• theneverfox@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    Nah, it kind of makes sense for the second guy.

    Remember, he’s not getting triggered by the acorn, he’s reacting to his coworker yelling that they’ve been shot and actual gunfire. That’s a justified reason to pull out your weapon IMO

    Granted, he should’ve tried to take control of the situation and de-escalate so he could “save” his panicked coworker, but that kind of calmness “under fire” would take actual training

    • Wrench@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      9 months ago

      It does mean that the assisting officers aren’t required to actually confirm their target, though.

      What if this was real. If a 3rd party shot at them. 1st officer fires, blindly assuming it’s the perp in cuffs in the car. 2nd cop shoots and kills perp in car because he saw that’s what his partner was shooting at. When, in this hypothetical scenario, it was really a 3rd party that wasn’t identified yet, which would be the only plausible source of a gun shot anyway since the perp was already searched and cuffed.

      That doesn’t make sense to me, but that’s how they’re trained. Ride or die with their comrads. Once the first shot is fired, it’s shoot first and ask questions later for all additional officers.

      That’s not good policy. That’s not good for civilians.