dagblog - Comments for "The Deputy Who Didn't Shoot"

Good post.

A Nonny Moose — Fri, 23 Mar 2018 19:05:18 +0000

In reply to The Deputy Who Didn't Shoot

Good post.

Reminds me of an argument from college logic class. The situation was that a hand grenade landed among a group of soldiers. A soldier throwing himself on the hand grenade would certainly die, but for the sake of argument we assume he would save the others. (Something like this happened in The Dirty Dozen, while they were scaling a cliff, I think.) Anyway, the question posed was, while it would certainly be 'good' to sacrifice oneself for the others, would it be 'bad' to simply try to survive by jumping for cover? How much sacrifice can we require of each other?

Well, this is all undeniably

Michael Maiello — Wed, 28 Feb 2018 03:47:40 +0000

In reply to The Deputy Who Didn't Shoot

Well, this is all undeniably correct. All guns are not created equal. If they were, we'd send soldiers into battle with nothing but light weight, easy to carry, pistols. You're also right that the original assault weapons ban was part of an anti-crime effort, not gun control for its own sake. Urban police were in some cases outgunned by gangs. They pushed for the ban. It's old school law and order conservatism. Nobody listens to hippies like me about why you shouldn't have a machine gun. They do listen to police officers. Or, they once did.

Beyond that, I just think it's unseemly and wrong to be overly critical of anybody else's actions in a life or death situation. Of course I mean that none of us know how we will react and that even if we are trained and have practiced, this can fail us. Even if we have faced death or injury before and done well at it, there is no guaranty how we'll react the next time. A little humility is called for when we discuss things like this. At the very least, avoid being a blowhard.

But even that's just scratching the surface. There's more than courage at play in a situation like this. The "good guy with a gun" might well hesitate out of fear for their own safety, but they also might not act because the consequences of dealing a mortal blow, even in the service of protecting others, are enormous and irrevocable. It's a lot to process.

While I'm sure in retrospect the reluctant deputy feels horrible and is grappling with questions of his own character, I take no joy from piling on.

Kahnemann notes that a face

PeraclesPlease — Sun, 25 Feb 2018 16:44:06 +0000

In reply to So maybe a good person does

Kahnemann notes that a face pasted next to a volunteer donation bin (say the coffee fund) greatly improves "volunteer" donations. Shame and peer pressure are powerful antidotes to less than ethical or admirable personal tendencies. Multiply this by the likelihood of danger, and the tendency to rabbit & run away grows (sometimes - or often? - despite training, et al).

So maybe a good person does

Flavius — Sun, 25 Feb 2018 15:07:39 +0000

In reply to Flavius, I love that story. I

So maybe a good person does something irrational.Because it's good. And he is.

Murray Kempton wrote about fighting in the Philippines. July of 45. War was going to end in weeks although they didn't know it. Japanese were loosing and they did know it.

Previously he had watched the Japs rescue a soldier wounded between the lines.

Then it happened to him. His buddy was shot. Kempton started to crawl back to safety. His buddy says "you aren't going to leave me are you?" That was exactly what I was going to do, Kempton wrote.

It wasn't a question of "who I was". He wrote. I knew who I was ,a bad person who was going to leave my buddy to die. But he was shamed into being ethical.

I avoid words like "cowardice

PeraclesPlease — Sun, 25 Feb 2018 07:34:25 +0000

In reply to Whatever the fallout, if any,

I avoid words like "cowardice" since human responses are normal and varied. When scared shitless, none of us know how we will respond unless we've been through something similar. Which is also why I think training and practice are important to avoid the unknown. We have virtual reality trainin simulation now along with laser tag et al - it's not the same as facing a live automatic or guy with explosives, but it certainly allows for looking for safe ways to enter a building, looking for other access points, etc.

So let's just give up,

PeraclesPlease — Sun, 25 Feb 2018 07:21:59 +0000

In reply to No. Preparedness and training

So let's just give up, resistance is futile unless you have overwhelming superiority in force - yay Colin Powell.

Somebody's comment said,

NCD — Sun, 25 Feb 2018 05:19:25 +0000

In reply to That's a much better way to

Somebody's comment said, "Remember your high school teachers? Now imagine them armed with guns. Seem really crazy?"

That's a much better way to

barefooted — Sun, 25 Feb 2018 02:34:52 +0000

In reply to It mentions some departments

That's a much better way to spend taxpayer money than arming and training teachers. I imagine the "some" are larger departments with more state funds (read Democratic, perhaps?) directed toward a complete and proactive response.

Whatever the fallout, if any,

barefooted — Sun, 25 Feb 2018 02:30:20 +0000

In reply to Note that more information

Whatever the fallout, if any, it needs to be strictly professional. Talk of cowardice should be relegated to internal, rank-and-file who are suffering through what happened - because even they realize that anything else just undermines their department. And until/unless there's reason, that needn't happen. A city's police department needs support from the community in order to function for them, so the lack of a "blue wall" is essential. As is some time to sort things out.

It mentions some departments

NCD — Sun, 25 Feb 2018 02:24:21 +0000

In reply to It's been my understanding

It mentions some departments provide all squad car deployed responders with ceramic body armor, AK-47s, shotguns and ballistic shields in the vehicle, along with advanced wound triage gear, bandages to stop bleed outs in victims.