This looks toxic, by the way.

  • Etterra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    Because it’s harder to pick and choose trial evidence that exonerates the cops of their malfeasance unless you have something evidencing that they told them to stop before they fired their gun, regardless of whether they actually said it before firing their gun.

    • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      44
      ·
      8 months ago

      A(A)CAB crew checking in, I guess, without a solution in hand. Show me a solution without cops and I’ll show you a warzone.

      • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        8 months ago

        show me a solution without cops

        when my car got stolen and the cops just gave me a report number and then me and my insurance did literally everything else

        • bfg9k@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          8 months ago

          When I was assaulted by a drunken idiot in broad daylight in full view of the cops, and they did nothing to stop him assaulting me or running off

          When I was randomly pulled over and my car meticulously inspected for defects/illegal modifications and when they couldn’t find anything they gave me a fine for the car being ‘too low’. And when I take it up with the magistrate it magically gets tossed out due to lack of evidence

          Fuck cops.

          • I was once handed five tickets for driving without insurance, while the cops held my valid insurance in their hands. I had to take time off of work to go to traffic court and get them thrown out. They almost didn’t because of systematic bureaucratic hell but that’s a different story.

      • BA834024112@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I don’t think in general the ACAB crowd means “no police”. It means better training, independent oversight, and a division of roles (e.g. social work, welfare check).

        Basically actually having accountability would go a long way towards weeding out the root problem

        • TheFriar@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          8 months ago

          That’s because there is no such thing as a unified “ACAB crowd.” It’s turned into a catch-all used by people from full on abolitionists to liberals upset over specific events. In reality, ACAB is an abolitionist phrase. If all cops are bastards, the entire concept of policing as we know it is flawed and needs to be done away with.

          That’s the problem with catchy phrases spreading over the internet: they lose all meaning.

      • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        8 months ago

        My apartment was broken into and stuff stolen. The cops came, took notes, took one of my vases for evidence (which they lost), then left.

        So besides stealing even more of my shit, and providing paperwork for my insurance company, what exactly did they do?

        • TheFriar@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          Well if they didn’t shoot your dog, it doesn’t even sound like these were cops at all. Are you sure it wasn’t the burglars who came back for the vase they couldn’t take the first time around?

      • Nobsi@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Germany, Switzerland… Finland…
        You know… Free countries

  • betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    If the person is able and willing to surrender after being shot, showing their hands (empty of anything they may have been holding before) and following instructions means the police can start first aid and bring in EMS sooner. The ambulance doesn’t come in until it is safe to do so which won’t be until after a search is done and handcuffs are applied. Specific details beyond that and exceptions to the norm would depend on local policies.

    • DebatableRaccoon@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Assuming there was ever anything in the victim’s hands to begin with. Plenty of cops will go on to deny the person emergency treatment under the guise of the individual being “too dangerous”

      Edit: To anyone daring to question the veracity of this statement, just go ahead and watch the last moments of this man’s life then take a good long look at yourselves and think about just what you’re trying to defend here. This is nothing but murder. Decided on by an overly-sensitive EMT and endorsed by six different cops. Be ashamed of yourselves.

    • 404@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      …So if you use your hands to put pressure on the wound to stop the bleeding, you won’t get an ambulance?

    • labbbb@thelemmy.clubOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      By the way, I’m wondering who pays for the ambulance in this case? Suspect or government?

      • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        In normal countries, normal people don’t pay for use of emergency services.

        What kind of hell do you live in where an ambulance is a cost/benefits equation?

        • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          What kind of hell do you live in

          The hell of the United States’ healthcare system.

      • Ookami38@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Just a guess, but I’d think it’d be based on fault. If it’s a justified shooting, they’ll probably tack it into the suspect’s fines. Ideally, if the shooting isn’t justified, the govt would pay, but I wouldn’t count on it.

        • Nollij@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          I’m afraid your guess is wrong, at least in the US.

          The patient is on the hook for any services rendered. If the patient has insurance, that will pay according to the patient’s policy. The insurance company may then sue the city (subrogation) for causing the injuries, but that will go through lawyers and the courts.

  • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    Wounded people can still shoot you back/stab you. They may even be more likely to do so due to the shock and adrenaline rush. Also the fact that one has been shot indicates that they probably had something in their hands in the first place or were unwilling to show that they didn’t.

  • glimse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    This post has no business in this community

    [Edit because everyone seems to disagree] OP posts these charged questions without clear answers all the time. They’re not earnestly asking

  • blahsay@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Ever hear about medal of honour winners killing 12 people with 5 bullets in them? Bullets aren’t always show stoppers

    Add some meth or fentanyl to the mix and it’s sadly pretty much zombie rules to put them down.

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      this is why cops dump entire mags without thinking.

      that and most of them can’t actually shoot for shit.

      • blahsay@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        You say that but most cops still will go their whole career without firing their gun statistically.

        Plus hand guns are crazy hard to aim over any distance