Meanwhile in USA

[Kafein]

idk how old this thread is but it's nice to see an ignorant EU base one situation and call it "Law Enforcement in America". EU and NA are both shit holes and i find it hilarious how nerds who haven't explored past a one mile radius around their comp act like they know shit. Suck an Obama nut and move on 

You have to admit getting into the USA is kind of hard if you are not a terrorist.

[Jeade]

The police are tasked with enforcing the laws of the country, you, as a citizen, don't get to decide if you want to comply with the cops or not, that is not one of your options.

Correct! That's what the court proceedings are for.
It is possible that police will overstep or courts can be prejudiced and corrupt, but the one surefire way to end up either in jail or dead is to start fighting with police.
That will literally never work out too well for you.

A weapon doesn't make a harmless person dangerous. People are dangerous, not weapons.

I'd say you're very close to the truth here, but the one thing you're forgetting is that dangerous people with dangerous weapons is dangerous x2.

[Oberyn]

How someone who is not a worthless paranoid pussy handles a "dangerous" knife wielder:
http://www.worldstarhiphop.com/videos/video.php?v=wshhh4OwNWPe6499J5j0
Wow, he didn't even need body armor  or years of training or 5 other guys on his side or a fucking attack dog, and most weird of all, he didn't even shoot him!!11!!. Truly he is a superman and expecting police literally trained to handle situations like these to not kill outright is obviously way too much to ask.

[Lars]

99% of those are drunk people who show the knife before making an uncoordinated haymaker-knife attack, or use it just to threaten. Very different from a pro who walks by and then stabs you 10 times in the neck before you notice what's happening.

A weapon doesn't make a harmless person dangerous. People are dangerous, not weapons.

Most bouncers nowadays would use OC, though.

Pepper spray is a bitch, i got pepper sprayed some years ago, the eyes obviously burn a lot, but  the  worst thing imo was  that it was hard to breathe, a sensation similar like if you are choking, at least that was what i felt. I guess that it can be different from person to person,  depending how much and where you got pepper sprayed,  the concentration of the OC  etc...   

[Molly]

How someone who is not a worthless paranoid pussy handles a "dangerous" knife wielder:
http://www.worldstarhiphop.com/videos/video.php?v=wshhh4OwNWPe6499J5j0
Wow, he didn't even need body armor  or years of training or 5 other guys on his side or a fucking attack dog, and most weird of all, he didn't even shoot him!!11!!. Truly he is a superman and expecting police literally trained to handle situations like these to not kill outright is obviously way too much to ask.

He trained something. The trip could be school yard experience, though it looks practised, but the 2nd one, when the dude got up again, is not a standard use of kinetics
Most noticeable should be that he is not even hitting the guy at the beginning, when he had him by his hair.

[Xant]

That guy should've done a disarm way quicker. You really don't want to be fighting for the control of the knife hand for that long.

[Oberyn]

Yeah ironically he was in much, much higher danger than any of the police on the OP video.

[Butan]

Ironically, that video shows exactly why the police shot first before getting closer.

If the guy on the vid had lost control of the knife hand for one second, his grin would have transformed into a expressionless bloody mask, and those stupid kids around would have started panicking a bit.



What people dont get is, if the last examples (bouncers, civilians, etc...) had guns at the ready and licence to use them, they would not get close and personal just for show. Except those that really want a show ofc, but those guys are either confident, or stupid, or both, and can still end up dead.

[Xant]

You really are clueless. If that video shows anything, it shows that a knife doesn't transform anyone into an invincible killing machine. You have no way of knowing what would've happened if that guy had lost control of the knife hand. It's a pretty safe bet that the wet noodle who had the knife wouldn't have murdered everyone in his general vicinity even if his knife hand wasn't controlled for a second.

What you don't get, apparently, is that police officers aren't doing their job for themselves. Their job description is not "just stay safe, no matter how many civilians you have to kill." No, they're "protecting" and "serving." The whole point, in western societies, is to make sure civilians are safe. Yes, it's more dangerous for them if they don't shoot... so? Should they shoot everyone who breaks any law because it'd be more dangerous to get close? If someone is speeding and you stop them, they might be on drugs and pull out a gun... maybe it's just better to call in a drone strike on the car.

Many bouncers and civilians would indeed use guns if they had the right to do that against people with knives. Yet they don't. For a reason. And still they manage. Why should the police be allowed to shoot people dead if other people aren't allowed to do that (and still manage)?

[Butan]

Many bouncers and civilians would indeed use guns if they had the right to do that against people with knives. Yet they don't. For a reason. And still they manage. Why should the police be allowed to... [...]

You stopped short of the reason, elaborate a bit more and you will find the answer.

Their job description is not "just stay safe, no matter how many civilians you have to kill." No, they're "protecting" and "serving."

"To protect and to serve" also include shooting down clueless dangerous armed people. If still alive, put in jail; if dead, case closed.

[Xant]

You stopped short of the reason, elaborate a bit more and you will find the answer.

There is no reason for it.

"To protect and to serve" also include shooting down clueless dangerous armed people. If still alive, put in jail; if dead, case closed.

Nope.

[Turkhammer]

civilians would indeed use guns if they had the right to do that against people with knives. Yet they don't. For a reason. And still they manage. Why should the police be allowed to shoot people dead if other people aren't allowed to do that (and still manage)?

I don't know where you are from but in my country, if a reasonable person (legal concept) has a reasonable expectation (another legal term) that he facing the threat of death or grievous bodily harm, then lethal force is permitted in self defense.   It has been established that a person with a knife can cover 21 feet and stab another person before that second person can draw a holstered pistol and fire.  A knife is a lethal weapon that can cause death in an instant.  Any civilian threatened with a knife and in close proximity to a knife wielder most certainly has the right to self defense up to and including the use of lethal force with a gun.  That's how it should be.  His actions will be scrutinized to the nth degree by the police and prosecutor and during a jury trial if he is charged with murder.

If a jurisdiction or a country has removed your right to defend your life or the lives of your family if and when you are faced with the gravest extreme, then they have taken away one of your most basic civil rights.

[Falka]

If a jurisdiction or a country has removed your right to defend your life or the lives of your family if and when you are faced with the gravest extreme, then they have taken away one of your most basic civil rights.

There's a difference between self defence against someone who's directly attacking you and shooting at guy standing 10 m away from you and doing nothing.

[Turkhammer]

There's a difference between self defence against someone who's directly attacking you and shooting at guy standing 10 m away from you and doing nothing.

Absolutely correct.  I was responding to the statement that civilians do not have the right to use a gun to defend themselves from a knife attack.  That's why in your example the first case is self defense and the second case is murder or manslaughter.

Quite obviously a person 10 meters away, doing nothing, does not put you in imminent danger of death or grievous harm.

[Kafein]

There's also the fact that if you hold someone at gunpoint he can travel an average of zero meters before you can react and shoot. Hence why neither persons in the videos posed a threat warranting the use of deadly force.