Just some common citizens walking through the state capitol building here in Oregon. With assault rifles.
Are you a cop who is dangerous and deadly? Whose hands and feet are weapons? “If the answer to that is “no,” train hard and train well to become so,” writes Dan Marcou at www.policeone.com, a website where you apparently advocate positions that make law enforcement look more ridiculous. Are police abuses a problem? No, Marcou says, “political correctness” is the issue. After we scrap that, cops can get down to being more aggressive. Which is apparently good.
Whenever a particular officer “aggressively” pursues criminals at a rate significantly above and beyond the norm, the term over-aggressive becomes the career kiss of death even though all those officer’s arrests withstand the scrutiny of the court.
In today’s world, law enforcement should embrace the word aggressive. That should have been made abundantly clear by the recently-resolved Christopher Dorner saga.
I guess the LAPD should have opened fire on more innocent civilians in vehicles that resembled Dorner’s? The word “over-aggressive” by definition implies a level of aggression beyond what was called for – that’s not something we should change our take on. So how deadly should a police officer be? “You need to be dangerous in a Native American Warrior sort of way.” I actually have no response to that.