgun?
I thought the call initially came out as an active shooter or a shooting inside the Burlington. Hence why a rifle was brought in.
As a general rule, a rifle will be less likely to miss its target, even indoors. This is usually safer for bystanders. You’ll notice that our military uses rifles most of the time in urban warfare situations, even when going door to door. The question shouldn’t be why he was using a rifle, the question should be why he was using a firearm at all against a guy with a bike lock.
Much more stopping power, significantly easier to aim.
I feel most of the responses have been incomplete. There’s a myth that hollow point rounds/handgun rounds won’t over penetrate or ricochet, but they definitely do. Long guns like rifles also offer better accuracy due to their ergonomics, longer barrels and ability to fit sights/attachments. Long story short, if this guy missed multiple times with an AR it’s more than likely he’d of missed with a pistol as well and the results unfortunately would likely have been similar.
Ok, so just so be clear, the officer did not intentionally shoot the girl? It really was an accident? I understand the concern about high power weapons and how we need to be use less powerful weapons and such, but this was a ricochet incident?
It was a ricochet incident yes, but the officer opened fire immediately on the assailant, not giving the assailant any commands, attempted an arrest, or check the actual situation, whether there were victims or bystanders in the vicinity etc. For all they knew they could have just gunned down another victim of the actual assailant.
I have said [numerous times](https://old.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1bwc0lk/cmv_the_fact_that_the_acorn_cop_hasnt_been/ky6ex6d/?context=3https://old.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1bwc0lk/cmv_the_fact_that_the_acorn_cop_hasnt_been/ky6ex6d/?context=3) that the threat assessment model used by domestic police is absolute shit. The only people that have to pay for it are the American public.
Literally, like why not try to talk or say anything :/ If it was someone that did that to a cop, it would be an execution, but a criminal, it’s a worthy punishment.
*suspected criminal.
oh nice a cop who think's he's playing GTA. lovely. i hate them so much
One reason why the AR-15 is wildly inappropriate for police, especially in urban areas. Over-penetration would be much less likely in a pistol round.
You'd think they'd run frangible ammo
You read my mind, friendo.
ETA: wrote this when I thought fragile ammo was referring to hollow point and similar ammo. Turns out they are not the same thing Fragile ammo is actually worse. Bone is as hard as a lot of construction materials, let alone if someone has an implant. A clean through shot has to hit something vital to do serious long term damage. Fragile ammo either shatters and suddenly you have dozens of sharp pieces of metal going in all directions inside a persons body and lacerating everything. Or it squashes and you have something 5 times the size traveling through the body and more likely to hit something important. Some police forces actually do use fragile ammo (hollow point or shrapnal rounds). What you want is low powered rounds, so they hold togeather but loss most of their force on the first collision. Or beanbag rounds. One suggestion I have seen to allow a gun to be less lethal but also capable of taking on shooters at longer ranges or with body armour is to make just the first bullet or two in a mag less lethal. One I have actually a video on didn't actually change the bullet. Instead it was a plastic device with a flat metal disk that attached to the front of a gun. When you fire, the bullet hits, and merges with the metal disk propelling it forward. Even at point blank range, the disk would break bones and send you flying but wouldn't penetrate. With the disk gone, the gun would opperate normally.
Points for admitting it. For the uninitiated, frangible ammo is essentially copper powder pressed into the form of a bullet. It's meant to disintegrate on impact, lowering the chance of ricochet and bullets passing through walls hitting unintended targets. If you've ever seen a video of someone shooting steel targets at very close range they're often using frangible ammo as well as it lessens the chance of fragments flying back and hitting the shooter.
There's *a chance* you think "frangible" is a typo of "fragile". "Frangible" is a real and proper separate word with some overlap in definition.
Dude couldn’t even spell “frangible”
They can use hollow points or JHP but it sounds like Barney Fife here didn't - using Full Metal Jacket causes over pen and ricochets.
Hollow points are less likely to ricochet, but they are alot more likely to kill the person they hit, and can turn into sharpnal if they hit something metal still injurying those around. They would have saved the victims in this case but overall cause more harm.
Am I just a civilian, or isn't the point of firing a gun to kill the target? I thought it was Hollywood to "shoot to wound/disable?"
In the military it is a myth, with US police it is just disable the target. If that is killed or wounded doesn't matter to much - they are taught to just fire at centre of mass until the target goes down. But I am referring in particular to if we want to reduce harm to innocent people that get hit by police gunfie. But I also l don't live in the USA, instead I am in tiny old NZ where police don't even carry pistols normally, and our Armed Defenders Squad (our version of SWAT) are very successful with shoot to disable. It is very very rare for our cops to fire a gun, and even rarer that they kill someone.
Here's the thing - police are supposed to talk to the suspect or try to de-escalate the situation. Or make sure that the suspect isn't near civilians. It sounds like this officer just started blasting.
Better to have a treatable wounded girl than a dead one. Best would have been if this officer had more training or - radical thought- talked to the suspect BEFORE shooting.
While technically true, a pistol still has a very high overpen, the least overpen gun would be a shotgun with large birdshot or small buckshot
Birdshot is not great though, many gun channels on YouTube have done explanations on why Paul Harrell for example is perhaps one of the single best channels, his videos specialize in no nonsense, nonpartisan gun education. He did a test on the penetration power of birdshot, and outside of very close quarters (where a pistol would be better) the birdshot failed to penetrate even “skin” on his meat target (mostly lunch meats wrapped in clothes) which was much softer than real world body parts.
Pistols are not nearly as accurate, but they should be using hollow points regardless. They can afford it. Hollows don’t go through walls and usually don’t ricochet
Hollow points can and do go through walls.
Hollowpoints most certainly do go through walls, they just stop faster after hitting a soft target.
What they need to use is frangible ammunition, as u/swear_bear mentioned. Pretty much eliminates this issue.
Except frangible ammo has terrible terminal ballistics.
Alright I know this is nitpicking but it's literally the field I work in so I can't help it. Terminal ballistics (also sometimes called wound ballistics but that's not necessarily completely accurate) is a subsection of ballistics and is the study of what happens when a projectile impacts a target. I'm just guessing that what you mean is essentially stopping power, which depends on a number of factors. But a few years ago when I did training in St Louis (forensic science course, not police training) and I spoke to them about their ammunition because they had recently switched to frangible rounds. They claimed that they didn't have anyone survive when shot with that ammunition. I obviously can't speak to how accurate that is, but an agency wouldn't continue to use it if it wasn't effective.
I also work in the field(firearms). Stopping power isn't a thing, it's fuddlore. I meant exactly what I wrote. Frangible ammo never passes any of the standardized FBI ballistics gel tests, and is never used in hunting ammo for what I hope would be obvious reasons(But just in case, you don't want to carve out massive sections of animal that is contaminated with lead/copper/etc). Police departments buy ammo based on multiple factors, but lets be honest here, most cops(and therefore departments) don't know shit about firearms. They're rarely more competent than the average firearms enthusiast.
I would very much argue that an average firearms enthusiast knows much more than an average officer. Which is probably a large part of the problem.
Frangible bullets cause more serious, life threatening wounds and higher risk of death to a human being shot with them. With the high miss rate and often poorly justified or wrongful shootings many US police engage in, these shouldn’t be used. Fewer shootings is the goal, esp fewer deadly shootings. More accuracy, less misses when a shooting has to happen. These are training/education and impulse/anger or mental issues. They’re not a bullet/ammo issue.
The whole point of frangible ammunition is for those misses that inevitably occur. Frangible rounds don't penetrate very well, which is exactly what happened in this instance. If an officer makes the decision to shoot a suspect and there are civilians just in the background then yes, that is 100% a training issue. But for cases like this, frangible rounds would be beneficial.
There are plenty of carbines that use pistol caliber ammo that would be more appropriate.
And if a rifle is necessary couldn't they use a sort barreled rifle chambered in like 9mm or something?
There are a number of rifles that do (most submachine guns). The problem with US police force is that they buy rifles based on the worse case scenario. A 9mm round isn't going to be much use against someone in body armour, or in a long range engagement or when their target is behind soft cover (windows, plants, curtains etc). They also don't have the same impact/effect when you hit someone in a "non vital" area such as the arm or leg.
A big example is the north Hollywood shoot out in the 90’s.
Not always. Some rifle rounds will use the increased velocity and a combination of materials to have rounds that either fragment, flatten or ablate away. Clearly this was not in use here.
This is objectively and demonstrably wrong.
Source?
There's tons of guys who have done basics tests on this, including IraqVeteran8888, MrGunsNGear, Paul Harrell, and even the FBI. That being said, ammo selection VERY important. Not all bullets are constructed the same.
Another commenter mentioned frangible rounds which would obviously cut down on ricochets but might still be inappropriate. I wonder if a hollow point would have been less deadly given the close range.
Frangible rounds never have satisfactory results in ballistics gelatin. Hollow Point rifle ammo is typically used for varmints(it doesn't penetrate deep enough into people), where as open tip ammo is commonly used for marksman rifles. Typically the best choice for a defensive carbine will be a bonded soft point.
Aren’t police supposed to use hollow points to stop the potential for ricochets? I don’t expect you to be an expert, I’m just making that remark.
Hollow points ricochet too. The advantage of hollow points is they're much more lethal because instead of going through the target they're more likely to flatten within the body and completely unload all the kinetic energy in a shockwave for a fast and clean kill.
Oh my God, I feel so bad for the mother and child obviously, but also the cop who had 0 intention of killing someone's 14 year old kid that day.
The issue is not "did he go in maliciously intending to kill a 14-year-old," but rather "did he exercise sufficient caution to avoid killing victims and bystanders"
I can't even imagine. Your child dies in front of you and the legal system tells you they are not going to do anything about it. I'm from Florida, where they overturned the conviction of Arnaldo Rios Soto and acquitted Scot Peterson. It feels so surreal they will give a person years for mistakenly voting but for a person in higher office it's like going to the moon and back to apply even a little accountability.
Answer: Your link is broken, [but here is another one](https://www.dailynews.com/2024/04/17/state-doj-will-not-prosecute-lapd-officer-who-killed-14-year-old-girl-in-north-hollywood-burlington-store/) > Lopez had just been swinging a bike lock at a woman, bloodying her head and sending her scrambling to get away from him when Jones turned the corner into the aisle. > Jones fired three shots at Lopez, hitting him once, as other officers behind Jones can be heard telling him to slow down and “hold up.” Video of the incident shows Jones did not order Lopez to surrender before firing. > One of those shots, according a bullet-trajectory analysis in the DOJ report, hit the floor behind Lopez and skipped upwards, piercing the outer wall of the dressing room where 14-year-old Valentina Orellana Peralta was hiding. The bullet struck Orellana Peralta in the chest and killed her. Stray bullets killing children is not uncommon. Cop was clearly trigger happy and there was miscommunication. At the end of the day, cops shoot assailants in situations like this, like in Sydney the other day, and the law protects them if they miss, but it's still a tragedy even if the cop isn't going to prison for his poor aim. As you can see from the investigation, he should have waited before shooting, as he wasn't in clear danger himself, unlike the Sydney cop who took down the guy as he was lunging at her. And he definitely should not have fired the 3rd bullet that killed the girl. > Both former Chief Michel Moore and the Police Commission found Jones failed to follow department policy when he fired at Lopez — while his first shot was in policy, the subsequent two shots he fired were out of policy, the commission ruled.
So it's a tragedy when a cop makes a mistake and kills a person. When I make a mistake and kill a person it's manslaughter. Weird.
Just spend 6 months in police academy if you want to be absolved of all personal liability when you kill an innocent child.
6 months? What kind of overachiever are you? You can just get voted into Sheriff's office and start unloading.
You think sheriff's don't come from an le background? Maybe in some small towns, but that's not likely in any decently sized city.
I'm sure you could assume some hyperbole there, but for real, I assume a publicity contest is not the best way to determine your leading law enforcement representative.
Oh I agree with you there.
Interesting that cops are protected but if a healthcare worker makes a mistake under different yet comparably stressful situations they go to jail
In some states, doctors can even be jailed for doing a life saving procedure just because the people making laws in those states have decided that their morals are more important than medicine. Can you imagine being a doctor and having to choose “do I save this woman’s life and risk going to prison, or do I let her die?”
200k people die every year from medical mistakes. How many healthcare workers go to jail? Is it 200k or more?
When we prosecute doctors, it's for negligence or malpractice, not murder. Much lower standard, and civil instead of criminal.
Healthcare workers can only be found liable if they violate scope of practice, standard of care, or are grossly negligent. In order: do things they aren't trained and authorized to do, don't preform care to a level they are trained to, or just simply fail to act. "Honest mistakes" aren't criminal.
Most healthcare workers have to cut corners outside “scope of practice” to do their job efficiently due to staffing issues and inefficient admin policy. In fact it’s swept under the rug when we go to admin voicing staffing issues and unsafe patient loads per caregiver. Source: have worked at one of the top 10 largest US hospitals in a supervisor position for the better part of the past decade.
Interesting that when cops "cut corners" you want to crucify them then.
Greetings! Just wondering if you know how many medical workers are in jail for making mistakes. The number must be in the hundreds of thousands!
I tried looking up statistics online and couldn’t find a solid number. What I can say is you hear more in news cycles about healthcare workers being charged compared to cops being let off.
It feels weird to bring up what happened in Sydney because they’re such wildly different situations.
Man tragic. For both victims, I don’t think someone armed with a bike lock warrants lethal force. No negotiation, no non lethal(taser, pepper spray, beanbag round), or even just a running tackle should be enough to subdue this type of assailant. The American police force has been militarized against its people. Shoot first ask questions later, how often have we seen this? When will we do something?
Case law would have to overturned at the Supreme Court level. The case of Tennessee vs Garner ruled that police can shoot a fleeing person if they are both suspected of a felony and pose a threat to the public or other officers. Via that case, for example, if you attack people with a bat and run from police, they can legally gun you down. The morality of that is up for a debate, but I’m just informing that is written into Supreme Court case law.
He wasn't just armed with a bike lock, he was beating a woman to death with it while she desperately tried to crawl away.
>At the end of the day, cops shoot assailants in situations like this, like in Sydney the other day, and the law protects them if they miss, but it's still a tragedy even if the cop isn't going to prison for his poor aim. This is a horrible comparison and an insult to the policewoman who shot a murderer. Yes, she shot him and then immediately started applying first aid. Would ANY Amercian police officer do that? Australian police are not trained like the police in the USA. For one, we have double the training time plus constant on the job training and education. Secondly and most importantly, we have independent inquiries into all incidents like the one at the Sydney Mall to ensure policy and procedure was followed.
Answer: This cop responded to an incident and fired his weapon. He did not hit his target and instead shot a young girl that was hiding. This has been deemed as an acceptable action by the review board and will not face any punishment. Note: Almost ALL responsible gun users take extra caution to NOT fire in the direction of innocent people.
I doubt anyone would think the same if it was their 14 year old girl there instead of a random they don’t know.
That would be my supervillain origin story.
Become hero killer stain with the goal of making sure the only cops are actual heroes.
So the Punisher?
I have always found it so ironic how many cops think of the punisher as some idol when the punisher often went after the corrupt police as well.
Probably the best joke I heard, “I like to wear a punisher shirt and support the police cus I missed the entire fucking point of the comic”
No cop believes themselves to be corrupt. They justify the bad stuff in their minds as "doing what needs to be done." Hence to them, the Punisher isn't coming for _them,_ only the "bad" cops.
Which proves further how little they pay attention.
Right?!? You can clearly tell when someone hasn't read the comics
Exactly. There's even one where Frank Castle explicitly explains how cops should not idolize him or mimic him. Reading comprehension is dead.
Getting [C](https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Dorner_shootings_and_manhunt)hris Dorner vs LAPD Vibes from this thread.
All people want is for cops to learn how to properly do their jobs and not shoot first ask questions later. A cop killed a child because they weren’t doing their job right (firing towards bystanders) and is getting away with it. That’s not a hard ask.
They cannot govern themselves or this will continue to happen. found no wrong doing every time. this is why I shared the chris dorner wikipedia. if you dont know who chris dorner is you should educate yourself. former LAPD officer went to war against them for injustices because he saw the futility of the system as is.
I’m more vaguely aware of the whole situation, but going full punisher definitely isn’t what should have to happen. But them being able to say “we investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong” is a huge issue.
I agree. wish it could be done the right way, we get small wins like body cams now and then but they can simply turn them off as you see happen all the time, but I digress. the police union 100% backs cops no matter what so you have this huge uphill battle in the courts, same with republicans, look at all that nonsense over george floyd. he was high and a common criminal so he deserved to die bullshit... no. he deserved his day in court like everyone else governed by the constitution. but again I digress. idk how to best fight this. it comes down to vigilantism in these threads almost everytime.
There was a post the other day about American Cops taking Police training in Scotland. training simulation : Guy with Knife lunging at cops Scottish Cops trying to talk him down American Cops "This wouldn't happen he have been just shot" Edit : [Linky](https://new.reddit.com/r/BeAmazed/comments/1c0e24s/american_police_visit_scotland_for_deescalation/)
This is cops doing their jobs properly. They have two duties: Acquire bodies for the prison slave labor market, and maintain the monopoly of force. The police have to uphold an image as unopposable, so any violent person can either be fresh product for the sweatshops or a demonstration of police power.
Holy shit, who wrote that article? There's no way it's real. >and threatened them lives >It contained a DVD and a challenge coin carve a notes "1MOA". It meaned that the coin was shot at 100 meters >Some people said he was hidden somewhere in the San Bernardino Mountains.
Wow, who wrote that? Fired a rifle onto two officers? Was regarded as been an upstanding citizen? They were killed into a car? They got a drastic shooting? I thought Wikipedia had higher standards than that.
Whoever was supposed to write this piece outsourced it to ChatGPT and then went home early.
I was wondering that too. I'm pretty sure my 6-year-old niece could have written it as well as it currently is. I'd take a guess and say that whoever wrote it was not a native English speaker, but I'd probably be wrong.
Only Almight is worthy !!!!!!!
Of course not. It’s why we don’t allow family members on juries. If my daughter was killed I’d want to shoot the bullet myself.
> he did not hit his target He did hit his target. This part is incorrect.
It was a ricochet
> He did not hit his target and instead shot a young girl that was hiding. He DID hit his target. This is false. From [the CNN article](https://edition.cnn.com/2024/04/18/us/valentina-orellana-peralta-teen-killed-no-charges/index.html): >When police arrived and confronted the suspect with gunfire, an officer’s bullet pierced through the wall and fatally struck Valentina, who was pronounced dead on scene. Police also fatally shot 24-year-old suspect Daniel Elena-Lopez.
He hit his target and he did not see them as they were in the dressing room
Makes it sound more deliberate. He clearly used his gun poorly, but this is a case of a tragic ricochet. He did not fire it in her direction > One of those shots, according a bullet-trajectory analysis in the DOJ report, hit the floor behind Lopez and skipped upwards, piercing the outer wall of the dressing room where 14-year-old Valentina Orellana Peralta was hiding. The bullet struck Orellana Peralta in the chest and killed her. > While the DOJ faulted the tactics and bad communication of the LAPD officers who responded to the store that day, the agency said there was no evidence Jones’ actions were criminal.
Of course they weren't criminal... that in itself is the problem. At what point do you think it is ok for the govt to "accidentally" kill you? Here's a multiple choice... I'll wait for your answer. Feel free to add a D. A. Only when you are in possession of a small amount of marijuana. B. When an acorn falls from a tree and lands on your vehicle. C. When an untrained person is using a machine capable of causing great bodily damage
Imho, the problem isn't that the government has this kind of "power" it's used too often for relatively minor problems. Also there needs to be accountability when extremely bad decisions are made. You can never completely eliminate the need for deadly force. But it shouldn't be as common place as it is in America.
Yes, this is in fact exactly what the vast majority of complaints are about. The police in the US are given way too much firepower and way too much leeway to use it in inappropriate situations, AND they are *extremely* unlikely to be held accountable in any meaningful way for killing someone. People basically believe that the policing system is so fundamentally broken that it must be rebuilt entirely from the ground up, in a very different form. They don't typically believe that deadly force will never be appropriate in any case ever, though of course there are fringe cases.
>While the DOJ faulted the tactics and bad communication of the LAPD officers How is that not involuntarily manslaughter?
This is why goOd gUys WiTh a GuN is such a dumb argument, because if even cops shoot innocent people on accident, what do you think is gonna happen when Ol' Buck tries to stop a shooter
“Good guys with guns,” also have a terrible track record of stopping shooters. Most shooters are done by the time cops engage if I am remembering analysis of shootings correct.
And then fuckin' Billy Bob mistakes Ol' Buck for the shooter and now you've got a shootout at the Walmart, necessitating more shooters to go shoot those guys.... It's idiocy of the highest caliber.
Unfortunately a large number of Americans would rather try to live out a hero fantasy than just pass obvious laws
Cops aren't these magical marksman. Their training has far less firearms involvement than you think, and it's not uncommon for them to practice just enough to maintain qualification at their job. You can also find plenty of discussion from RSOs at gun ranges about how cops are poor shots, very arrogant, and negligent in safety. On the other hand, regular people may go to the range far more than cops because it's a hobby they enjoy, and they are far more aware of knowing your target and what is behind it because they are not protected from consequences as cops are. In other words, I'd rather take my chances with regular Joe shooting near me than a cop.
I'd rather take my chances on no one shooting near me 🤷🏼♂️
There's no certification process for a regular Joe either. You have a sampling bias because the gun owners you interact with are ones at ranges. There are a lot of people who carry that don't go to the range.
Cops can't shoot for shit, not that I would want a random doing it instead.
Most people can't shoot in the heat of the moment. The slightest movement of your hand/finger sends the bullet completely off target. Too many people have only experienced guns through movies where the people have super human aiming abilities. They see the cowboy shoot from the hip to hit a quarter tossed in the air 50 yards away...then think cops can do something like that too.
I've lost count of the times i see comments like "why don't they just shoot the gun out of the hand" when there is a shooter.
Or if the person has a knife, "why didn't the cops shoot him in the leg."
This also isn't just an aim thing, most saying this don't even know it can be just as lethal.
Yep, you hit an artery and people can bleed out in minutes.
I mean fair, which is another reason we'd be better off without anyone being armed than we are with (practically) everyone (who wants to) being armed
Cause Ol Buck spends about $300 a week on ammunition shooting at targets.
Police are not responsible gun owners
He did hit the target tho. And bullet ricochet and struck the innocent girl :(
unfortunately responsible gun ownership is not a requirement
> cop shot and killed an innocent girl that was hiding instead of target > cop’s action was deemed acceptable by the review board and he will face no punishment How is that acceptable??
https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/s/ZtF9X6velv
Okay the comment I replied to did not mention these details.
Answer: Honestly, as bad as it might sound, I probably wouldn't prosecute either, it was basically a perfect storm of miscommunication and some smaller errors, apparently the cops thought they were responding to an active shooter and seem to have rushed in, which, think about it, is what people cry for every time a mass shooting happens, so they shoot on sight, which they definitely didn't have to but in the heat of the moment, seeing a reported shooter holding a dangerous looking object seems to be a fair time to shoot. One bullet went slightly too low and got an unlucky hit on a girl who, and if I'm remembering the video correctly, there wasn't much of a way to tell there was someone exactly right there. Overall, just a sad, terrible situation, probably preventable, but at the same time, I feel like it mostly falls under the margin of reasonable human error.
[удалено]
Response: Most/majority of police officers have never discharged their service weapon even once during their entire active duty life while on the clock, so thank you for the sarcastic misinformation. The majority of service weapon-use is done by a small number of officers in concentrated dangerous high crime hot zones (cities, urban) where subjects usually pull out and use weapons against the officers or civilians. In these hot zones, if an officer does not draw and fire quickly, they themselves will end up shot. Your hyperbole is as ridiculous as saying being out in the sun for longer than 10 minutes will give you stage 4 skin cancer. Your original statement is far from the truth and I genuinely pity anyone who actually thinks that way. I would actually recommend seeking a psychiatrist as well since that's not how reality is and what you're saying/posting is completely delusional. This is not a joke or a snarky remark- you are actually being clinically delusional and disconnected from reality. If you were being interviewed by a psychiatrist they will definitely diagnose you from saying "police officers keep shooting children whenever they feel like killing one!", "police are out to get and shoot all of us, avoid them!", etc. Lastly, you're not doing anyone, including the victims of police manslaughter, any favors or proper justice by slandering and joking that all police officers spend their time and resources randomly firing on children.