Police Moderator
Global Moderator
On The Job and Tangled Up In Blue
Posts: 9,821
|
Post by Police Moderator on Feb 26, 2012 8:46:50 GMT -5
Officer Safety Uber Alles: The Coercion Cartel's Prime Directive The Minnesota state legislature is debating a measure that would amplify that state’s “Castle Doctrine” by recognizing that innocent people have no “duty to retreat” in the face of criminal aggression. This would expand existing legal protection for the defensive use of lethal force against home invaders -- including, where appropriate, the government-employed variety. That prospect is causing the local tax eaters’ guild to irrigate their skivvies. Dennis Flaherty, executive director of the Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association, complains that enactment of the measure “could result in dangerous situations for police officers, who regularly enter homes without permission,” reports Twin Cities ABC affiliate KSTP. “We’re fearful that people will react and shoot and our officers could be mistaken for someone that they believe is trying to jeopardize their safety,” simpers Flaherty. In encounters of the kind Flaherty describes, it would be more accurate to say that citizens would recognize police officers as people who “jeopardize their safety.” In an interview with Minnesota Public Radio, Flaherty stated the matter even more candidly: “Officer safety is the primary concern that we have about this bill…. [E]very day in the state of Minnesota, we have peace officers that are entering on somebody’s property – often times by stealth so that we have the element of surprise. We are extremely fearful that with this shoot-first-ask-questions-later mentality that this bill establishes, that we will have officers that will not only be in harm’s way, but in fact will be injured or perhaps killed.” Read more: Pro Libertate
|
|
|
Post by staffsgtsbunny on Feb 26, 2012 10:07:10 GMT -5
Going to be interesting how this one shakes out.......
|
|
|
Post by professorx on Feb 26, 2012 12:36:09 GMT -5
Officer Safety Uber Alles: The Coercion Cartel's Prime Directive The Minnesota state legislature is debating a measure that would amplify that state’s “Castle Doctrine” by recognizing that innocent people have no “duty to retreat” in the face of criminal aggression. This would expand existing legal protection for the defensive use of lethal force against home invaders -- including, where appropriate, the government-employed variety. That prospect is causing the local tax eaters’ guild to irrigate their skivvies. Dennis Flaherty, executive director of the Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association, complains that enactment of the measure “could result in dangerous situations for police officers, who regularly enter homes without permission,” reports Twin Cities ABC affiliate KSTP. “We’re fearful that people will react and shoot and our officers could be mistaken for someone that they believe is trying to jeopardize their safety,” simpers Flaherty. In encounters of the kind Flaherty describes, it would be more accurate to say that citizens would recognize police officers as people who “jeopardize their safety.” In an interview with Minnesota Public Radio, Flaherty stated the matter even more candidly: “Officer safety is the primary concern that we have about this bill…. [E]very day in the state of Minnesota, we have peace officers that are entering on somebody’s property – often times by stealth so that we have the element of surprise. We are extremely fearful that with this shoot-first-ask-questions-later mentality that this bill establishes, that we will have officers that will not only be in harm’s way, but in fact will be injured or perhaps killed.” Read more: Pro LibertateI am really skeptical about some "police" organizations lately. I use "police" in quotes, because some of them seem to go against what most police advocate. Dennis Flaherty, executive director of the Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association feels that citizens under attack should have the duty to retreat because "[E]very day in the state of Minnesota, we have peace officers that are entering on somebody’s property – often times by stealth". I would imagine if the police in MN were to visit someone's property they would be there in uniform to talk to homeowner, or be in tactical gear with a battering ram. There would be no mistake in either case the police were there. I am not sure how stealthy either situation would be. So this guy, supposedly with a police association, feels: 1. Citizens should have a limited right to protect themselves. 2. The police commonly sneak around unmarked on people property. Again, I am skeptical. I am not sure the typical law enforcement officer is represented by this person.
|
|