Do other countries have outrage over incidents with police and race?

[Bob]

I keep hearing the same news story -- cop shoots someone.  That someone dies.  Usually it's white cop shoots black kid.  And then there is racial outrage.

All that drama aside.... Is that situation happening in other countries or is just a US thing?  Does it happen?  Maybe no one cares?

Do other countries ever hear news like that from the US?

[j_menz]

We've had a few incidents here. We do get at least some of the ones from the US making the news here. Our cops seem a little less trigger happy, but there are still race issues.

[iansinclair]

Sadly, such things do happen in other countries.  Some more, some less.  Some a LOT more than in the US.  Do folks in the US hear about them?  Mostly, no -- US media is extraordinarily poor at covering "foreign" news.  Do folks in the countries in which the things happen hear about them?  Depends on the country.  UK, Australia, most western European -- yes, they do, and the outrage can if anything be more vocal.  Southeast Asia?  Middle East (except Israel), Russia?  most of Africa?  Uh... no.

Do folks in countries than the US hear about that sort of thing from the US?  Very commonly, they do; US bashing is a very popular pastime in quite a few places -- and, to a certain extent the US brings it on itself, with an attitude that the US is better than anywhere else.

On the other hand, making race a factor in anything that happens is quite prevalent in the US, and encouraged by certain factions within US society.  Black on white or vice versa race has not been as much of a problem in most European countries -- for good historical reasons -- until recently, but that seems to be changing (and there have been some rather ugly incidents both recently and historically regarding such minorities as Jews and Gypsies...).

[chopinlover01]

Our cops seem a little less trigger happy, but there are still race issues.

Wouldn't that be partially because for quite a while (not sure if the law has been reinstated) they didn't carry firearms for a long time, as a result of police being trigger happy?
(Assuming you're from the UK. My sincere apologies if you are not.)

[j_menz]

(Assuming you're from the UK. My sincere apologies if you are not.)

I'm not.  I'm Australian. Our cops have been armed for a long time.

[chopinlover01]

Ah, my mistake then. The UK has/had a ban on police personnel having firearms on their person, except for the sheriff whom I believe had a ceremonial pistol.
The result?
Spikes in crime 
Apologies about mistaking your origin.

[outin]

The police here are very nice and helpful and very rarely shoot anyone. Race is really not an issue with them, you would have a hard time getting into the police academy with extreme attitudes towards anything.

We've had a bundle of serious crimes recently done by immigrants, but only one of them got shot. And I think it was understandable, since the guy was most probably psychotic and suddenly attacked a policeman in an unfamiliar apartment with an ax that he already had used to kill a guy in a pub. Of course the incident will be very thorougly investigated...

Interestingly the immigrants seem to have adjusted very well to our habits, hitting people with an ax is a very traditional Finnish thing.

There have been some incidents with Private security personnel though...

[indianajo]

***** the race.  Shooting an unarmed man is unacceptable, whatever race.  12 bullets in a man resisting arrest is both execution by the police and a sign of incompetence by the guy that did.  he should have blown out the guys knees and elbows, then worked him over with the night stick until some other limbs were broken. 
Speaking as a guy with white skin, the cops are just as disrepectful to any pedestrian after dark, and have a great suspicion that anybody that doesn't carry the muscle bulk of a northern European is a drug user.  I'm built to run down deer and mastodons with an atlatl, and have never used illegal drugs in my life, but I get a lot of grief from cops. 

[thalbergmad]

In jolly old England, the police are only allowed to arrest white English people for trivial offences.

Terrorists, rapists and pedos from any other race are generally left alone to carry on offending, as if one is arrested, the stupid BBC and all the lefty papers will be accusing them of racism.

Thal

[chopinlover01]

Shooting the arms and knees is not a viable idea under any circumstance in which an officer uses their service weapon. They are using lethal force, and not only can arm and knee shots be lethal, it degrades the chance of any hit at all under extreme stress, increasing the chance of civilian injury.

[iansinclair]

Shooting the arms and knees is not a viable idea under any circumstance in which an officer uses their service weapon. They are using lethal force, and not only can arm and knee shots be lethal, it degrades the chance of any hit at all under extreme stress, increasing the chance of civilian injury.

Correct.  Anyone actually trained to use a firearm -- it doesn't much matter whether it's a trained police officer, Marine, or civilian who is actually conscientious about having and using a firearm -- is trained to aim for "centre mass".  In the heat of action, you are not going to hit it -- but you will come close and, most important, if you have deployed your firearm and taken the safety off, you must not be in the frame of mind of "disable".  If you are going to use it, use it.  Despite what you may have seen in innumerable cowboy or action movies.

The real training in the carrying and use of firearms comes in the training in how to avoid being placed in a situation where you are impelled to use it, and in how to make a fair decision in the heat of action.

[chopinlover01]

The post above is the explanation to why cops don't "Just shoot them in the foot/leg/other body part!".
Also, bullet penetration (especially with the Geneva conventions advocating use in military (increasing overall usage among civilians as well) to use ball ammunition, which is designed to penetrate through the target), or rather, over penetration, is a serious issue. If there is a civilian within 100-200 feet of the line of fire after the bullet hits the arm, they could get hit (and, they'd have no time to react; a 9mm pistol round, coming from a fairly weak firearm in the grand scheme of things, travels at around 1000 feet per second) and seriously injured.

[Bob]

Ok.  So basically a yes, other countries have stuff like that.

(No arguing on the thread.  Make your own.)

[indianajo]

I'm annoyed to hear that the majority of posters here believe cops should shoot to kill pedestrians if they believe something is "going on". 
I met a guy in town who resisted arrest as a teenager, and had his legs beaten to a pulp by the cops, who then sent him to the hospital to kindly cut one off for him.  That was proper police procedure, IMHO.  The guy seems to have reformed; at least he is selling used car parts now with one leg and no prosthesis. 
Shooting to kill is a *****y police response if the perpetrator is unarmed.  I was in the military, and in my limited training I was shown how to shoot down at the ground to limit the danger to bystanders. BTW, knees and thighs are nearer the ground than the heart. These semi-autos the worst cops carry now are an invitation to a 12 bullet response on an unarmed man.  Shooting at the ground is something the SWAT team in this town haven't learned. When a 60 year old bank robber pulled a gun after a traffic stop of his escape vehicle, the cops put three bullets in the house of the losing candidate for mayor, 150 feet past the perpetrator.  One did actually kill the perp, which in view of the gun, was IMHO justified.   

[ahinton]

In jolly old England, the police are only allowed to arrest white English people for trivial offences.

Untrue - and, were it true, it would be in contravention not only of the UK Human Rights Act 1998 but also the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the Universal Declaration of Human RIghts (UDHR) and the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), of which the later two are United Nations declarations and to all of which UK government is a signatory.

Terrorists, rapists and pedos from any other race are generally left alone to carry on offending, as if one is arrested, the stupid BBC and all the lefty papers will be accusing them of racism.

Again, the former is rarely true and the latter untrue and, in any case, anyone can accuse authorities of racism in the course of their professional duties, but if such charges cannot be proven in court and if said authorities are not chargeable with other non-compliant or illicit behaviour, it would make no difference. Whilst alleged terrorists (they're not actual terrorists in law unless and until they have been arretsed, charged, tried and convicted of terrorist offences) might be seen to involve themselves in suspicious activity and, if so and if caught, be arrested irrespective of their race and gender, rapists and pædophiles rarely carry out their crimes in places where they might be observed to do so and therefore the likelihood of their being arrested in flagrante dilecto is minuscule; that said, cast your mind back to some of those who have been active in music education establishments in UK and who have been arrested and tried for sexual abuse of minors in their charge, as well as others who have been suspected of child grooming and other such criminal activities and ask then yourself if the perpetration of such crimes really knows any racial boundaries in practice.

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

He he, i knew he would take the bait on that one.

Thal

[ahinton]

He he, i knew he would take the bait on that one.

Never mind the "bait" (and, after all, I'm only one of many members here); I note that you offer no response to the content, which is paticular dispiriting given the lack of oomment about the tens of thousands of people in Britain under the so-called age of consent who have over decades fallen prey to predators of one kind and another and indeed still do...

Ah, well...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

[quote author=ahinton link=topic=57626.msg621058#msg621058 date=1 I note that you offer no response to the content, which is paticular dispiriting given the lack of oomment about the tens of thousands of people in Britain under the so-called age of consent who have over decades fallen prey to predators
[/quote]

But that is where i do have a point. One only has to look at the horrific goings on in the Rochdale case, to note that white girls were abused by black men and it went on for far too long due to colour blind council workers and a police force that was so infested with politcal correctness that they could not or would not accept what was staring them in the face.

Thal

[ahinton]

[quote author=ahinton link=topic=57626.msg621058#msg621058 date=1 I note that you offer no response to the content, which is paticular dispiriting given the lack of oomment about the tens of thousands of people in Britain under the so-called age of consent who have over decades fallen prey to predators


But that is where i do have a point. One only has to look at the horrific goings on in the Rochdale case, to note that white girls were abused by black men and it went on for far too long due to colour blind council workers and a police force that was so infested with politcal correctness that they could not or would not accept what was staring them in the face.

Of course that's true and I agree wholeheartedly with you over this, but I stick nevertheless to my statement that this and all the other similar cases (and, heaven knows, there are so many of them emerging from the woodwork now that one could almost be forgiven for raising the hackles of suspicion in respect of those who claim never to have been so abused or ever to have witnessed or othewise heard about such abuse) demonstrate that, as a criminal practice, it knows no boundaries of race, gender, age or anything else; in other words, it could be and indeed has been perpetrated by members of many social groups, races, ages &c. and by males and females alike. Moreover, the covering up of such incidents is as bad and as widespread as the incidents themselves and those who have done the covering up are likewise of many different backgrounds.

Best,

Alistair

[j_menz]

But that is where i do have a point.

Jimmy Saville was black? His makeup person was clearly much more talented than I had previously thought the evidence to suggest. 

[thalbergmad]

If he was, it would have taken even longer for him to be exposed.

Thal

[ahinton]

If he was, it would have taken even longer for him to be exposed.

"Even" longer? How much longer do you want?! He died before he was exposed, so was never charged or convicted and, as far as is currently known, he had been abusing minors for well over half a century. Others, such as Michael Brewer in Manchester, had likewise been committing crimes of this nature for several decades.

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

"Even" longer?

Probably never.

Thal

[ahinton]

Probably never.

So - point taken, then? Most sadly, this kind of thing does, as I've stated, know no boundaries...

Best,

Alistair