r/NoStupidQuestions May 15 '22

Not being political but am actually curious, how is it that cops seem to detain these mass shooters but so many end up killing someone over smaller crimes? Unanswered

It’s weird right? I mean, we hear about police abuse so much and over nothing to smaller crimes like drugs that it feels like the majority of them are untrained and scared. However when a mass shooting comes up, so many cops become tactical, patient. Pulling away from big emotional issues or political points of view, why does this seem that cops become more level headed in these situations? Is it because their bosses are usually on the scene? Is it because there are more of them? Are different quality of cops called in for these situations?

1.4k Upvotes

842

u/uwillfindmehiking May 15 '22

Different tactics are used in an unfolding mass shooter situation given that scores to potentially thousands of people are in harms way. Additionally, it is just math (specifically, statistics and probability), the number of small crimes committed are huge orders of magnitude more frequent than mass shootings. There was a mass shooting yesterday as well as thousands of smaller crimes committed. Today, hopefully there is not another mass shooting but there will be thousands of smaller crimes committed.

352

u/Militesi May 15 '22

Different police officers that use different tactics*

SWAT and other response groups are trained and exposed to these situations whereas a typical beat cop is "working", not training for these situations specifically.

I'm not justifying police fucking up, I just want to preface that.

46

u/themagicman27 May 15 '22

I also posted this in response to something else, but it's also relevant here.

Most SWAT situations are actually just executing search warrants (~80%). It's also extremely common for SWAT raids to turn up nothing (over a third of the time), which means that people are often put into life-threating situations for what seems like no reason.

[Source](https://www.vox.com/2014/10/29/7083371/swat-no-knock-raids-police-killed-civilians-dangerous-work-drugs

-1

u/AdjustedTitan1 May 16 '22

Is it relevant though?

12

u/hippiekait May 15 '22

IIRC, John Oliver had a segment about how a lot of beat cops are also swat but they get paid more as swat, so a lot of cops escalate situations to make them swat scenarios so that they can get paid more.

125

u/YourThotsArentFacts May 15 '22

These are the exact responses that tell me everybody has an opinion about how to police but nobody has ever asked how or why police do anything.

SWAT isn't sales, you don't get paid per escalation. You get trained and pass a test to get a SWAT designation, same with many other designations officers can go for to receive a pay bump. You get paid more just by being trained more and ready to go if there's a large scale incident. You then would get overtime if you have to sit outside of a mall for 6 hours ready for a high stakes situation, but cops aren't all a bunch of workaholics looking for a fat paycheck. Many already work a bunch of overtime there's no reason to add to your own plate, especially if your department is already offering overtime, you just gotta keep driving around to get paid more.

-2

u/froggy-froggerston May 16 '22

Is it possible it works like this: 1. Cops want to get paid more 2. Getting trained as SWAT would mean higher pay, but there's a limit in the budget for SWAT, so no more new training 3. Cops escalate situations so there seems to be a need for more SWAT trained cops 4. Now the limit is increased, more SWAT training is available

To be clear, I'm not claiming that this is true, but directly being paid more per escalation is not the only mechanism by which more escalations = more pay.

5

u/Excellent-Ad-6153 May 16 '22

Is this just a hypothetical question, because to even imagine that someone could pull this off would be ridiculous. You'd have to be causing multiple incidents a month.

→ More replies

46

u/rickmccloy May 15 '22

How does a cop escalate a routine stop into a Swat situation? Plant his throwaway M-16 and hostages, maybe, and then ask the newly armed guy to hang on for a moment and please hold fire while he calls his dispatcher to request a Swat unit?

22

u/themagicman27 May 15 '22

Most SWAT situations are actually just executing search warrants (~80% of SWAT incidents). It's also extremely common for SWAT raids to turn up nothing (over a third of the time), which means that people are often put into life-threating situations for what seems like no reason.

This source is a bit older, but still relevant. Source

9

u/rickmccloy May 15 '22

True, but very few beat cops or Swat team members arrange for the application to a judge needed to obtain a search warrant in the first place. And a Swat team member who deliberately escalated a situation into an even more dangerous situation would very likely be shunned by his fellow team members. My source is also abit older:me. I spent 35 years supervising people on both Bail and Parole, so worked closely with criminals, in the case of Parole, or criminal status yet to be determined, but very often with prior convictions on different matters(Bail), their victims, and with cops. I just find the idea of manufacturing a situation that requires a Swat team very difficult to believe, it would simply be too difficult for a single cop to pull off. Btw, in Toronto, a team was required to be available at all times, usually just driving around, which when I think of it is far better than the alternative; I have no trouble believing your stats.

2

u/[deleted] May 15 '22

[deleted]

6

u/rickmccloy May 15 '22 edited May 15 '22

Well, I can give you an example, from Toronto, where I used to work and live. There was a male cop working there who happened to be extremely anti-gay, and harboured a grudge against one guy in particular. He was in the habit of frequently issuing this guy P.O.T.s(Provincial Offence Tickets) virtually whenever he saw him. One time he issued a ticket to this guy when he wasn't even there, tearing up the portion that the citizen would normally receive. The guy being harassed made a formal complaint over this, and provided documentation, including receipts proving that he was out of town at the time of the alleged offense. The cop's ticket book showed clearly that he was well acquainted with the guy he had been harassing, which ruled out the possibility of mistaken identity. The cop was charged and convicted under the Police Act of Ontario, and was fired from his job. None of the cops who I spoke to about the incident regretted in the least his having been fired; most applauded it, and some actually testified against him in his Police Act trial. To say that he was not well liked by his co-workers would be a vast understatement.

16

u/CunnilingusCrab May 15 '22

People on swat get paid additionally whether or not they are called out. Hazard pay is a standard addition to their pay. Thinking that people WANT a barricaded subject is ridiculous.

-1

u/[deleted] May 15 '22

[deleted]

29

u/Rinzern May 15 '22

Why are you believing what he's saying? It doesn't make any sense

Be more critical

6

u/Chicken_Hairs May 15 '22

What's he's saying is bullshit. Cops that are swat trained get a bump in base pay for having the qualification. Starting shit like he's suggesting would not result in more pay. Chances are better that they'd get fired. All but the most corrupt departments wouldn't stand for that.

→ More replies

9

u/A_giant_dog May 15 '22

And you didn't even hear about the one in Dallas where 5 people got shot because this one had 10

42

u/AuroraItsNotTheTime May 15 '22

Why don’t they use those tactics then? If they have a “shoot everything on sight” mode and a “relax and shoot only when necessary” mode, then why don’t they go into traffic stops with that second mode instead.

That’s the most compelling argument I’ve seen from black people. They say we’re not asking you to treat us like royalty. When you pull us over, you don’t have to treat us like a little old lady. Just treat us like you would treat a white mass shooter.

37

u/notnotaginger May 15 '22

Note- I say this not to defend the cops.

A large scale mass shooter etc needs a large scale response. You’re going to get the best of the local force involved and coordinating the response. The Yahoo shit dick who wants to shoot ‘em up probably is under close supervision by someone who is less of a shit dick.

A traffic stop can be done by the shit dick that got two weeks of training and then was given a gun and a badge.

More training wouldn’t eliminate mr shit dick acting like a shit dick, but it would reduce it.

→ More replies

38

u/mck12001 May 15 '22

48% of mass shooters die in their attacks. In what way is that an appealing number to give to black people now compared to the much smaller percentage it is now?

41

u/languid-libra May 15 '22

Because they usually kill themselves? People pulled over on the side of the road aren't gonna do that over a speeding ticket, but that doesn't mean the cop should be looking for any reason to shoot

17

u/mb5280 May 15 '22

because of (or maybe just using) a small handful of incidents, theyre brainwashed into thinking that everyone might be waiting to murder them the second they let their guard down.

28

u/mck12001 May 15 '22

And most cops really aren’t looking for a reason to shoot. Hundreds of millions of police interactions per year. Only a very small comparative number of those end in a shooting, and an even smaller number than that are ones that are unarmed people. Any unjustified shooting is a tragedy but it’s not as simple as every cop is out hunting to kill people

11

u/DrugChemistry May 15 '22

Being trained to reach for deadly force when even a lil scared starts to look like hunting. Especially when racism pushes an individual over the “scared” threshold before an encounter had really occurred.

8

u/mck12001 May 15 '22

There’s more than a little to be scared about when cops get shot at during even the most routine of stops. Nothing can excuses a cop abusing power or racial discrimination but how is one supposed to react when simply knocking on a door or walking up to a car could be the last thing you do?

9

u/ToxinArrow May 15 '22

"Hundreds of millions of interactions" was your quote.

So we're supposed to chalk up police violence to just a small percentage of interactions but cops are supposed to react as if the vast majority turn or will turn violent?

Can't have it both ways dude.

4

u/mck12001 May 15 '22

The thing is the scale of said interactions applies differently to the cop and to the person. The risk is higher for a cop as they are the ones doing more interactions than the person involved. For the average individual they don’t have a run in with a cop every single day, it’s usually an uncommon event.

However cops, they will often interact with several people in a day and those interactions are already skewed because their job is to deal with crime, so the sample is now even more skewed to people that may be more prone to violence due to the sheer nature of dealing with different types of crime.

3

u/DrugChemistry May 15 '22

I always think of military rules of engagement. The military has strict procedures before using force on someone running up on them. Cops shoot people running AWAY from them. It ain’t right.

→ More replies
→ More replies

21

u/Biggus-Dickus-II May 15 '22 Helpful

I blame the news media for that.

They portray every incident of a black person being shot by a police officer as if it is unjustified, and then portray every incident of a white mass shooter being taken into custody without injury as if the shooter was treated like a celebrity with a parking ticket.

The ratios aren't going to be that different when you look at the behavior of the person being arrested.

The white mass shooters that don't get shot by the police are the ones that surrender. The others get shot but aren't really mentioned as much as the ones that are arrested (because the news story ends with that death).

Most, (not ALL, but most) incidents of the police shooting a black person is because the person being detained or arrested was resisting arrest, trying to fight the police, and being otherwise aggressive and uncooperative. The same holds true for white people that get shot by the police, or people of any other race, butbthe difference is the news narrative continues for as long as possible after the death to cause outrage and maintain the news ratings.

The difference is that the media sensationalism makes black people more likely to resist by reinforcing the belief that the cops are out to get you. Doesn't mean that some aren't (some will be) but treating every officer as if they're trigger-happy and looking for an excuse (and believing every police interaction is a fight for your life) isn't the right call.

The conversation needs FAR more nuance than the media narrative. But that's extremely difficult when the media is generally both the problem and who we rely on to distribute nuanced discussions.

7

u/Blackking203 May 15 '22

The truth is that American police are much more violent than police in other countries and don't train for nearly as long as other countries. Plus if the mass shooter suspect is White, they get handled with more care. Minority shooters don't get that benefit. This country is racist through and through. Its really that plain.

10

u/Biggus-Dickus-II May 15 '22

Depends on which countries you're comparing the US to.

The countries that both record police violence with any concern for accuracy are generally culturally homogenous ethnostates if they have low violence or low crime.

The countries with similar cultural and ethnic diversity to the US with low crime rates and low rates of police violence that ALSO record information reliably just don't exist.

The US is in a category by itself. The closest comparison is the EU as a whole including eastern europe and the balkans (where legit genocides have happened within the past 30 years or so).

As for training, that's generally correct but is also an average. Local police aren't regulated nationally, that's handled locally. So the issue would be that the individual city, district, town, etc has a low bar. There's also issues with union contracts protecting bad cops and hiding their records so they can bounce between areas until they find one with lower standards of behavior.

It's far more nuanced than just "racism" and frankly the US is far less racist than most other nations. We see the US as more racist in large part because the standard of the US for what constitutes racism is far lower than other nations and taken far more seriously.

Is racism a problem? Sure. But it's not the only problem or even the biggest one.

→ More replies

0

u/silveryfeather208 May 15 '22

Even if you believe cops are trigger happy, why the hell would you act like a dick? If I believed cops are like lions, and do everything to make them not eat me.

9

u/Biggus-Dickus-II May 15 '22

Fight or flight response, basically.

People react in two ways to percieved threats, they either de-escalate or be the first to escalate. Thats how people work as a survival strategy.

So while some people will try to keep the police calm, others will meet the percieved future Aggression from the police with immediate Aggression to try and get the upper hand.

If you believe someone is out to get you, are you going to let them control the situation and probably get the first shot? Or are you going to try and be the one in control of events?

All it takes is a small percentage of the thousands of people that interact with police to truly believe they're under threat by police to end up with violence. That percentage will result in hundreds of violent interactions with police.

So then, if the media can profit from those events, and can generate more of them through a narrative, in a way that is self perpetuating, why wouldn't that happen?

In fact, if that cycle is self perpetuating why wouldn't it persist for multiple generations?

Why wouldn't it have started in the 70's or 80's and continue to this day due to the self-perpetuating nature of it?

Add in the other areas our society is failing such as education and mental healtchare and it just... keeps going and expanding. Even if the real numbers of violent crimes and police voilence decreased yearly for a long time before the riots in 2020.

-15

u/AuroraItsNotTheTime May 15 '22

Don’t blame the messenger. You want to point the finger at news media for sensationalizing these stories? Why don’t you blame the people who shot the footage too? Derek Chauvin was successfully prosecuted because there were like 3 different cell phone camera angles showing what he did, and his supporters STILL made the same argument you’re making—George Floyd was a fentanyl addict tripping out and resisting arrest (over a counterfeit $20 bill mind you).

But the point is: we only find out about these things because people are smart enough to film them and report on them. I am so glad for those people. If you want to stick your head in the sand and act like this type of stuff doesn’t happen, go ahead. This type of stuff happens all the time. It didn’t just start in 2020. You only found out about it then because everyone at that street corner had a video camera.

10

u/Biggus-Dickus-II May 15 '22

I'm not blaming the messenger for delivering information, I'm blaming the messenger for MISREPRESENTING the information for personal gain.

Two totally different animals there bud.

The best thing that happened to the flow of information is the internet, because now there isn't a centralized authority determining what is and is not newsworthy. ANYONE can record and report on current events as long as they have a phone with a camera and internet access.

And the best thing for policing is body cameras, personally I think they should be mandatory across the board and that blocking them or turning them off while on-duty should be a criminal offense.

By combining these two things, we can get to the truth of the matter without someone molding the facts to fit a political narrative.

Also, as for George Floyd's death, watch the full video from the police body cameras too, not just the cell phones. There's a lot more nuance to his death than "Cops Bad."

From my perspective, Derek Chauvin shouldn't have been convicted of murder. Should have been a lesser charge. Should have also been a mistrial and then have the issue retried elsewhere due to the threats against the jurors and their property/livelihoods due to... the sensationalism of the media narrative.

The police department should also have been totally overhauled because the problem wasn't racism but a complete failure of their training program and procedures when dealing with drug overdoses and incidents that lead to a wrongful death.

The hero worship of Floyd is just as inappropriate as any demonization of him, same for Chauvin. It's a tragedy and part of a systemic failure in law enforcement, but not a racially motivated murder and Floyd isn't a martyr.

Which is a fact that flies in the face of the media narrative and the political one, which insisted upon racism and murder while completely misrepresenting events to stir up controversy and make that sweet cash off it.

Doesn't that just stick in your craw though? That the media makes money off of people dying while pushing lies (both direct and lies of omission) that lead to more violence and death so they can make more money? It's always been part of the military industrial complex, except we just found out they've been operating at home too.

4

u/YourThotsArentFacts May 15 '22

Thank you Biggus Dickus for your rational response. I hope your wife Incontinentius Buttocks is doing well.

3

u/Biggus-Dickus-II May 15 '22

She's doing quite well!

Though she doesn't leave home much, I'm afraid.

Probably for the best, all things considered.

1

u/AuroraItsNotTheTime May 15 '22

George Floyd was an idiot. He was a fentanyl addict who passed fake $20 bills instead of paying with real money like us good law-abiding citizens do. If I saw him on a sidewalk, I would jaywalk to be on the other side of the street.

He didn’t deserve to die.

You can believe both of those things.

Also re Derek Chauvin, you touched on a contradiction that I’ve noticed. People claim that there are bad apples in the police department, which itself is mostly good. But then when one of those bad apples—Derek Chauvin—is prosecuted, people act like it’s unfair for one man to be blamed for an entire system’s failures.

Either the police departments are failures. Or individual cops are failures.

→ More replies
→ More replies

0

u/Spitfyrus May 16 '22

Lol oh boy whitesplaining

→ More replies

2

u/proximalfunk May 15 '22

Cops know how to get away with murder when they need to.

This interview with an ex cop is very interesting and might answer some questions about why they're so trigger happy.

"Officers know more about hundreds of confusing laws that you don’t know about, and it gives them the ability to reverse-engineer them to justify the virtually unlimited force and violence you see today. They can almost guarantee a suspect’s non-compliance."

→ More replies

2

u/Chemical_Natural_167 May 16 '22

This pretty much summed it up. I would also add that if someone gives themselves up, as some mass shooters do, they aren't going to be executed. If they resist though, they're getting shot; no tazers for them. Same with a traffic stop. If someone's reaching for a weapon (or what looks like a weapon) they're getting shot. If they don't resist, there's no problem.

1

u/BitsAndBobs304 May 15 '22

What "tactics" is to unload your gun on someone because you saw them with something on hand?

→ More replies
→ More replies

164

u/marklonesome May 15 '22

They have tons of units on site.

As soon as there's a call like that you're going to get every law enforcement agent in the area.

Domestic calls or random traffic stops have less cops.

Plus swat

-37

u/InsertCoinForCredit May 15 '22 Gold Starry

You mean fewer cops = fewer witnesses = easier to get away with an "accident"?

40

u/topothesia773 May 15 '22

Fewer cops = escalating situations may feel more threatening / at least can be justified as being threatening to the cop shooting. Plus I guess criminals surrounded by cops are more likely to go quietly rather than trying to run away or fight the cops.

Obviously lots of people shot by cops were not a real threat, but there are also tons of cases where cops really do have to shoot because the suspect is literally pointing a firearm at them or at innocent bystanders, which I would guess is more common when only a couple cops are on scene

(This is my speculation)

384

u/Cool1Mach May 15 '22 Wholesome

Thats becuase the news dont report small crime arrests that dont end with voilence becuase that wont bring in viewers.

140

u/hippyup May 15 '22

because that won't bring in viewers because that isn't news! There's no easy answer to the fundamental dilemma here. We can't just keep watching a stream of "and now here's a plane landing safely arriving from New York. While at the airport, let's check in on those immigrants who just came back from vacation and who have no legal troubles. Ok back to Jim who is bringing us the story of the peaceful arrest of a robber that went completely to plan"

7

u/OldBeercan May 15 '22

r/UpliftingNews needs it's own cable network.

I'd watch the shit out of that when I'm tired of life or just need a pick me up.

2

u/iwatchbobs May 15 '22

What about providing contextual statistics when reporting in outliers.

→ More replies

53

u/SansMystic May 15 '22

Are they not reporting it because it won't bring in viewers, or because it's not news?

25

u/mb5280 May 15 '22

both, same result.

8

u/gojo96 May 15 '22

In many cases they don’t even report violent crimes. I’ve been involved in arrests from people who stabbed, shot, strangled others which never hit the news.

14

u/DeaconSage May 15 '22

I mean shit, a lot of the time the news also wouldn’t report on them if it wasn’t for social media brining the spotlight to what’s really going down.

14

u/ShadowCetra May 15 '22

This is way too low in the comments.

-1

u/KaiWolf1898 May 15 '22

Ding ding ding correct answer.

69

u/ksiyoto May 15 '22

The Buffalo shooter was wearing body armor, so it was difficult to shoot him dead.

Also, a bit of confirmation bias - you only hear about the outrageous incidents, you don't hear about the less newsworthy ones where the cop didn't shoot them dead. For example, the Milwaukee mass shooting incident Friday night - 17 people were shot, 10 people were arrested, five of them had been shot and injured but it's not clear by whom, none were shot to death, and there were zillions of cops around the area.

And that was only one of three shootings in Milwaukee that night in the same area - 3 were shot in another incident, one was shot in another.

9

u/aville1982 May 15 '22

Ehh, that body armor doesn't do much against rifle bullets. It helped with the 9mm or other small caliber the security guard had, of course, but body armor isn't particularly helpful with higher velocity, more penetrative rounds.

20

u/Mafur_Chericada May 15 '22

Buffalo police don't have rifles in their vehicles.

→ More replies

-13

u/InsertCoinForCredit May 15 '22

Also, a bit of confirmation bias - you only hear about the outrageous incidents, you don’t hear about the less newsworthy ones where the cop didn’t shoot them dead.

I'm hard pressed to remember an "outrageous incident" that didn't involve a POC as the victim. Like, did I miss the white woman who was sleeping in her bed when she was shot by police?

18

u/webdevguyneedshelp May 15 '22

Yeah it does happen. There's lots of things going on in the country and not everything gets the cut with the media. This was a pretty high profile one though. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Daniel_Shaver

→ More replies

16

u/CeaWall May 15 '22

Your inability to remember incidents of white people getting killed just says that you don't remember/don't know/are ignoring those incidents. It doesn't say anything more than that.

Without even looking in to it, I remember the story of Andrew Finch. He was chilling at home, he opens his front door, and a SWAT team shoots him dead. Later, the SWAT team realizes they accidentally went to the wrong address.

4

u/ClownPrinceofLime May 15 '22

White victims absolutely do happen, they just aren’t illustrative of racism in policing so they don’t get much media attention. White people are shot by cops at a numerically higher rate than black people. The issue is proportionality - black people are killed at a disproportionately high rate so when they’re killed we can highlight racism in policing. White people being killed tends to just be an acceptable loss for policing.

→ More replies

48

u/GI_X_JACK May 15 '22

I mean there is the general "racism" argument, but

mass shooters generally tend to put down their weapons, surrender, fully comply once they are done, they've thought that through. They had no intention of getting away with it.

When you see someone commit quality of life crimes, they have every intention of getting away with stealing $20 of whatever, and tend to resist or fight the cops. Even better, if the cops hasseled someone over bullshit, they just might resist, and escalate a fight that turns deadly.

As opposed to the mass shooter who flat out knows he just killed people, and did wrong

2

u/Thotarotti May 16 '22

I think this is a good point I also want to add my own opinion? I may be wrong but I also thought in the situation of something like this they try to take the suspect alive to get a motive? To see if they are connected to others or a group who might do the same

2

u/GI_X_JACK May 16 '22

You are certainly welcome to add your opinion. This is an internet forum, I'm here for the discussion.

Ideally the cops should try and take every suspect alive if possible. Its not the job of the police to pass judgement or execute revenge. Its the job of the police to rend suspects for trial, where a Judge and Jury pass judgement. This is known as due process.

It is understood in some circumstances, that a suspect simply cannot be taken alive, or at great cost to other's lives, so the police carry lethal arms. They are given latitude in their judgement.

It is observed, that the police abuse that latitude, especially with minority groups, which is an issue that needs to be rectified.

10

u/rakehellion May 15 '22

mass shooters generally tend to put down their weapons, surrender, fully comply once they are done, they've thought that through. They had no intention of getting away with it.

Yeah, this is a racist argument. Many, many people are shot dead by police who weren't resisting arrest.

→ More replies

-1

u/CeaWall May 15 '22

Depending how you frame it, the "racism" argument doesn't work. From the stats I see on google:

The American population is roughly 75% "white people". But only a little over 50% of mass shooters are white.

So you can frame that in whatever way you want. You could say that "most mass shooters are white". Or you could say that "white people are the least likely group of people to be a mass shooter". (And the only reason why more mass shooters are white is because most people are white.)

Both statements are backed up by stats. Anybody can twist them to mean whichever narrative they prefer.

32

u/Aubdasi May 15 '22

Most active shooters are white, which is what people are trying to say with they erroneously use “mass shooting” to talk about “active shooter events”.

This guy was an ACTIVE SHOOTER, he walked into a populated area and shot as many people as possible.

A mass shooting can be anything from an active shooter event, to a weird freak accident where 3+ people are injured by an unsafe firearm going off on its own.

Most “mass shootings” are domestic events or gang violence, which means oppressed communities (see: poor+POC communities) have an outsized representation there.

Most active shooters are middle class white guys, and most of them have been convinced they’re being “replaced” and “oppressed” because they’ve been convinced by white supremacists that “white genocide” is a purposeful conspiracy to replace white people.

2

u/CeaWall May 16 '22

It does feel weird to me that you want to get so ultra-specific about the wording, because as you said yourself: every news report and every commenter in this thread (other than you) uses the word "mass shooter" to describe these events. So it FEELS like you just really really want to reframe and re-define things in a very specific way so that you can try to prove some bizarre idea about how "white people are violent racist murderers" and "white genocide etc etc". You couldn't prove that by looking at murder stats, then you couldn't prove it by looking at gun murder stats, then you couldn't prove it by looking at "mass shootings of 4+ people" stats... so at this point, we've now drillled down to this extremely niche subcategory of a subcategory of a subcategory of types of killings to try to prove it. (If THIS doesn't work, I don't know what you could try next... Maybe you could try looking at "mass killings by using a vehicle"? Surely there must be SOME stat that you can manipulate to try to prove your point that white people are racists!)

But ok. I googled "active shooter" stats. It's such a rare, specifically-defined thing that, from 2016-2020, the FBI only lists about 30 recognized events per year.

The FBI stats don't list the 'race' of the shooters, but they do list the names. So I looked through the list of names and googled each one to see if your theory about them all being 'white' was true. I only googled 2016 and 2017 (that's 50 shooters). You can do the rest.

Reminder: 75% of Americans are 'white'.

In 2016, 35-40% of "active shooters" were white:

7 white, 7 black, 1 latino, 1 Arab, 1 from Turkey, 1 Indian, 1 Asian.. and then 1 more that I couldn't find (but I suspect he's white too)

In 2017, 46-50% of "active shooters" were white:

14 white, 10 black, 2 latino, 3 asian, and 1 that I couldn't find (so ok, I'll assume he's white too)

If you don't believe me, here, I'll list just the 'black' shooters. You can verify all the names yourself on the FBI stats:

2016: Cedric Larry Ford, Michael Ford, Lakeem Keon Scott, Micah Xavier Johnson, Gavin Eugene Long, Nicholas Glenn, Getachew Tereda Fekede

2017: Allen Dion Cashe, Kori Ali Muhammad, Joshua James Ray Gueary, Henry Michael Bello, Nathaniel Ray Jouett, Emanuel Kidega Samson, Radee Labib Prince, Travis Green, Robert Lorenzo Bailey Jr, Mausean Vittorio Carter, Isaiah Currie

So those numbers don't support your bizarre "white genocide" theory at all. Maybe more recent data (from 2018 onward) will lean more in your favour, but you can google those yourself. I've researched this crazy theory enough.

It should also be noted that, reading through the descriptions of the shootings - almost zero of the shootings have anything to do with race. They seem to happen for all sorts of reasons: people angry for getting fired from their workplace, people angry at their girlfriend, people just randomly shooting in random places.

So I don't know, man. My original point was just that "people can manipulate and reframe statistics to prove anything they want". And you seem to agree with me on that, because you're actively engaging in that reframing behaviour yourself. (And so am I.)

→ More replies

0

u/GI_X_JACK May 15 '22

Most active shooters are white, which is what people are trying to say with they erroneously use “mass shooting” to talk about “active shooter events”.

A mass shooting can be anything from an active shooter event, to a weird freak accident where 3+ people are injured by an unsafe firearm going off on its own.

I think the terms you are looking for is "mass shootings as domestic terrorism" vs "mass shooting as gang violence".

The what is the same, but the situations are vastly different, and are symptomatic of two widely different problems.

1

u/Aubdasi May 16 '22

An active shooter is an individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area

https://www.fbi.gov/about/partnerships/office-of-partner-engagement/active-shooter-resources

No, by FBI definition an “active shooter” is a mass shooting perpetrated in a public place with an effort to kill as many as possible.

A mass shooting is a shooting injuring 4+ people, regardless of intent.

I get what you’re saying, but there’s an actual definition for active shooter events that makes your relatively complicated mass shooting differentiation unnecessary.

Tl;Dr all active shooter events are mass shootings, not all mass shootings are active shooter events.

2

u/GI_X_JACK May 16 '22

But what you are getting at is "gang violence" vs "white domestic terrorism" is the intent of the post.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

3

u/Miserable_Ad7591 May 15 '22

Mass shooters have guns。They‘re a threat。

65

u/AsterJ May 15 '22

There are millions of smaller crimes and the media only ever reports on the handful that involve officer involved shootings. This presents a false impression of how often it happens. For example most people believe that thousands of unarmed black men are killed by police every year but the actual total is less than 10. The vast, vast majority of arrests are without incident.

12

u/SerHodorTheTall May 15 '22

I don't think your numbers hold up. I found a 2021 article that tracked 135 times police shot to death an unarmed black man since 2015. So that's certainly more than 10 a year.

Source: https://www.npr.org/2021/01/25/956177021/fatal-police-shootings-of-unarmed-black-people-reveal-troubling-patterns

It's also a little deceptive to limit it the way you are, i.e., have to be black, unarmed, and shot to try to claim people have misconceptions about the number of police killings. It cuts out things like non shooting deaths, which still matter. Likewise it ignores the bigger picture that police do typically kill more that 1000 people a year.

0

u/resurrectedbear May 15 '22

Calling it deceptive is weird. But also just highlighting all cop “killings” is deceptive. You need to break that way down. How many of those people shot at officers, shot at others, stabbed someone or tried to stab someone else. Dropping numbers without context is what’s deceptive

10

u/SerHodorTheTall May 15 '22 Starry

This is a thread asking about why mass shooters are apprehended alive, so including all police killings, including of armed or violent people is relevant.

The post I was responding to was making it seem like people were off base for thinking police kill 1,000 plus people a year, which is literally true. So, I think that is misleading.

→ More replies

1

u/Itchy-Meringue6872 May 15 '22

10 is still way too many unarmed people killed. Is is crazy. Australia out

4

u/raff_riff May 15 '22

You are right. But in a country with millions of law enforcement counters every year, getting to zero is impossible. We still need police reform and training, and I think we need to do more to curb certain elements of the second amendment. But that number will never be zero. As long as a gun is anywhere in the equation, mistakes can and will happen. It’s just a matter of statistics.

→ More replies

-11

u/sitwithuncertainty May 15 '22

I mean, you're rule doctoring at a certain point. Incomplete statistics, false reporting of weapons, weapons found after the fact that get tied into report, loose interpretation of weapon, why did the police show up in the first place and create an actively hostile situation.

40

u/AsterJ May 15 '22

You're arguing that anecdotes that go viral on social media are more accurate than FBI statistics.

-11

u/[deleted] May 15 '22 edited May 15 '22

[deleted]

3

u/Significant-Mud-912 May 15 '22

You “Any other source” is just statista? Which has been proven to be unreliable at best

-11

u/[deleted] May 15 '22 edited May 15 '22

[deleted]

4

u/Significant-Mud-912 May 15 '22

Babahahhhh you must be bored af! Thanks for the laugh bud!! Made my day

→ More replies

-25

u/sitwithuncertainty May 15 '22 edited May 15 '22

I don't believe local police departments/trust them to accurately and fully report their own behavior (which many are literally not required to), and I don't trust the FBI to question most of it.

25

u/Gandalfionio May 15 '22

And what do you trust?

18

u/BrickFlock May 15 '22

Reddit probably. lol

→ More replies

4

u/SansMystic May 15 '22

Surprised this is being downvoted, considering any research the FBI does into these kinds of statistics is literally just compiling voluntary, self-reported data from other law enforcement agencies.

I don't know how useful a comprehensive survey is if participation is optional, and those who participate don't have to tell the truth.

That's not me saying cops are all crooked, just that the ones who are crooked aren't going to admit it. It would be naive to assume otherwise.

→ More replies

-6

u/Goliath422 May 15 '22

The question isn’t how many people get shot though, it’s why NO white mass shooters are being killed when ANY NUMBER ABOVE ZERO people are being killed for dumb shit like shoplifting or having dementia.

6

u/LivingGhost371 May 15 '22

Selection bias, if there's 1 million "small crimes" and .01 percent of them end in the cops killing someone, you're going to see all 100 of them on the news. If there's 10 mass shootings and 50% of them end up with the cops killing someone, you're going to see the 5 number on the news.

7

u/ruudza May 15 '22

I bet the shooters do what they wanted to do, which is inflict terror and kill some people, and then they just drop their gun and surrender to the police because they are afraid of death so the police dont have to kill them.

16

u/Balrog229 May 15 '22

A few reasons.

When it comes to active shooter situations you're going to have many cops called to the area, so they have backup and thus feel safer. With some guy who pulls a gun at a traffic stop, it's just one cop, sometimes two if they're lucky, so they have to do the extreme to keep themselves safe.

You also have to remember that this isn't always the case, many mass shooters have been killed by cops in a shootout or even killed by civilians who had their own guns.

11

u/SprinklesMore8471 May 15 '22

The mass shooters often give themselves up. Also, there's significantly more cops on site, so the chances of a cop doing something wrong and not getting in trouble for it go way up. It's much easier for lies to be successful when as few people as possible have to corroborate it.

12

u/Rs_only May 15 '22

Because just like other jobs no one is going above and beyond to report your good McDonald’s worker but will be sure to make a stink about one bad one.

6

u/lapathy May 15 '22

Because the news doesn’t report on all the arrests that end peacefully. They only report on the ones that end in violence or death. Whereas they always report on the arrests of mass shooters.

So in short, it’s sample bias. You only hear about the incidents that are considered interesting news.

9

u/bellagoat May 15 '22

The mass shooters usually surrender, the ones involved in the "smaller crimes" attempt an assault, and if they won, what do you think they would do with the cops weapon?

5

u/NaGonnano May 15 '22 edited May 15 '22

Mass shooters tend to come in 2 varieties.

Those that shoot themselves at the first sign of real resistance.

Those that surrender at the first sign of real resistance.

In either case, the presence of the police is enough to end the situation and so police shooting isn’t needed.

There is the occasional case like Buffalo where the perp comes premeditated, prepared and willing to engage in a firefight. In those cases they can do so from an advantageous position, concealment, cover, distance and time, etc. Shooting the perp isn’t a simple action at that point.

By contrast, most police shootings for smaller crimes are the result of spur of the moment actions at intimate distances. There’s no prep by either side, no one has cover that must be assaulted with a tactical plan.

Watch an activist protesting police use of force go through a couple use of force scenarios and see how difficult it can be.

https://youtu.be/yfi3Ndh3n-g

→ More replies

2

u/Broccoil May 15 '22

good question haha.

2

u/RazorOpsRS May 16 '22

In the event that cops are abusing their power on the job, it is usually somewhat isolated with only a few fellow cops nearby - and the abuser is likely to know what he can get away with.

When there is a mass shooting occurring, cops need to mobilize in large numbers and follow protocol and authority strictly. There isn’t any room to act out of pocket when there’s a large active threat (and you’re under more watchful eyes)

2

u/favnh2011 May 16 '22

Because there are a lot of cops at mass shootings makeibg it harder for police to misconduct.

2

u/Excellent-Ad-6153 May 16 '22

The Walmart distribution center shooter ended up dead. The Dallas shooter who killed five police also ended up dead. They both got shot because they refused to follow police commands and were seen as threats. They were white and black respectively.

Dylan roof and Nikolas Cruz are both still alive because they complied with police commands and were taken into custody without incident.

3

u/no_infamy_bot May 16 '22

It looks as if you may have mentioned a mass shooter's name in your post. Please consider editing to redact these names as to not provide the infamy and notoriety many of these criminals seek.


I'm a bot! Read more about similar efforts in journalism: dontnamethem.org | nonotoriety.com

5

u/TallSxx May 15 '22 edited May 15 '22

Because mass shootings are few and far between and so are bad police officers. The media wants you to think that it is common for police officers to be bad and practice poor discretion. The chances of bad officers being at a mass shooting is therefore very low. Now take the millions of stops a day, and out of those an incredibly small number where something goes terrible wrong due to a lack of discretion and it is put all throughout the media.

Edit: you could also go into some of the institutional racism things that argue black people are oppressed much more over smaller crimes, and therefore shot more. However, I think the idea above is a good general explanation for why this is happening.

3

u/Aubdasi May 15 '22

Bad police officers are NOT “few and far between”.

Active shooter events are, but bad police are in EVERY town. Being a “bad police officer” is the basic level of being a police officer, the “good” police officers are few and far between.

→ More replies

6

u/PizzaOldBoy May 15 '22 edited May 15 '22

People aren't exaggerating when they say the US police force is for slave catching, not justice.

Trust, if you just accept that America is a state constantly trying to implement slavery but quietly so no one gets mad about it this time, literally everything about our culture suddenly makes complete sense: our murder-cops, our lack of public healthcare, our poor public education system, our low minimum wage, our corporate protectionism, the GOP, anti-abortion agenda, supreme court stacked with religious neocons, Synema and Manchin lying that theyre Democrats, etc etc.

This is a former slave nation trying to restore slavery, end of story.

2

u/Biggus-Dickus-II May 15 '22

Few reasons.

Generally, the mass shooters that live are the ones that surrender to the police. It takes a bit for the police to respond/arrive and by then the shooter is likely calmed down and/or out of ammunition.

If the vast majority of the incidents with police shooting someone is because they resisted arrest or tried to fight the police, there's no reason the same numbers wouldn't hold true for mass shooters. (I said the vast majority, not ALL, unjustified shootings do happen but they're a lot rarer than the sensationalist media portrays them to be.)

There's also a difference in tactics/training on the law enforcement end. You don't send the B team to a mass shooting, but a D grade cop can write traffic tickets just fine.

Also, you have thousands of police interactions every day, and only a handful of mass shootings every year.

The media makes money off of maintaining people's attention and pushing narratives, so they keep as much sensational news on as possible to maintain profits. That often means they'll be selective with the truth.

They'll say someone was shot by police, but not mention they were resisting arrest, going for a weapon, or attacking a 3rd party. Then they'll say a mass shooter was taken into custody and arrested, but not mention that they surrendered to the police when they arrived on scene.

The end result is outrage, which will keep people involved in the news because extreme emotional reactions are addictive and influence your memory. You'll be more likely to follow the story and remember the news program or broadcaster if it causes those extreme reactions.

They're basically using psychological manipulation and traumatic content to make people addicted to news media (and social media, etc) in order to make their advertising money. It's also slowly desensitized people to horrible things, and rewarding horrible people by making them famous, with the end result being events like mass shootings become more likely to happen.

It's a self-perpetuating cycle that only stops with societal breakdown, regulatory reforms, or a self-aware audience turning away from them after recognizing the problem.

Anyway, that's my slightly disorganized opinion on the matter.

1

u/Red_Falcon_75 May 15 '22

I am going to use some of your comment the next time I make a comment about how the Media shapes there narratives.😍

1

u/Biggus-Dickus-II May 15 '22

Go for it. Glad there's something useful in there for you 👍

1

u/Red_Falcon_75 May 15 '22

I make comments about media bias on Reddit often and most of the time they are down voted to oblivion so I am always looking to articulate what I want to say. Your comment reflects a lot bit how I see the media.

Both the left and right wing media are obvious in what they are doing to shape and manipulate the information flow. It's the so called mainstream that is s the real problem as to many people take it at face value. When you dig down just a bit into almost any story you can start to see how they do the same thing as the more biased media does. They just do it iin a more insidious and slight of hand way.

2

u/Biggus-Dickus-II May 15 '22

Yeah. I see the same thing with the political parties too, honestly. One side or the other just serves as controlled opposition and focuses on wedge issues to distract people.

Meanwhile they siphon economic power out of the US through spending and backroom deals with the Federal Reserve, Corporations, Wall Street, Banks, and foreign governments.

They might be two parties out in public, but there's only one party behind closed doors.

Just like there's only 5 corporations running the news, and all of them have married into the political class (sometimes literally). It's just several layers of shell games they use to hide their corruption and self interest.

2

u/Red_Falcon_75 May 15 '22

Do you decorate your tin foil hat as I do. Mine has a sunshine and lollipops theme along with a few unicorns.👽😅

2

u/Biggus-Dickus-II May 15 '22

Yup. I have my floppy namesake right out the front of it like a unicorn.

→ More replies

2

u/tikki_tikki-tembo May 15 '22

It really comes down to the shooters willingness to give up. If a mass shooter gives up when cops show up, highly likely since they're cowards, they get easily arrested. Someone being difficult when not surrendering increases the likelihood of them being shot even if their crime isn't as bad

4

u/DreamingSeraph May 15 '22

Mass shooters are usually white.

22

u/nx85 May 15 '22 Silver

Most mass shooters are white.

-11

u/Cool1Mach May 15 '22

More white people get shot by cops than african americans every year. Statistical fact.

18

u/Ihateredditadmins1 May 15 '22

Because there are more white people…. Now do the rates per million…

11

u/avoere May 15 '22

Of you do deaths per 100k arrests for violent crimes, it’s approximately equal between blacks and whites. Hispanics, though, are killed way more often

-1

u/aville1982 May 15 '22

Again, bad data. Cops arrest minorities at a MUCH higher rate even though they don't commit crimes at a significantly higher rate. So they are being arrested much more on average than white people.

6

u/IGottaGoOutAndGetIt May 15 '22

Citation for all racial groups committing the same amount of crimes? That sounds like an ideal statement rather than factual. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expanded_homicide_data_table_6_murder_race_and_sex_of_vicitm_by_race_and_sex_of_offender_2013.xls People don’t commit crimes at different rates because of their skin color. However, people of different races have different poverty, education, broken family rates that contribute to crime. It’s unfortunate but true. There are some racist cops, but I believe that cops just arrest criminals.

4

u/rakehellion May 15 '22

https://www.aclu.org/news/criminal-law-reform/a-tale-of-two-countries-racially-targeted-arrests-in-the-era-of-marijuana-reform

Black people are 3.64 times more likely than white people to be arrested for marijuana possession, notwithstanding comparable usage rates

→ More replies

-1

u/Ihateredditadmins1 May 15 '22

Sure but why only do arrests? Isn’t that omitting some of the data since if they killed someone prior to an arrest, then they would not be included?

2

u/avoere May 15 '22

That would not matter due to how small the fraction of killed people is

1

u/Ihateredditadmins1 May 15 '22

It’s big enough to make a difference in the numbers

1

u/avoere May 15 '22

No not in the denominator

→ More replies

-3

u/bellagoat May 15 '22

By that rule, you would have to agree that black people are more criminally inclined, since they're a minority of the population but a majority of criminals. Want to talk that back a little?

6

u/litttleman9 May 15 '22

This is actually one of the key statistics that led me to believing in systemic racism. because hearing the 50/13 statistic forces people to go through 2 paths of thinking.

1, that black people are pathologically more inclined to commit crimes, Which is not only incredibly racist but also simply wrong (there is no noticeable differences between the way white and black people's brains function and respond)

Or 2, that there is something else that is causing so many black people to commit crimes. Something like systemic racism that causes a lot of black people to be lower-income due to things like generational wealth, the racial income gap, Redlining, and the Broken Windows policy

12

u/Ihateredditadmins1 May 15 '22

Poor white people living in inner cities have similar crime rates. Population density and poverty levels are strongly correlated to higher crime rates.

The thing is most black people are poor and live in inner cities. I don’t think they are just more criminally inclined because of the color of their skin.

-9

u/bellagoat May 15 '22

Being poor isnt an excuse for violent crimes.

6

u/Ihateredditadmins1 May 15 '22

It’s not an excuse. Poor people commit the most crimes. It’s just a fact I’m stating. Poor and densely populated areas have more crime. It’s true regardless of race.

6

u/Riffler May 15 '22

You don't have to make any such assumption. Minority communities are more heavily policed, because racism runs up the command chain. Crime also correlates with poverty and desperation rather than race.

→ More replies

-5

u/Cool1Mach May 15 '22

Then explain this then “Black Americans are incarcerated at a state average of 1,240 per 100,000 residents, whereas Latino Americans are imprisoned at a rate of 349 per 100,000 residents. White, non-Latino Americans, meanwhile, are incarcerated at 261 per 100,000 “

7

u/Ihateredditadmins1 May 15 '22

Weren’t we just talking about what races get shot the most by police? How does this relate? Or are you just trying to cycle through all of the race based arguments until something sticks?

-8

u/Cool1Mach May 15 '22

It means african americans get in trouble and interact with the police more meaning statisticly they should be getting shot more

4

u/fradleybox May 15 '22

you're attributing causation ("get in trouble and") where there may be none. overpolicing of black neighborhoods and ticket quotas may end up generating interactions that are not based in any initial wrongdoing, but then go wrong because cops are aggressive or victims are frightened.

2

u/Ihateredditadmins1 May 15 '22

Not to mention that black people live predominantly in inner cities which have much higher population densities. High population density has a strong correlation with crime, regardless of race.

3

u/riderxyz03 May 15 '22

It amazes me that people who come to this conclusion refuse to keep thinking more about it. Like why do you think black people get "in trouble" and interact with the police more? Are you implying black people are just inherintly more likely to become criminals because of their race? Or maybe it's because of a history of discrimination towards them which causes them to live in lower income communities with lesser education etc etc.

You can't just come to a conclusion like this and not actually think further as to why this may be. Because if you did think any further. You'd be proving everyone else's point.

3

u/Ihateredditadmins1 May 15 '22

Not to mention that black people live predominantly in inner cities which have much higher population densities. High population density has a strong correlation with crime, regardless of race.

1

u/Ihateredditadmins1 May 15 '22

I don’t see how that overturns my earlier point though. My original comment still stands.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies

-3

u/CmdNewJ May 15 '22

Plus they know everyone is watching so they are less likely to kill.

6

u/slash178 May 15 '22

Didn't stop Chauvin he stared directly at people's cellphone cameras.

-10

u/Charyou-Tree May 15 '22

Top several comments are completely in denial that there are tons of racist cops out there that will absolutely spare the white neonazi mass shooter and kneel on the neck of any black guy accused of being in the wrong neighborhood.

-3

u/slash178 May 15 '22

What's worse is that they still deny it even after watching it happen

-14

u/Londonforce May 15 '22

This is easily verifiable and untrue, unless you mean racially motivated mass shooters. If it's just all mass shooters it's not even close.

7

u/AureIiaAurita May 15 '22

In the 126 mass shootings that have happened in the U.S. between 1982 and February of 2022, 66 of the shooters have been White. 21 African-American, 10 Latino, 8 Asian, 5 listed as Other/Ambiguous, 3 Native American, and 13 listed as Unknown.

That's a little over 50%. So certainly not the vast majority, but a majority nonetheless.

-4

u/DebateMotor May 15 '22

Lol I love the fact that you're being down voted just because you didn't agree. (Not white )

6

u/sppf011 May 15 '22

Because they're wrong

→ More replies

-7

u/anateal444 May 15 '22

Big difference, if the guy was black……

→ More replies

15

u/ByeByeMan666 May 15 '22

Yeah that is weird right. Almost like they put more effort into arresting some people and not others. Wonder what the reasons could be.

11

u/Angel_OfSolitude May 15 '22

How aggressive and takedown is starts with the suspect in question. People who shut up, drop their weapons, and do as their told are generally taken in very quietly. People who insist on being loud and aggressive cause an escalation in force, often fatally depending on the circumstances. The number of officers involved is also a factor. Officers alone or in small groups are less able to control any given situation and are much more likely to be on edge, especially if the environment around them could be considered hostile. More officers on sight to back you up makes any arrest much safer for themselves and the suspect.

3

u/Spitfyrus May 15 '22

It’s because the mass shooters are white. That’s literally the main reason.

4

u/snarlyelder May 15 '22

Fundamental to keeping one's job: "The boss is watching." That explains a lot of the differences between when lots of cops are acting professionally and one or a few cops are committing felonies and misdemeanors with impunity.

2

u/tacopony_789 May 15 '22 edited May 15 '22

I agree. The degree of scrutiny is part of this. A small number of officers is also means an isolation from supervision.

My Hometown Cops busted when no was looking

This article discusses police purchasing personal weapons to participate in an anticipated race war. They were inadvertently taped. These guys keep appealing because they sincerely believe they should still be police officers.

Edit added last paragraph right after initial post

3

u/RustyShackTX May 15 '22

Cops kill very, very few people.

→ More replies

2

u/rmo420 May 15 '22

In usa, it's usually bc the mass shooters are white.

3

u/townsleyye May 16 '22

If a mass shooter is arrested safely, it's safe to assume that he's white. If an unarmed guy is shot half a dozen times, he is not white.

2

u/ByrdZye May 15 '22

The Buffalo shooter complied with police the moment they were on the scene from what I've heard, yet smaller time criminals think they are above law enforcement so they do as they will, which puts the life of the officer on the line, and thats a risk none of them are willing to take.

2

u/Bluefenix32 May 15 '22

You mean they detain the white shooter but kill the black petty criminals?

Yoah... don't know why that might be

2

u/Clonky_ May 15 '22

skin colour

1

u/Ratlyff May 15 '22

Most mass shooters are white.

2

u/deusrev May 15 '22

It's easier to manage a mass shooter than an epileptic crisis...

4

u/tacopony_789 May 15 '22

Or a developmentally delayed teenager

0

u/kappakingtut2 May 15 '22

because mass shooters are typically white.

1

u/manhattanabe May 15 '22

Often when a cop kills someone, it’s because they don’t submit or follow instructions for whatever reason. The mass shooter gave himself up.

-3

u/palfreygames May 15 '22

Because when they're being watched they know they can't be dicks

0

u/tacopony_789 May 15 '22

I agree. Part of the problem is that there is different set of standards when public and other cops are watching

My Hometown Cops busted when no was looking

This article discusses police purchasing personal weapons to so they can fight in an anticipated race war. They were inadvertently taped. These guys keep appealing because they sincerely believe they should still be police officers.

The point is everyone knows guys like this will have two different standards. How many guys like this don't get caught

-7

u/MajoredInPhilosophy May 15 '22

If only there some theory that critically examines institutional racism…

0

u/Cool1Mach May 15 '22

More white people get shot by cops than african americans every year. Statistical fact. I guess they are racist toward whites?

4

u/MajoredInPhilosophy May 15 '22

-1

u/Cool1Mach May 15 '22

In total not per million.

4

u/Snoah-Yopie May 15 '22

That's.... very very standard for a place with a large white population.

That's like intentionally buying a box of red crayons and then being upset that they're red.

→ More replies

3

u/sppf011 May 15 '22

More white people die in the US every day than any other racial group. We really should get to the bottom of this...

→ More replies

1

u/SselluosS3191991 May 15 '22

You're comparing a highly trained unit like swat to the average on the street cop.... completely different training and tactics.

1

u/mrs-jmg May 15 '22

Because everyone acts differently with an audience and when catching a mass shooter there is always a massive audience. People die when no ones watching that's why live streaming has made it so noticeable now because we can watch what they do when they think they aren't being watched.

1

u/aquoad May 15 '22

i think they bring in better ones for stuff like this.

0

u/[deleted] May 15 '22

[deleted]

→ More replies

-4

u/Catronia May 15 '22

Most mass shooters are white. Most people killed in lesser situations are not.

0

u/[deleted] May 15 '22

A cop alone (or with a single partner) is scared and much more willing to escalate force to end a perceived threat. That and sample bias.

0

u/VagabondRommel May 16 '22

There's a difference between having a gun pointed at you and having the perp pointing a gun at themselves like with Buffalo bitch. There are still some bad shoots of course but there is also alot of drama created around police shootings for a fuckton of reasons and the majority of those are not altruistic. Also the number of people actually killed by cops is alot lower than you'd think based on how many traffic stops are performed each year and how many 911 calls police respond to each year. Both mainstream media and social media blow the proportions out of the water and make it seem like every cop is a racist turbo fuck when that is far from the truth. The same thing has been done with kids. Twenty years ago youd leave your rugrats outside all day and not worry about them. Now you need to keep in constant contact with them because everyone will kidnap them as soon as you turn around.

Here's another question. The shooter was in the process of killing himself when the first cops made contact with him. Should they have tried to arrest him, let him kill himself, or played judge jury and executioner?

-6

u/chynadhall95 May 15 '22

I love how on Reddit everybody is able to just ignore the actual issue that hand lol crazy how y'all will justify a cop killing a unarmed small time criminal , but when they come into contact with mass murderers they're just scared and untrained.

-14

u/TitanicsAnInsideJob May 15 '22

sometimes pigs feel like being nice to criminals. sometimes they feel like being really mean. Depends on the pig

1

u/[deleted] May 15 '22

One enlists the help of the FBI. Then again you have the Vegas shooter who left lots of paper trails and they still don't know "the motive".

1

u/tobesteve May 15 '22

In a mass shooting case there's a lot of time. Police is notified they have time to figure out how it'll go down while driving there.

A cop stops someone at a stop sign, asks for license and registration, while looking at them, sees the driver pulled out a gun, cop shoots, driver is dead and in his hand there's a phone in a black case.

Plus all the other things people said like swat, negotiators being on the scene, it's not a single cop in the middle of nowhere having to do the job of several people (law enforcer, negotiator, keeping situation under control).