On Wednesday, March 13, the Napa County District Attorney's Office released surveillance footage of a shooting by an American Canyon police officer in Vallejo
We have stricter rules of engagement for the Army when deployed, “Do not fire unless fired upon” also in many circumstances if someone throws down their weapon you must cease fire.
We have stricter rules of engagement for the Army when deployed, “Do not fire unless fired upon”
Not only is this a fallacy of false equivalence, but it’s also straight up false. This is only one of many rules of engagement that are applied contextually, such as during a reconnaissance operation where stealth is necessary, or a peacekeeping mission where hostile combatants aren’t necessarily expected. It is also not usually the role of a peacekeeper to chase down criminals to enforce another country’s laws. Obvious exceptions to this rule apply in the same way that they apply to law enforcement to allow them to protect themselves during times when they reasonably believe that a gun-toting individual is an immediate and real threat to them. The same logic usually also applies to ordinary civilians acting in self-defense.
also in many circumstances if someone throws down their weapon you must cease fire.
Friendly fire. The reason I know so much about law enforcement methodology isn’t because I like them. I just genuinely believe that the community is wrong to chastise in this instance.
Removed by mod
We have stricter rules of engagement for the Army when deployed, “Do not fire unless fired upon” also in many circumstances if someone throws down their weapon you must cease fire.
Not only is this a fallacy of false equivalence, but it’s also straight up false. This is only one of many rules of engagement that are applied contextually, such as during a reconnaissance operation where stealth is necessary, or a peacekeeping mission where hostile combatants aren’t necessarily expected. It is also not usually the role of a peacekeeper to chase down criminals to enforce another country’s laws. Obvious exceptions to this rule apply in the same way that they apply to law enforcement to allow them to protect themselves during times when they reasonably believe that a gun-toting individual is an immediate and real threat to them. The same logic usually also applies to ordinary civilians acting in self-defense.
Of course. Until they draw a second one.
Why would I think that it was relevant to the police.
You tell me. You’re the one who brought up army protocols.
Please note the Sidebar:
“② If you’re here to support the police, you’re trolling. Please exercise your right to remain silent.”
Friendly fire. The reason I know so much about law enforcement methodology isn’t because I like them. I just genuinely believe that the community is wrong to chastise in this instance.