I'm going to have to disagree with you here. If shooting someone is the only solution you have to a dangerous situation, then you have the emotional maturity of a neanderthal and you are the unstable person with a gun.
> Civilians can't empathize with this context but what the officer did, in failing to act, is tantamount to a cardinal sin in police work.
Like hell civilians can't empathize. Cops don't have the monopoly on dangerous situations.
If this is a cardinal sin in police work, then police work is fundamentally broken.
I respect EMTs. I respect firefighters. Interactions with any of them has been a warm and human one. They truly are heroes. They save lives with little regard for personal sacrifice.
Interactions with cops? Dehumanizing: a glaring symptom of the imbalance of power.
We have forgotten, to our own peril, an old adage: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes.
This is a straw man argument. I never asked anyone to endanger themselves. I don't criticize the officers who shot the man--it was a tough call and while it turns out they made the wrong call, I believe they made the best call they could given the information they had. I'm saying that the officer who didn't shoot, should be lauded for his actions, not fired.
Further, people who apply for police work do so of their own accord. No one forces anyone to become a police officer. If you want to be safe, you should get a desk job instead of becoming a police officer. If you put yourself in danger and use that as an excuse to shoot people unequivocally, you're just a murderer. Part of an officer's job is assessing a situation and deciding whether lethal force is warranted. I don't blame an officer for making the decision to use lethal force, but it should be a decision. And if you aren't willing to make that decision, you should find another career.
If someone hesitates to kill doesn't that prove they're a better person than someone who James Bond his way through? James Bond is fun but he doesn't really kill people, it's actors. Killing a real person should be the absolute last resort used by military officers or if your jurisdiction still allows for it (for some barbaric rhetoric reason), a court of law. Not police officers in the heat of the moment.
Another argument that might be only truish in France: police officers are not qualified, I'm sorry to say that, but the foot soldiers do not have the education, they didn't go to college, some didn't finish high school, it's fine as long they only regulate the city/polis, but once it gets philosophically tricky... They're not qualified. I've seen many police officers who just can't read without mouthing silently or even aloud. I don't trust the quick judgement of someone who can't read. Maybe I'm an elitist libertarian. I'm ok with that if it means I'm against killing people.
