I have seen it from other departments. Hell, I have seen it used by my own teams. The guy is OBVIOUSLY old and fragile. WHY is it such a stretch of the imagination to have someone pull him to the side and talk with him? Why is the first default the use of force? What threat did the old timer pose to a 30 something officer in full battle-rattle?
Sorry, I will NEVER agree that this was the correct path to take.
It was not.
If you think it was, I hope you are not patrolling my streets.
Perhaps they could have sat him down and had a cup of coffee with him. They could discuss world events like why the cities are burning and how many police officers and citizens have been killed and injured by the peaceful protesters. Maybe they could ask him if he had visited the two officers who had been run over by an SUV in Buffalo the other day one of whom had his pelvis smashed. It seems like a pretty good time to do something like that seeing as how they were in "full battle rattle" and heading into a riot situation. Maybe you could volunteer your time and go discuss it with the protesters that way the police could do the job they were hired to do.
I have been in "full battle rattle" in the middle of riots myself. As for me I am glad I never had someone like you watching my backside when I was in that type of situation. Not sure where you worked but I knew guys who had the same self righteous attitude as yours. They would talk nonsense about other officers but somehow they never seemed to be around when the rubber hit the road.
Maybe you should be asking why a 75 year old man could possibly think it's a good idea to approach and confront the officers in that situation. Apparently the 57 police officers in the emergency response team who resigned have a different point of view on the situation than you have also.
Last edited: