Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2013 10:20:46 GMT 10
You don't know much about policing.
|
|
|
Post by caskur on Apr 26, 2013 13:02:14 GMT 10
odd The escapee isn't very smart. Well, considering that he out witted the coppers that were chasing him, how stupid are the cops ? cops can go back to the stations to a nice cup of hot tea and some biccies and stay dry... the sex slug offender can stay dodging crocs... and eat the cane toads for all we care...
|
|
|
Post by bender on Apr 26, 2013 14:14:28 GMT 10
He needed to run 5 steps and perform a tackle. What a woose. Earl, I shit you not, up at the Darwin Croc Park each enclosure (the water part of it) is about 4m square and about 40cm deep. A 14 - 17 foot croc can hide in that and you'd never know they were there. Add to that potential hazard the fact that (as you say) he needed to perform a tackle which would by definition mean that he and the escapee are now off their feet and presumably wrestling in that water. I think you're being a little bit harsh. If we are required to restrain someone we normally operate at a minimum of 3 of us to 1 of them. Part of that is because ultimately it's safer for the person being restrained but the main reason is that to try and effectively restrain someone (on dry land) 1 on 1 it's nigh on impossible if that person is determined to resist. Hell, the last time I went through control and restraint refresher training I played the part of a detainee in a practice scenario and I was able to hold off 3 people. That was partly because I knew what parts of my body the officers were going to attempt to grab, but it was mainly because I was determined to resist. To expect someone to be able to do it 1 on 1 in water and mud with the added risk of it being well and truly in croc territory is a pretty high bar to set.
|
|
|
Post by Salem on Apr 26, 2013 17:55:51 GMT 10
Oh rubbish! To chase that guy into a croc infested swamp would be stupid. If he did, and they fell about in the water as he tried to make an arrest, don't you think the splashing would attract every croc in the area?? Freddy and Phil are knee-jerk reactionaries and lack any semblance of common sense.
|
|
|
Post by bender on Apr 26, 2013 19:01:10 GMT 10
Yeah Earl, I did see the video. The cop didn't know how deep the water was (past the point that the escapee had reached at the moment the cop came to a halt and holstered his sidearm), the cop was wearing his full rig, a tactical vest and his belt equipment, he's carrying a radio, mobile phone, taser, notepad, his wallet, all items that aren't going to react too well to a dunking, they had plenty of cops on the scene, a chopper overhead and personally I think that he had logic on his side in thinking that that was the best place to put a static perimeter in place.
Fair enough, the escapee did actually manage to give them the slip, but the proof that that cops decision not to go for a paddle was the right one was in the fact that not one of the other cops on the scene elected to go in the water either.
At the end of the day, there was no real harm done in not picking the escapee up at that moment. They picked him up a couple of days later and no cops needed to get their uniforms wet to do it.
I think any fair minded person would say "good enough."
|
|
|
Post by caskur on Apr 27, 2013 1:40:04 GMT 10
If he had shot the slug sex offender, more bad attention would be paid to him than the slug sex offender... I think it was a very smart move for the officer to keep his pant legs dry.
|
|
|
Post by bender on Apr 27, 2013 3:58:54 GMT 10
Not good enough. He was a woose. ;D So you're saying that if you had been there you would have barrelled in without hesitation, without even pausing to holster your weapon, tackled the guy, brought him down, controlled him and managed to cuff him, all in knee deep water with a muddy bottom. You're a better man then me Earl.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2013 6:51:37 GMT 10
Most importantly the copper didn't get his boots wet.....gotta get your priorities right, afterall it wasn't the cops who put these offenders in minimum security.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2013 10:30:19 GMT 10
When you work in the asylum with people with a range of mental illnesses and many of them violent, you are going to have to restrain some people at some stage.
So I have to agree (for once?) with Bender about retraining violent and often desperate people. And in the case of mentally ill patients, they do not feel pain and so can fight with the strength of 4 or 5 combatants. We nurses have a phrase for it ... no brain, no pain. Police see this often when trying to restrain drug affected offenders who can fight with superhuman strength way beyond their physical capabilities. Same goes for those who are desperate escapees.
Yet Earl Grey, the armchair critic who spends his days 24/7 at his computer and who becomes exhausted just thinking about a leisurely stroll around the block, can come out with such condescending crap about the police officer's actions - clearly showing his ignorance of situations involving violent, desperate offenders and taking the right response to ensure the least risk of serious injury to all concerned.
|
|