• conditional_soup@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Look, you can look through my post history if you don’t believe me, I’m no simp for cops or authoritarians, but this is kind of a bullshitty line of reasoning. Maybe it’s because I was raised around guns and was taught gun safety, or I have a friend who was a deputy (he quit under Trump for ethical and moral reasons), but what you’re proposing isn’t all that simple. It’s like asking someone to discern if a dollar bill is a counterfeit by showing it to them from out of arm’s reach for five seconds without warning them first; sure, some dollar bills, like the one my kid made, will very clearly be fake, but even a half decent fake would pass the sniff test under those conditions. For some folks, a subset of monopoly money might pass under those conditions. There’s a much greater personal risk involved in assuming a gun is fake than assuming it’s real; after all, enough people have been shot by “fake”, “unloaded” guns purely by accident.

    A personal story: I’m a paramedic. Once we got called to someone having altered mental status. When we get there, it’s an older guy who’s clearly acutely confused; he came out to the ambulance, pointed at a component on our door, and asked if it was a camera (it very clearly was not) and then went inside without waiting for an answer. He was agitated, talking nonsensically, confused, and not following commands. As I’m trying to calm him down enough to get him to come with us, he wanders into the kitchen, and I follow. He stands next to what is very clearly the grip of a pistol sticking out from under some paper; only the barrel and slide are hidden. I wedged myself in between him and the pistol and blocked his access to it. My partner later came back to check and found it was an airsoft pistol. Mind you, I’ve played airsoft, I’ve used airsoft pistols, but for all I could tell in the moment, it was a real gun. Now, do you think it would have been smarter for me to stop and closely examine the pistol first? Doesn’t it make more sense to assume the more dangerous possibility until it’s ruled out?

    • Zombiepirate@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      My point is that the cop (who shouldn’t even be on the force anyway with his history) didn’t do any investigation, didn’t see him brandishing, didn’t even talk to the kid before he assumed he was a threat.

      If we have a right to carry guns in this country (which SCOTUS says we do, right or wrong), then shooting someone for suspected possession of a gun is using violence against a person who is exercising their rights. However, for some reason I just can’t put my finger on, conservatives rush to defend the police in cases like this.

      I understand your point, and it’s well made, but I was saying something different in my post.

      • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Hmmm… Alright. That’s not what I got out of it, sorry for the miscommunication. Yeah, cops harassing, arresting, and murdering people for exercising their constitutional rights is whack.