# Controversial encounters between law-enforcement and civilians - the omnibus thread **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 10, 2014, 7:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942 "2014-10-10T07:35:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 605
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2018, 8:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12082 "2018-01-02T08:11:36Z")
We’ve given **Steophan** the Voight-Kampff test before. How did he do? Let’s try some more questions. > [@Steophan](#): > > The standard is not, never has been, and never will be, “I was scared”. > > To use lethal force in self defence, you need to be in imminent fear of death or serious injury, and that fear needs to be resonable. Taken out of context these statements may be correct. But the way you apply shows serious cognitive disconnect. Let’s hope your job involves no interaction with humans and that you don’t have a gun. Contrast two scenarios. (1) A young woman is walking down a deserted street at night and a strange man approaches her. (2) A policeman holds a gun with both hands aimed at the midriff of a probably-innocent motorist and yells at him to produce his driver’s license. Who is more likely to now attempt abduction, rape or murder? The strange man approaching the woman on the deserted street? Or the frazzled probably-innocent motorist with a loaded gun pointed at him? Please answer as best you can, **Steophan**. Don’t worry: replicants \*are \*permitted to post at SDMB as long as they comply with all rules. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2018, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12083 "2018-01-02T13:22:19Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > We’ve given **Steophan** the Voight-Kampff test before. How did he do? Let’s try some more questions. > > Taken out of context these statements may be correct. But the way you apply shows serious cognitive disconnect. Let’s hope your job involves no interaction with humans and that you don’t have a gun. > > Contrast two scenarios. > (1) A young woman is walking down a deserted street at night and a strange man approaches her. > (2) A policeman holds a gun with both hands aimed at the midriff of a probably-innocent motorist and yells at him to produce his driver’s license. > > Who is more likely to now attempt abduction, rape or murder? The strange man approaching the woman on the deserted street? Or the frazzled probably-innocent motorist with a loaded gun pointed at him? > > Please answer as best you can, **Steophan**. Don’t worry: replicants \*are \*permitted to post at SDMB as long as they comply with all rules. The strange man is unlikely to be any threat whatsoever, and has made no threatening behaviour. It would not be _reasonable_ to perceive a threat from them. I’m not sure where you are that the cops are stopping probably-innocent people, as they’re required to have reason to stop them. But even disregarding that, the person stopped - unlike the strange man - is interacting with the cop, and so is slightly more likely to be a threat. It’s highly unlikely they will be a threat, but more so than a random stranger. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2018, 1:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12084 "2018-01-02T13:24:42Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > Zimmerman could have avoided his deadly encounter, but he bulled his way into it. You really need to look into the actual facts of that case, as revealed at the trial, rather than the sensationalist exaggerations and outright lies in the media. The same applies to most of the cops accused of things, without the full story ever being presented in the media. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2018, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12085 "2018-01-02T13:38:06Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > No, having to wait until the gun is pointed at you is a ridiculous standard. Whether or not you need to see the gun would depend on the circumstances, what is required is a resonable belief that someone is imminently going to seriously harm you. That’s an obviously sensible standard, despite what some people here keep claiming. The only reason not to support that is because you don’t believe in the right to self defence. > > Clearly plenty of people here don’t but for whatever reason are unwilling to defend that belief. Nope, sorry. Having to actually see a gun should be the standard for shooting someone because you were afraid of them shooting you. ---
**Author:** ![SaneBill](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e68b1a/32.png) [@SaneBill](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SaneBill)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2018, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12086 "2018-01-02T14:37:20Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > The strange man is unlikely to be any threat whatsoever, and has made no threatening behaviour. It would not be _reasonable_ to perceive a threat from them. > > I’m not sure where you are that the cops are stopping probably-innocent people, as they’re required to have reason to stop them. But even disregarding that, the person stopped - unlike the strange man - is interacting with the cop, and so is \*\*slightly \*\* more likely to be a threat. It’s highly unlikely they will be a threat, but more so than a random stranger. Bolding mine. Good to know what makes the difference between a justifiable killing and a non-justifiable. So if that strange man tips his hat there is interaction and therefore he is slightly more to be a threat. And killing him is reasonable. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2018, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12087 "2018-01-02T15:36:56Z")
Oh my. Maybe it’s too stupid to even take the Voight-Kampff test. :smack: > [@Steophan](#): > > I’m not sure where you are that the cops are stopping probably-innocent people, as they’re required to have reason to stop them. Here’s a hint, **Steophan** : Castile was stopped for a defective tail light. Where I come from, murderers on the run from the cops, and therefore afraid of being pulled over, _ **are careful to check their tail lights before they venture out.** _ Geeezh. If these questions are really this hard for you, go for a walk to clear your head and then THINK before you post; OK? ---
**Author:** ![raventhief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/raventhief/32/4_2.png) [@raventhief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raventhief)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2018, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12088 "2018-01-02T15:56:37Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > Oh my. Maybe it’s too stupid to even take the Voight-Kampff test. :smack: > Here’s a hint, **Steophan** : Castile was stopped for a defective tail light. Where I come from, murderers on the run from the cops, and therefore afraid of being pulled over, _ **are careful to check their tail lights before they venture out.** _ > > Geeezh. If these questions are really this hard for you, go for a walk to clear your head and then THINK before you post; OK? Is a would-be cop killer going to tell the officer hey btw i have a gun? ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2018, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12089 "2018-01-02T16:48:03Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Nope, sorry. Having to actually see a gun should be the standard for shooting someone because you were afraid of them shooting you. Nonsense. Absolute, unjustifiable nonsense. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2018, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12090 "2018-01-02T17:04:18Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Nonsense. Absolute, unjustifiable nonsense. No u! :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![SaneBill](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e68b1a/32.png) [@SaneBill](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SaneBill)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2018, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12091 "2018-01-02T17:09:34Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Nonsense. Absolute, unjustifiable nonsense. Exactly, seeing a gun is not enough. There has to be a _reasonable_ fear. Like the one caused by that said gun turning towards you - therefore creating _imminent_ danger for one’s life. And it shouldn’t be too difficult to handle that situation because no-one here has said that a cop shouldn’t have his gun already drawn, perhaps even pointing to the suspect with the hammer cocked. You seem to be under impression that only possible solution to a little ( assumed ) hostility is to kill. But it’s perfectly possible to have even a full-blown fight and still have everybody walk away alive. ---
**Author:** ![Clothahump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@Clothahump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Clothahump)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2018, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12092 "2018-01-02T17:13:14Z")
> [@SaneBill](#): > > To summarize Steophan’s input here: > > If a cop feels scared for whatever reason it’s OK to kill anybody in sight until he no more feels scared. No. That’s bullshit. And the sad thing is that you knew it was bullshit when you posted it. ---
**Author:** ![SaneBill](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e68b1a/32.png) [@SaneBill](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SaneBill)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2018, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12093 "2018-01-02T17:33:44Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > No. That’s bullshit. And the sad thing is that you knew it was bullshit when you posted it. Well, for once assume that I’m stupid and enlighten me. But of course you won’t. You just say something beside the point ( and you know that, sadly ) and then ignore all requests to comment the actual thing that was asked. You always do that. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2018, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12094 "2018-01-02T21:32:30Z")
> [@SaneBill](#): > > Exactly, seeing a gun is not enough. There has to be a _reasonable_ fear. Like the one caused by that said gun turning towards you - therefore creating _imminent_ danger for one’s life. What are you basing your claim that that level of threat is needed before it becomes reasonable? It’s not based on law, the way the law is applied in court, or even on anything approaching common sense. You are allowed to defend yourself before someone attacks you, obviously, else the right would be pretty fucking useless. Yeah, you might be able to shoot back before you bleed out. But that’s not self defence, because you’re dead. There have been loads of court cases in loads of jurisdictions that make it pretty clear what is allowed in self defence. To repeatedly claim otherwise is ignorance, and at this point, wilful ignorance. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2018, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12095 "2018-01-02T21:35:10Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > You are allowed to defend yourself before someone attacks you, obviously, else the right would be pretty fucking useless. If they have not attacked you, there is nothing to defend yourself from. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2018, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12096 "2018-01-02T21:44:44Z")
> [@Typo\_Negative](#): > > If they have not attacked you, there is nothing to defend yourself from. Jut to be clear, you are talking about preemptive assault. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2018, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12097 "2018-01-02T23:03:29Z")
> [@SaneBill](#): > > **Steophan** , > > are YOU a cop…? No, he is a bridge-tender. **Steophan** is a Brit. His opinions on the behavior of American constabulary are entirely worthless. The only skin he might have in the game might be some sort of schadenfreude from watching the US eat itself up from the inside. ---
**Author:** ![SaneBill](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e68b1a/32.png) [@SaneBill](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SaneBill)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2018, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12098 "2018-01-03T00:14:12Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > You are allowed to defend yourself before someone attacks you, From what exactly ? You keep saying it is enough if fear is be reasonable and the danger imminent, however imagined it proves to be afterwards. And every time you fail to demonstrate how it can be so without any weapons or contact or even agitated behaviour. Apparently a person can be walking away but if you can’t see his hands it’s OK to kill him, provided there’s been some perceived unpleasantness. I think you’re just getting desperate and try to wear us out, so you can claim victory after we’ve given up. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2018, 11:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12099 "2018-01-03T11:07:06Z")
> [@SaneBill](#): > > From what exactly ? From imminent attack. > [@](#): > > You keep saying it is enough if fear is be reasonable and the danger imminent, however imagined it proves to be afterwards. > And every time you fail to demonstrate how it can be so without any weapons or contact or even agitated behaviour. Apparently a person can be walking away but if you can’t see his hands it’s OK to kill him, provided there’s been some perceived unpleasantness. Look at all the cases in this thread where someone has claimed that they kileld in self defence, and upon investigation that claim was upheld. Then you will know what it means. For example, the police receive a report that someone is waving a gun around and scaring people. When the police approach him, instead of following instructions, he reaches for the gun. That the gun was a fake, and therefore there was no actual threat, is _utterly irrelevant_. It was legal, and justified, for that cop to shoot Tamir Rice. There are probably by now hundreds of similar cases in this thread, argued against by idiots with no understanding of the legal or moral right to defend yourself. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2018, 11:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12100 "2018-01-03T11:16:18Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > For example, the police receive a report that someone is waving a gun around and scaring people. When the police approach him, instead of following instructions, he reaches for the gun. That the gun was a fake, and therefore there was no actual threat, is _utterly irrelevant_. It was legal, and justified, for that cop to shoot Tamir Rice. This is an inaccurate portrayal of the actual event, and includes information (that he didn’t follow instructions) that is impossible to verify based on the video (which didn’t have sound). And the cops had already been proven to be inaccurate in their prior statements. But this is all from **Steophan** , a [repeated liar](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=835614) and overall dishonorable poster, so it’s no surprise. ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2018, 11:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12101 "2018-01-03T11:59:21Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > It was legal, and justified, for that cop to shoot Tamir Rice. And yet they paid six million dollars to make the Rice lawsuit go away. Moron. ETA **Lying** moron. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942.md?page=604) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942.md?page=606)