Quote:
Originally Posted by aka123
Police is supposed to take risks, and it means beyond than just being police. Using minimal force is the starting point in here (in my country); it doesn't mean shooting unarmed man 6 times. What the fuck is about the 6 times anyways? Isn't one time enough? So fucking messed up police culture around there.
|
Comparing your country to the United States is like comparing apples to nutmeg. I am not being insulting - I am sure it's beautiful in Finland. The amount of homicides you have by firearms in any given year can be counted on my fingers, while in the US we have cities like Chicago that have had over 450 deaths. The rate for homicide by firearm in Finland is 14%, while in the United States it's 69%. We have a vastly different gun culture here.
Finland had fourteen homicides in 2014, only a fraction of which involved a firearm. In 2014 one hundred and twenty-one police officers were shot and killed in the line of duty. This doesn't include the ones that were shot and wounded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aka123
I already suggested what the police should have done; step back. I mean literally. One step back. Instead he shot 6 times (or his friend too) a guy who was coming out of a car. As that was the situation; guy came out of his car. He even told he is going to come out of the car.
|
The police officer did in fact step back. One moment the police office was up against the car door, but eventually had backed up to the point where he was off camera.
You cannot really argue this because in your country there are only a handful of homicides, and only a small percentage of them involve firearms. In the US we have thousands of homicides, and more than half of them involve a firearm. It's not that police are afraid to take risks, but in the United States when police come across someone armed with a firearm it instantly becomes a deadly situation.