TexasCHLforum.com

ScooterSissy wrote:

flintknapper wrote:...I’m just saying….I believe (these days) officers have it drummed into their heads that THEIR safety is the only thing that matters and that a certain “warrior” spirit is the only thing that will get them home each day (sigh…….).

The job can be dangerous…no doubt, but if you are unwilling to accept that (and a few bruises and bumps along the way) then maybe Law Enforcement isn’t really the best profession for some folks.

It is undeniable…. the growing divide of the “US vs. THEM” between the public and the police. Why is that?

Thank you, this is the point I was trying to make. You did it better than I (at least, at the end there ;) )

It's pretty obvious from this thread, that there is somewhat of an "US vs. THEM" mindset in place. It's as if any non-LEO questioning an officer's behavior is tantamount to "bashing" them, because "we" don't know what his "perception" of the situation was. Years ago, I worked for the Sheriff's Dept. in a Texas college town, and I'm sorry, but this idea that EVERY officer is facing life or death situations EVERY day they go to work, is fantasy land. Certainly they know there is a possibility they MAY face such a situation on any given day, but 99% of the time it's pretty much routine stuff. Perception plays a big part in the outcome of every situation, because perception is reality, to that person. If you go into every encounter with your primary thought being "I may have to kill or be killed", that colors your perception of events, and you are MUCH more likely to overreact and possibly wind up firing your weapon, because mentally, you are already visualizing yourself in a worst case scenario.

Of course an officer is entitled to DEFEND himself against aggressive behavior...but only AFTER that aggressive behavior has actually occurred. That does not give them the right to act preemptively. It is not acceptable for an officer to punch some one first, just because he thinks they MAY take a swing at him. Nobody has said on officer should "take a beating now and then", but they shouldn't be so afraid of any physical confrontation that their first thought is to pull a gun or taser before a punch has been thrown.

C-dub wrote:

Keith B wrote:Very sad situation. My sympathy goes out to your friend. Not able to see exactly where the dog was in relation to the officer, but that shot definitely was taken awfully quickly. My gut says he overreacted big time to the dog coming to investigate and then tried to cover it with his blaming your friend for not getting his dog, when in reality your friend had not even had time to process what was going on and react himself. This is one time when the dash cam audio will be an asset for your friend to prove liability on the city.

Yeah. Even without the video it sounds bad for the officer and he immediately began trying to pass the blame to the owner. To me, that says he immediately knew he did something wrong and was trying to distance himself from his actions.

I don't think there's any question the officer reacted too quickly and too aggressively. Aside from being male, Mr. Paxton did not match the description given the officer. There was no indication in the disturbance call to indicate the actual suspect was armed. As Keith said, this time the dash cam will pretty much put the blame on the officer.