Quote:You have a very shallow view of the training and/or ability of a police officer, especially when it comes to physical confrontation.  Do you actually believe that a police officer is going to win a "fist fight" against anyone that they encounter?  I will tell you right now that the answer is absolutely not.  Just because they go through some training doesn't make them "expert fighters" or "super tough".

 

The training that goes on (at least when I went though it) is more defensive rather than offensive.

 

Again, as I stated earlier, a police officer should NEVER have to sustain an assault under any circumstances (in your case, take a few punches).  If someone wants to go down that road, then they should suffer the consequences for their actions.  If that means that the officer felt threatened enough to use deadly force, then so be it.  Perhaps the person killed should have not been beating up on a police officer.

There are ways of not sustaining an unarmed assault that don't involve killing the assailant. Just sayin'. I know you're extremely protective of cops, and I'm extremely critical of them. If Joe Blow Citizen were to respond to fisticuffs with a Glock, he'd spend a decade or more in prison on a manslaughter charge. I fail to see why cops should be given any additional leeway. If anything, the defensive training and ability to call for backup that Joe Blow Cop has should raise the standards of justifiable homicide far above what Joe Blow Citizen would face in court.

 

No one should have to sustain an assault, but that does not entitle the victim to pull out a gun and kill the unarmed assailant. Surely you would agree that if you responded to the scene of a bar fight only to find that someone was dead from a gunshot wound, you'd begin an investigation that would end in an arrest for murder, right? Why should the presence of a badge preclude the possibility that an officer shooting an unarmed man is, in fact, murder?

---