[philovan]

Originally Posted by foxfantastic ↗

I see your point, but this is 2026. Surely we can devise something that will stop someone in their tracks besides deadly force.

Then there is the question of whether we SHOULD use an alternative means. Put bluntly, it is the question of whether people who act in such a manner as this individual should continue to live in a (hopefully) civilized society. I merely raise the question; I don't attempt to answer it.

[William May]

Originally Posted by rohmell ↗

That's right, Boys and Girls, you get get a machete of your very own at any Harbor Freight Tools store!
https://www.harborfreight.com/18-in-...ade-57951.html

Sorry, but the label CLEARLY STATES: "Not to be used around police officers!"

[ajs11961]

Originally Posted by Yanni ↗

...all the europeans, together now:

"tHe tRiGgEr hApPy cOp cOuLd hAvE jUsT AiMeD fOr tHe LeGs, huRR!"

Yes, see below with the male dressed in drag right on cue.

[ajs11961]

Originally Posted by Anal Dough ↗

Frequency does not equal predictability.

Law enforcement deals with violent people often, yes. But each encounter still hinges on variables that change second to second. Distance, weapon, bystanders, lighting, reaction time, whether the person charges or hesitates. Those factors determine whether less lethal options even have time to work. Tasers fail. Pepper spray takes time. Physical restraint requires proximity that can get someone killed if the suspect is armed.

AI doesn't solve physics, reaction time, or human behavior under stress. It can't slow down a charging person or guarantee compliance. Hell, it can barely pull off a decent joke or an acceptable response to a shit-post (despite the best efforts of some of my ChatGPT-dependent contemporaries).

There are many arrests that end without lethal force every day. The existence of those successes doesn't eliminate the rare situations where the window to act is measured in a heartbeat.

I won't continue to debate you on this. You've been here long enough to have seen what happens when cops hesitate at the wrong moment. I feel like you're just arguing from the perspective of a utopian unicorn, so pointing out any more flaws in your reasoning is likely to spiral into further fantasy land or petty semantics, and I'm just not in the mood.

Thanks for the discourse. Keep dreaming.

well-said, Mr. Dough

[ajs11961]

Originally Posted by foxfantastic ↗

I'll grant that he was being aggressive, violent, and ignoring clear commands, but you're telling me that after so many centuries law enforcement has absolutely no other recourse in this type of situation other than lethal force.

You cant shock the guy? Fire a pair of bolas around his ankles? Fire a net? Throw a rubber blanket? We have a spray meant specifically to incapacitate bears, but thats also out of the question.

Only death

I guess if you were the cop you would have went to the trunk and got a bolo for the ankles, a rubber blankie to throw on the bad guy and some bear mace.
A male dressed as a female with full makeup and hair on gives me bad vibes....

[ajs11961]

Originally Posted by foxfantastic ↗

I see your point, but this is 2026. Surely we can devise something that will stop someone in their tracks besides deadly force.

Why haven't 'you' devised something to stop a maniac?
You can volunteer and do a ride-along with cops and handle a nut running at you with the machete and let us know how that works out. Heck, you could be a star on DR.

[Caf002]

When someone is coming at you with a lethal weapon, ie machete in this case, the best and logical option is to lethal force. And I don’t believe that the academy teaches to go for the leg, etc, it center mass.

[foxfantastic]

Originally Posted by Anal Dough ↗

Not debating, just pointing out that such an invention already exists: It's called, wait for it... not beating the shit out of your wife then charging at a cop with a machete. In situations like this, it works (almost) every time.... unless you're black.

I hope your fantasy comes true one day, John Lennon, Jr. — till then, I'm grateful for the folks who make these sorts of decisions in the moment so I don't have to.

I call that complacency. Why even invent things like pepper spray and tasers and tear gas when it is so much cheaper and expedient to just shoot people dead?

The reason Im arguing this is that, as Minnesota demonstrated, there are times when agents shoot people dead who weren't even a threat to begin with. I'm sure cops themselves don't like being put in a position where they have to kill someone either, only to later discover the dude was wielding a toy or a water gun. To kill someone who is not in the right frame of mind.

This cop did what he had to do with the tools at his disposal, I'm not deprecating his actions, but a hand to hand melee is NOT an unexpected turn of events in this line of work, which is why we have non-lethal methods of apprehension. We can do better.

[foxfantastic]

Originally Posted by ajs11961 ↗

Why haven't 'you' devised something to stop a maniac?
You can volunteer and do a ride-along with cops and handle a nut running at you with the machete and let us know how that works out. Heck, you could be a star on DR.

Yeah, Im sure countries that observe Sharia law also tenaciously argue that cutting off a man's hands will prevent him from stealing again. Civilized countries have risen above that, so why can't we rise above this?

[foxfantastic]

Originally Posted by Caf002 ↗

When someone is coming at you with a lethal weapon, ie machete in this case, the best and logical option is to lethal force. And I don’t believe that the academy teaches to go for the leg, etc, it center mass.

Thats a very good observation. The reason bullets and tasers fail in these types of encounters is that they are too small and have the potential to miss. Something with a broader range might fit the bill.