Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
Seattle police kill suspected cop killer
Topic Started: Dec 1 2009, 04:17 AM (544 Views)
Jolly
Member Avatar
Geaux Tigers!
Piano*Dad
Dec 2 2009, 08:52 AM
ivorythumper
Dec 2 2009, 06:29 AM
Piano*Dad
Dec 2 2009, 05:20 AM
kenny
Dec 1 2009, 08:59 AM
I hope they didn't just murder him in cold blood for revenge.
I hope they followed procedures.
Come on guys, don't be deliberately dense about what (I think) Kenny is saying.

It certainly doesn't sound to me like Kenny was suggesting that the police should have walked up to him and politely asked him to step into the squad car. Of course they should "aim for the center" if they were threatened. That's a far cry from walking up to a downed suspect, putting a gun to his head and saying "this is for John, Jim, Justin, and Jamie" and then blowing his brains out.

Do you actually want your police to behave like the savages we see so often in, oh, the less developed parts of the world that many here rail against?
Is that what happened? If so then it should be prosecuted. I didn't realize that he was incapacitated and assassinated.
I don't know what happened in this case. I haven't bothered to read the story.

My point is hypothetical, as was Kenny's.

Police departments have procedures. Following those procedures does not require suicidal approaches to criminals who are armed and dangerous. But it also requires behavior from the police that follow basic ethical norms. Many of the reactions to Kenny seemed to be premised on the idea that killing the guy was just fine and dandy because he was dangerous and/or because of what he had done to their brethren. All I was posting was a situation in which that idea becomes either absurd or virulently immoral itself, hence the hypothetical downed suspect who is now harmless. Do you then walk up to him and blow off his face. I argued that the answer to that was a clear NO.

I understand Jolly's counterexample, and I would agree that that warden had guts to spare in how he exposed himself to danger in order to gather information. I would disagree that it is OK for the Louisiana police to assassinate the convict who someone 'thought' was probably the ringleader just to show "the animals" who was in charge of the zoo. If you have evidence that a particular person drowned the guard, you present that evidence in open court to see if it stands scrutiny. If it does, you put the guy in 'Old Sparky' following accepted legal procedures.
And I understand what you are saying...it works well for sane, rational people...even those who may have broken the law or are incarcerated.

But...

At some point, at some most basic animal level, the only way to keep society functioning is if the absolutely worst predators are either afraid or know with certainty that some acts will be dealt with in the most basic currency of man.

And while cops should not normally be judge, jury and executioner, there may be times where the most ad hoc of justice may be the most expedient for all concerned.
The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2