I don’t know how one unnecessary death is something you’re indifferent to, but the risk of another is disturbing. I’m not trying to attack you, I’m just honestly curious.
One is a combatant and one is a 10-ish year old child standing on a sidewalk.
Google the video, dude was agressively coming straight at her. He had pretty clear hostile intent, and I don’t think she had the time or the vantage to assess him as unarmed. From her perspective, this is a combatant, and the armchair quarterback hindsight fact that what he was brandishing was a marker shouldn’t be much of a factor in my opinion.
She absolutely had plenty of vantage to identify a very obviously non-combatant child in her line of fire though… Even looking through the sights that kid would have been visible… it was that close. That’s not acceptable for someone who’s armed professionally.
I have to laugh at calling police “professionally” armed. Sure, they carry a gun for their job, but many show the discipline of a CoD teenager who forgot how to put the safety back on…
Yea, it’s just funny to see in a message condemning their behavior with a gun. IMO, if someone gets to be called “professional”, that should come with hard requirements of excellence when we’re talking about deadly weapons.
These articles virtually never describe someone worthy of “professional”.
The word professional has several definitions, and being competent is only one of them :)
I did use a very archaic definition I suppose, but simply being engaged in a specific occupation, without any skill or competence whatsoever, is all it takes to define one as a professional.
I.e. you can be a professional (work in an occupation) without being very “professional” (competent, expert) at all.
I’m older, and tend to not worry much about what assumptions I’m inviting, sorry. Googling the definition of the word will show what I’m saying easy enough :)
I don’t know how one unnecessary death is something you’re indifferent to, but the risk of another is disturbing. I’m not trying to attack you, I’m just honestly curious.
One is a combatant and one is a 10-ish year old child standing on a sidewalk.
Google the video, dude was agressively coming straight at her. He had pretty clear hostile intent, and I don’t think she had the time or the vantage to assess him as unarmed. From her perspective, this is a combatant, and the armchair quarterback hindsight fact that what he was brandishing was a marker shouldn’t be much of a factor in my opinion.
She absolutely had plenty of vantage to identify a very obviously non-combatant child in her line of fire though… Even looking through the sights that kid would have been visible… it was that close. That’s not acceptable for someone who’s armed professionally.
I have to laugh at calling police “professionally” armed. Sure, they carry a gun for their job, but many show the discipline of a CoD teenager who forgot how to put the safety back on…
Thats the context I intended actually :) its part of their profession.
Yea, it’s just funny to see in a message condemning their behavior with a gun. IMO, if someone gets to be called “professional”, that should come with hard requirements of excellence when we’re talking about deadly weapons.
These articles virtually never describe someone worthy of “professional”.
The word professional has several definitions, and being competent is only one of them :)
I did use a very archaic definition I suppose, but simply being engaged in a specific occupation, without any skill or competence whatsoever, is all it takes to define one as a professional.
I.e. you can be a professional (work in an occupation) without being very “professional” (competent, expert) at all.
I’m older, and tend to not worry much about what assumptions I’m inviting, sorry. Googling the definition of the word will show what I’m saying easy enough :)
Oh I’m familiar, I just had to laugh at the extreme juxtaposition between the definitions in this case.
It’s hard to find better examples of “professionals” acting unprofessionally than cops.