Fear....a uniform.....and a gun is what is dangerous.A kid all alone on a bus with a pocket knife is not,,,,,,,
Toronto Police Officer Charges in Connection with Streetcar Shooting
- Thread starter SLM
- Start date
It means center of mass, police aren't trained killers.
My brother-in-laws brother is a Mountie and has been for over 30 years. According to him the training is;
Shoot at the center of whatever part of the body you can see, if you can only see his arm you shoot at the center of that. They aren't trained to kill, they're trained to react in defense of themselves and the public.
You're thinking of death squads in places like Central America.
btw, I don't know many people who have their hearts in their solar plexus. The heart is slightly above and to the left of the center of mass.
You can't put all this on the police officers either, I've been hearing some of the officers I know, mostly Mounties, warning of declining standards for years. My sister was engaged to a recruit while he went through the RCMP training course in Regina in the early 1980s and it was intense and comprehensive. Officers left with most of the tools they needed to function as peace officers. Training has been cut back starting with the Liberals in the 1990s I think and we don't have the same quality of police training we did several decades ago.
I also had a friend who worked as a mental health professional in a provincial psychiatric hospital and he had worked at a forensic unit where the criminally insane are sent. He often had to deal with people who were psychotic and a danger to themselves and others and had extensive training in intervention. Deadly force should be used as a last resort, not as the preferred reaction to a threatening situation. True professionals know how to de-escalate most situations, which is why training is so important. If we want want professional police officers, we need to make sure they get appropriate training and support.
I also had a friend who worked as a mental health professional in a provincial psychiatric hospital and he had worked at a forensic unit where the criminally insane are sent. He often had to deal with people who were psychotic and a danger to themselves and others and had extensive training in intervention. Deadly force should be used as a last resort, not as the preferred reaction to a threatening situation. True professionals know how to de-escalate most situations, which is why training is so important. If we want want professional police officers, we need to make sure they get appropriate training and support.
Location of the heart.
You should then clarify the situations. I worked for an RCMP Officer who was on their Tactical Response Team for 9 years.
Police training: ‘You shoot until the threat has stopped,’ use-of-force trainer says | Toronto Star
“You shoot until the threat has stopped,” Valois said. Officers are not trained to shoot a weapon out of someone’s hand — something Valois said is next to impossible. They also aren’t trained to shoot out knees or other extremities. Officers aim for the largest “centre of mass,” generally a person’s torso.
“The concept is to incapacitate the threat,” said Rick Parent, also a former police officer of 30 years in B.C. who now teaches in the police studies program at Simon Fraser University. That usually takes a least a couple of rounds, Parent said, possibly four or more. “That’s what they’re trained to do.”
Though officers don’t intend to kill the person, they often do, Parent said, because the centre of mass is home to vital organs and arteries.
Both Valois and Parent said officers in Toronto and elsewhere in Canada are trained that within six to nine metres, a person armed with a weapon can close in on them before they have time to draw their weapon — a concept first developed by Utah police Sgt. Dennis Tueller and aptly named the Tueller Drill.
Parent said there is no set distance for when an officer should or shouldn’t choose to shoot someone, especially once their gun is drawn. That is up to the officer’s judgment.
“If they do move, then they’ll probably discharge their firearm,” Parent said.
He added: “Sometimes it’s a judgment error . . . They’re human beings first, police officers second.”
Last edited:
Location of the heart.
You should then clarify the situations. I worked for an RCMP Officer who was on their Tactical Response Team for 9 years.
Police training: ‘You shoot until the threat has stopped,’ use-of-force trainer says | Toronto Star
“You shoot until the threat has stopped,” Valois said. Officers are not trained to shoot a weapon out of someone’s hand — something Valois said is next to impossible. They also aren’t trained to shoot out knees or other extremities. Officers aim for the largest “centre of mass,” generally a person’s torso.
“The concept is to incapacitate the threat,” said Rick Parent, also a former police officer of 30 years in B.C. who now teaches in the police studies program at Simon Fraser University. That usually takes a least a couple of rounds, Parent said, possibly four or more. “That’s what they’re trained to do.”
Though officers don’t intend to kill the person, they often do, Parent said, because the centre of mass is home to vital organs and arteries.
Both Valois and Parent said officers in Toronto and elsewhere in Canada are trained that within six to nine metres, a person armed with a weapon can close in on them before they have time to draw their weapon — a concept first developed by Utah police Sgt. Dennis Tueller and aptly named the Tueller Drill.
Parent said there is no set distance for when an officer should or shouldn’t choose to shoot someone, especially once their gun is drawn. That is up to the officer’s judgment.
“If they do move, then they’ll probably discharge their firearm,” Parent said.
He added: “Sometimes it’s a judgment error . . . They’re human beings first, police officers second.”
That's what I was saying, they're trained to shoot at the visual center of mass with the intent to incapacitate the threatening individual, not kill them. And the solar plexus is the center of a person's mass, the heart isn't located there.
I've known cops, mostly Mounties, all my life and the quality of training has gone down, to the the point where they are sometimes a danger to themselves as we saw at Mayerthorpe and the public as we've been seeing recently with beatings and shootings.
The level of professionalism isn't what it used to be.
Arguably shooting Sammy Yatim three times when he advanced with a knife was justified, shooting him six more times when he was down opened the officer involved to charges of murder.
Who in the hell knows what the officer with the taser was doing.
It may have actually made it easier for him. Proving first degree murder is a lot harder than second degree murder.
Well that's the actual act of killing to be sure. But it was that moment, during the pause, that pretty much everyone was asking "What was he thinking?", that's the part that speaks to intent.
To be perfectly honest, if there were simply the three shots and the young man was just as dead, I could very well see myself giving the officer complete benefit of the doubt as far as justification for shooting. After all, I'm not the one staring down someone with a knife. And I've heard so much contradiction from 'experts' stating the optimum action to take in these types of situations.
But it was when he paused, he had to be considering what to do next. We know what he ended up doing. Now I want to know is why.
That may have something to do with corruption in the system. The latest case that comes to mind is that of Monty Robinson, charged with vehicular homicide and tasering the immigrant at the airport. Did he actually spend so much as a night in jail? Things do have a habit of evening out over time and I'm guessing Mr. Robinson some day will mysteriously turn up "in a compromised condition".
From what I understand, for a charge of 1st degree murder to stick, there has to be "malice aforethought" and previous planning. I doubt very much if that applies here, in a specific sense. I'm not sure how a general attitude of "blow the bastards away" would apply.
I don't think there is an appropriate length of time to think about killing someone. I suppose if you are thinking about the length of time to make it first degree, it would be variable. How long does it take to formulate a plan and to take the preliminary steps to one, avoid detection, two to wait for the right time and conditions and three, to perform necessary prerequisites?
Not much if you have the means and think you have the authority to do it because you're wearing a badge.
There were plenty of other options and time to consider them but he acted as Judge Judy and executioner.