Another perspective on police shootings of unarmed citizens

There is so much knee-jerk reaction to this most recent police shooting of yet another unarmed citizen. It is obvious that the protocols for handling this type of occurrence are inept and faulty on premise. It seems that the first priority is to kill rather than disarm or deescalate. That basic reality serves to further the notion that life other than self is valueless and self is, foremost, what matters even if your job is to serve and PROTECT. That includes protecting us from ourselves. Mental illness is a distinct characteristic of humans and the human condition. In a fit of rage, this young man goaded the police into doing exactly what it did, shoot to kill. What does that say about the police process and its leaders? It says loud and clear, we come first. Sure, the police commanded the kid to stop. But in his state of mind, a condition the NYPD should be expert at confronting, could not follow commands. Other less lethal measures should have been immediately at hand rather than the excuse that the special response units were getting set up when the events unfolded. Another process/protocol error. One might wish to consider, on another level, that this disturbed individual is a result of our very society. But that is another issue for discussion.

I believe the core mind-set of the NYPD needs to be one of avoiding weapons discharge till the very last possible moment to protect both the life of the officer AND the subject of concern. All this crap I have read about your not being a cop, you don't know what it is like to face this danger, is just that, crap. ALL of us become afraid for our lives at sometime during our existence. Fight or flight is high-school knowledge. Instincts for survival should be mediated if you are going to be in law enforcement. The cop mentality should be to understand this better than most people and act accordingly. Fear of death is and should not be the primary motivation for discharging a weapon. Of course, it is easy in hindsight to quarterback this recent scenario. But look at some of the details. Five cops discharged weapons from multiple points of convergence. All were shielded by automobiles. The subject was some 5-6 feet distant in evening but reasonable street lighting. Police accepted this setting as one of direct and imminent threat to themselves. Could all five have felt threatened so as to shot to kill when they were all at different position from the subject? It is unreasonable to believe that all five needed to discharge their weapons. Were they acting to preserve their own lives or the lives of their co-workers?

I am not anti-cop. I respect the position they place themselves in frequently. But it is still a career of choice and everyone of them knows full well the dangers of pursuing this line of work. And cops are not heros just because they became cops. If you go into police work believing this, you should never have been accepted in training. The police can consider themselves heros if they successfully avoided deadly force and resolved this peacefully. They did not. It seems the actions are a direct result of the police mind-set, a general societal acceptance of and condoning of violence and a lack of enlightened leadership in the NYPD which continues to perpetrate said concepts.

I further suggest that as a society steeped in violent imagery, an antiquated cowboy mentality and strike first preemptive thinking, our police forces merely reflect these societal attitudes. I guess a kindler, gentler America is a concept still too far removed from our nature.