|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
They didn't respond to shoot him. They responded to save his wife and talk him out of the incident without it escalating. He choose to go off the deep end. You said we never hear of cops shooting other cops to save innocent people. I think they shot a person to save an innocent person, the other cop's wife. Again, people like to twist words to make it fit their story. A bad cop was threatening to kill his wife and started to shoot at the responding officers, placing innocent civilians in the area at risk. Its what you asked for. Also, you will notice, he shot at them, they tried to talk to him instead of returning fire immediately, and when he continued pointing his weapon at them, they then shot and killed him. They didn't just show up with guns blazing.That was just a quick example I thought of immediately. If I did a Google search, I could probably find a dozen more examples.
I showed it. And you still don't want to accept that good cops actually stopped a bad cop from hurting an innocent person by killing him. You said those are cops that should be honored in your post that I quoted. You failed to do it, again making excuses instead of even following up in what you posted just a few minutes ago. Your dislike for the police doesn't even allow you to give credit where it is due, even when you set the qualifiers and they meet that. Again, it is what it is and not worth arguing with you any longer. It's a holiday weekend. I'm out. Good luck to you.
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
.What hurts the system more, angry internet posters or you?
Angry Internet posters. It does more to burn out good cops than anything else. You can say it doesn't. I've seen first hand that it absolutely does. Again, we aren't going to come to a compromise on this because you aren't going to believe what I say regardless of how much I've seen it happen over the ten years I was on the police force. I'm trying to talk my friends out of the job because I don't want them hurt or dying for people who don't appreciate the sacrifice they are willing to give. Again, I wouldn't mind having a beer and discussing face to face, unfortunately, that isn't an option so I choose to take my wife on a date and a nice dinner than continuing to have a conversation here where nothing is going to be solved and no one is going to change their opinion. It is what it is. Good luck.
You know what you never hear and would sell tons of papers? "Cop shoots other cop to save innocent." That would be a cop who would deserve to be honored. Where are the good cops when the bad cops are gunning people down in the street?
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Not really. Just figured it isn't worth debating. People are not going to change their minds - you, me, or anyone else in this thread.
There are people that think cops will do nothing but screw them over. They discredit them every chance they get, even the good cops with never a negative mark against them in a 20 year career, and don't honor the good ones who sacrifice their own lives to protect complete strangers. For those people, I guess they would rather live in an anarchy and protect all of their stuff on their own. That's fine. That is what they think. I disagree and there isn't really a middle ground to come to.
When people start twisting words to make it sound like the cop walked up, with malice and aforethougt, and shot the baby in the face at point blank range, it's time for me to exit the conversation. It is clear that those people don't want to discuss the topic. They only want to crucify the cop. They fail to see that every emergency incident like this has grey areas. Mistakes happen. If you think the system is broken, go make strides to fix it. I've already advised several times in this thred that bad police work should be held accountable. People seem to have ignored that and want to keep championing the position that all police are evil.
I'm not mad. Im not frustrated. It is what it is. I got out of police work because I got tired of all the people who didn't appreciate the service willingly offered and the risk of me losing my life every day for people that don't appreciate it. It isn't my loss. I work for a gaming company. It's really children who would have been protected had I stayed. They unfortunately don't receive the same level of investigation, and subsequent protection, that they would have received if I was still a crimes against children detective.
So, since there is no middle ground to come to in this conversation, I choose to bow out of the conversation and wish you good luck in your life.
Unfortunately the swat team is not part of the info gathering, surveillance, etc... They are called out to end a situation based on the info that was provided to them. Should the swat member who fired the grenade be held accountble? No. Should the detective or commander that didn't confirm all of the information before telling the swat team to go be held accountable? Absolutely.
As to your larger point, I 1000% agree. The person providing the wrong info should be held accountable, the Habersham County DA should open an investigation, and if shoddy police work was responsible, the officer/detective that provided bad info that led to the awful injuries of the baby should be held accountable.
I dont think anyone here is arguing against that at all. I encourage everyone on this thread to write the Habersham County DA and ask what the hell? However, the DA did his job by bringing the case to the grand jury. I believe a grand jury of citizens failed to pass a true bill on any officer in this case. If you want to hold anyone accountable, hold the citizens of Habersham County responsible. They are the ones who refused to true bill the case and send it back to the DA's office so he could seek prosecution.
I would like to stay and discuss longer. Hell, I'd love to have a beer and just chat about it because difference of opinions is what makes everyone a more rounded person. But, my daughter has the day off school so I'm headed out to spend the day with her, not stay on the message boards.
Let's use another example and see if it helps clarify. And yes, I understand it is fictional but I'm trying to see if it helps clarify.
A doctor diagnoses a patient and says they have symptom XXXXX so what is wrong with that person is XXXXXX. They relay that information to the surgeon. The surgeon then cuts the person open to start performing the surgery on what he was advised was wrong. When he opens the person on the table up, he sees that the info he was given was wrong, that the person does not have XXXXXX, and he immediately tells the nursing staff to start sewing this person back up. When the nursing staff starts seeing the person back up, the patient goes into cardiac arrest and dies. Who should be held accountable? The doctor providing the incorrect info that led to the surgery, or the doctor who was performing the surgery based on the information he received from another professional in his same field? It was, after all,the tools used to cut the person open and the complications that arose from that, that caused the person to die, not the original doctor that provided bad info.
Please restate your argument. What you stated confused me in what you were asking me to rebut.
I didn't say that and you know it. The procedure is for the detective and the commander to do their job, make sure all of the information they are providing to a swat team is accurate, and relay that information.
Mass murderers don't usually kill neighbors. They go into a mall food court or a theatre or whatever and kill I discrimation. What I *think* you are referring to is a serial killer. They actually single out a specific type of victim and actively seek to kill that type of victim and not really deviate.
Also, please don't say "every killer in the history of mankind." For example, It's an inaccurate statement. Someone who kils a person because they struck the vehicle when they were driving drunk doesn't fit the argument you are trying to present.
Because it is standard practice in swat when you make entry into an apartment building, to use bird shot, not slugs. The officer was trained to change ammunition when in that specific instance. He didn't change ammunition. He put someone's life in danger through his actions of not changing ammunition, which is something he is solely accountable for. It is his weapon.
The swat officer who fired the flash bang grende, hadn't been on scene when the information was gathered. He was likely at home when the incident started and called out to the scene. When he arrived on scene, he was likely told by his commander, "We've received information that there are armed guards by the doors. From the drug buy a few hours ago, There are no children present. To prevent loss of life to offers entering, we are going to use a flash bang grenade to stun the guards by the front door. Upon entry, point man and second will proceed down the hall. Numbers three and four will handcuff and guard the incapacitated by the door."
The officer that fired the weapon that has the grenade is going by the information provided by his commander. He isn't afforded the opportunity to investigate the circumstances so has to rely on the info provided by either the detective or the commander. It is solely the detective or commanders responsibility to make sure the information they bare providing is accurate. If something is inaccurate, and innocent people get hurt or killed, it is completely the fault of the commander or detective, hit the guy who came from home, received the information, and followed through with actions based on the info he was given.
Since one doctor killed a person in surgery because he made a horrible error in judgement, that means all surgeons are eventually going to make an error in judgement and kill someone? I've never been a doctor but aren't medical reviews conducted by other doctors?
It's similar. The doctor didn't kill with a gun or a grenade, but he did kill due to errors made in surgery that, if not made, would have allowed the person to live.
Just because one person in a particular profession screws up, it doesn't mean everyone in that profession is going to do the same.
Can you name an incident where someone randomly murdered 1 person but let 40 others lI've? If so, link it and we will discuss.
You can't compare what one unit in one department did and say that it applies to every department in the country.
I assume you either missed or ignoring where I said people who do shoddy police work should be held accountble. It's back on the last page.
I guess you think profiling is ok then? What you advised above is very similar to same reasons federal law enforcement profiled people.
Like I said, replace almost any other group where you've put the word cop and you would be rallying against the side of those profiling that group.
Mmmmmmaybe hand-to-hand combat training, as opposed to most other guys' absence of such? Just a theory here, mind you.
Most police receive four hours training at the academy and nothing is required after that. If the officer wants any further training, it's up to the individual to seek it out. I'm sure there may be a handful of departments that offer additional training somewhere. But, most officers out there have only the few hours at the academy that involve arm bars, wrist locks, and maintaining control of their weapon when someone is trying to take it away. Most of those thing they teach rarely work on someone larger or stronger than the officer.
I'm sorry you feel that way. Generalizations about, and stereotyping of, any group is just not a positive way to go about life. Replace "cops" with just about any other group of people out there in your paragraph I quoted above and you should start to see what I mean. Stereotyping a whole group of people, whether it is a career, race, ethnicity, hobby, etc... is pretty unfair to the 98% of the group that doesn't fit what you've labeled them all as. I would think gamers (which all of us here are I am guessing) should know better than most what being the victim of a stereotype is like.
This is actually slightly off base. The officer is always responsible anytime he discharges his weapon, whether it is lethal or less lethal force. There was a case were a SWAT team entered an apartment of a barricaded crazy man who they knew was armed. The second team member through the door forgot he had slugs loaded into his shotgun. When the team took fire from the crazy man, the SWAT member fired his shot gun, injuring the crazy man. Unfortunately, the slug exited the crazy man, traveled through two other walls, and struck and injured an innocent person in the next door apartment. That officer was held accountable for injuring that neighbor even though they weren't part of the incident intitially.
Every officer is taught in the academy, and twice a year at re qualification, that they are responsible for every time their weapon is discharged. If they have even a doubt they may injure an innocent, it's best to think twice before discharging their weapon. In this particular case, the officer probably won't be charge and shouldn't be. However, the detective or commander who failed to do sufficient and complete investigation should be looked at by the local DA's office for shoddy police work.
What we need to see is the good cops starting to throw their bad cop colleagues under the bus and speak out about police corruption. A decent problem reporting system that doesn't get people threatened by the cops would also be a good idea. What many people don't realize is that accepting transparency and accountability lets you avoid having everyone judged by the behaviour of "a few bad apples". Ideally, this would not be necessary because the police sorted these things out in a way that worked already - but that is not the case. Trust is difficult to repair in all situations, even more so for people with power.
Its out there but the news doesn't cover it as much as they should. The sorry cops that killed the old woman in Atlanta during a ridiculously bad no-knock warrant all went to prison. The cops in New Orleans who were taking target practice on displaced people during Hurricane Katrina have all gone to prison. There are cops dismissed, and investigations started every day by internal affairs offices all over the country. Unfortunately, the media really only wants to cover the most controversial cases because it is what drives ratings. You never hear about the cop that was fired because he handcuffed people too tightly for the third time in six months, received two previous warnings, and was subsequently fired because he never corrected the errors of his bullying of the helpless person in handcuffs.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Ah, now I see your second message. I disagree with almost everything in it, but as you are a staff member, which I didn't realize until now, with the power to delete posts as you see fit, I shall refrain from posting further tonight.
The only posts I removed that you posted are where you were demeaning me with a title that doesn't fit. Your post that include links to the NYT article are still here and not removed.
As I mentioned in my PM, If you want to repost your posts without the officer comment, then they will stay up.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Sent you another PM.
I don't want to get into a debate about the Mochael Brown case. But, I'm going to hod, judgement until all the evidence is out.
There is apparently videos where witnesses are overhead saying they saw Brown charging the cop even after he was ordered to stop. The cop also allegedly had a fractured orbital bones that came from Brown striking him. It's already been shown several witnesses lied about what they saw. A lot of people make the mistake and think that someone who doesn't have a weapon, besides their fists and hands, aren't a threat when, in fact, they can kill someone with just their hands, especially when they a bigger than the person they are attacking (Brown was bigger than the cop). I will wait until all the evidence and the grand jury findings come out before I make a personal decision on it. Do I think the cop was wrong with the initial stop? You bet. It should have never escalated. Do I know if it was Brown or the cop who escalated it to the point where it turned lethal? Nope, I wasn't there and don't have all the evidence.
Agreed and why I support the use of personal cameras by every officer the day they are sworn in. Like I said earlier, better hiring screening and better pay is also going to eliminate most of the "bully complex" you find in the scumbag cops out there.
I know that it is easy to lump all cops into the same boat and say that most, if not all, lie to make their cases. But, there ae more good cops than bad cops out there. and no, I'm not directing that specifically at you Jeff. That is a general statement.
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
I never said it was acceptable.
100% agree. And why I think internal affairs is the second most important department in every police department.
And that is absolutely the fault of elected officials, especially district attorneys.
Since there are articles that have been posted about how there should not be no knock warrants, let me offer an article where a judge refused a no knock warrant when it was absolutely necessary. You can read it HERE.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Yep, an opinion piece by an author who is known to hate everything involving police. Find me a article that presents both sides of the argument nd we can discuss. Post a very one sided article and it isn't worth the time debating. I'm not looking to argue with you, by the way, which it seems you are looking for. I was just trying to offer the insight from someone who has been there and done that for a decade.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
I think we are in agreement on the topic for the most part. As a cop (or detective), it is very sobering responsibility when you can take away people's liberties. I fully support full scrutiny on every arrest. It is why I was careful on every arrest I ever made and I made sure I had more evidence than would ever be needed to obtain a conviction. It's also why I've never had conviction overturned on appeal in more than 350 arrests.
I also absolutely support personal cameras attached to every officer's uniform. It would absolutely protect more officers against false claims than it would catch officers doing something wrong. Of course you get people screaming not to raise taxes to support that initiative and the money has to come from somewhere. You also get the crowd that will argue it violates their right to privacy.
I'm certainly not defending bad cops. I arrested three cops during my tenure. I had no patience for a bad cop as it gave the rest of cops bad name, including me at the time. If it is a "bad shooting", the cop should absolutely be arrested and put on trial.
However, the pendulum shift is concerning. Why does everyone yell for "innocence until proven guilty" for an accused civilian, but when a cop is involved in a shooting, they aren't afforded that same opportunity? Almost immeditely after every police shooting you hear cries to arrest the officer, even if there were multiple witnesses that support a "good shooting."
On a side note, when I use good or bad shooting, let me clarify. I don't think there is ever a such thing as a shooting that is good and I hope it doesn't come across that way
Interesting. So the crooks have not tainted the well sufficiently enough. You can trust them to tell the truth most of the time and not hide evidence?
Let me give the opinion of someone who has walked a mile in those shoes. I was a crimes against children and special victims detective for almost 10 years. I didn't care whether I made ten arrests a month or no arrests in a month. My only goal was to arrest scum bags that hurt people who couldn't protect themselves. I didn't need to fabricate evidence. I based my cases solely on the evidence that was presented. Any case worth an arrest generally has five times the evidence you need to make the arrest. You just need to find it with a little work. Every officer amd detective I worked with felt the same way.
Lumping the tens of thousands of good officers and detectives into the same group as the handful of bad ones is just plain wrong. What most people forget is a police force, no matter how big or small, is a direct reflection of the community they serve because the pool of officers comes from that community. If you really want to fix the problem, it is fairly simple. Better screening during the hiring process and better pay. When communities hire people to become officers and carry weapons that can maim and kill, and they pay the, less than a McDonalds manager makes, something is wrong.
As I've been advised countless times while in this job, we aren't going to please everyone all of the time, even when it's something that is new, free, and something previously unavailable. I'm also guessing you didn't like WBG or WBG2 since they had the same requirement. My apologies it doesn't fit your needs. Hopefully, we can take the feedback and do better the next time around.
I had more than 200 emails and 20+ Questions on each of the 200+ questionnaires to review. It is likely I may have missed one or two in all of the documents. Email me.
The ACG pregens hold their own. The old pregens from the core are being reworked. New pregens for the APG are being designed. Try to keep an open mind. And try them out before you just shut the idea down without any play experience with the new and revamped pregens.
Andrew K wrote:
I don't remember seeing an email from you, Andrew. However, I went through more than 170 emails so I may have missed one or two. Email me so we can sort it out.
They are coming. All of them.
If it was a tier 1 regular scenario open for full reply, I would agree with you. However, for a product focused designed specifically for introduction of the system and game to new players, and not for veterans to play ad nauseum, we decided it best to make it pregens across the board. In the future when we release other quests series, we may reconsider. However, I need my mind changed through actual play experience because there is too much of this crap that happens and drives away first time players for good.
How many first time player experiences being ruined is enough?
You've played PFS since event #1. You tell me,
Agreed. Unfortunately, people bring overpowered Pcs to the table to show they can solo the quest, and it leads to a bad experience for the new person sitting down for his first timeSo, we limited the damage that can happen by limiting these to pregens only.
Disappointed that the closest region is 160 miles away.
It's only because someone didn't apply for wherever you are at. VO positions are often under appreciated and people lash out at them about things not in their control, single them out on message boards just because they have a title next to their name, and other immature acts that make people hesitant to volunteer their valuable time for people who don't seem to appreciate it. That makes finding volunteers a difficult task and is one we battle every day.
If you or someone you know might be interested in volunteering, have them email me.
Your GM is wrong. As Jeff said above, "the only reason maps ever use a size other than 5' squares (which the rules are based on) is something called "getting the darn thing to fit on one page."
All other rules about movement and the like still apply. We just couldn't fit the entire map onto a page if it was drawn in 5 foot squares.
On a side note, I generally get 1-3 emails detailing these types of situations on average on a weekly basis. This is an example of the reason I haven't opened up GMing with more creative liberties. Feel free to point to this thread the next time someone asks why they can't do whatever they want as a GM in PFS OP.