Damage shown from bomb blast that killed Dallas sniper

So typical of police. Instead of isolating the shooter so that he can only hurt himself, waiting until he surrenders or bleeds out, they use a military grade weapon to blow him in blood splatter and meat jelly.

Symptomatic of the blue culture of "I am facing a difficulty, I will resort to the most powerful weapon I have"
Instead of contain and deescalate it is lethal force NOW!
Dog scares you? Shoot it.
Mental patient goes off his face? Shoot him.
Autistic man playing with toy truck? Shoot him, oops....shoot his caregiver.
Two cops in physical struggle with one person? Kill him.

>>61290
Cops are fucking shits

>>61290
Imagine you are in Syria. One ISIS towelhead is hot on your trail in a small mud village, and you are armed with a glock 43, one chambered, 4 rounds left. He chases you with an AK with a full magazine, full auto. You are in a Syrian city setting. You hide in a blown out building.

You see him coming down the road, eyes on sights, finger on trigger, searching buildings. In this building is a weapons cache, a fully automatic M4 with a 100 round magazine. You pull the charging handle, and the rifle loads a round. You feel confident the rifle is in decent condition.

Do you:
A. Drop the M4, because you dont need a full auto rifle to kill one man. Just your 5 rounds of 9MM.

B. Holster your sidearm, pick up M4, spray in ISIS members general direction.

Please choose.

>>61270
>spanish tape

>>61413
You miss the point and the analogy doesn't compare.
The rules of engagement and context are different. As a police officer you are obliged to use the minimum force to get the job done and to bring the perpetrator to justice to be tried in a court of law. Also, you also have an obligation to the perp as they are also likely to be a fellow citizen.
I don't have a problem with using C4 per se. But I do object to it being used at the expense of potential less lethal means.
NO police officers in Dallas were in immediate danger from the gunman once he was wounded and surrounded. As such it was just a case of isolation (check), ensuring he could not hurt anyone else (check), potential to deescalate (check - in Syria/combat there is no moral requirement to deescalate).

The fact that you compared Dallas to a war zone is the very problem. It may feel like one once you are in it but to lose sight of the fact that you are a police officer and NOT NOT NOT a soldier is the problem with US police departments.
FFS even hick town sheriff departments are driving enormous battlefield vehicles and armed with battlefield ordinance while the hick town officers and stroking it. WTF!

>>61290
Retard, the dude was yelling that he had a bomb. They blew him up the same way they would any other other potential explosive

>>61424
you stupid asshole, the guy said he had a bomb. the police blow up potential bombs. Blowing that dude up was completely fine and by the book

>>61436
>>61441
So police, having surround the guy are standing so close that a bomb would hurt them?
"Oh look at me! I am a police offices. I am just that stupid"

>>61462
>>61441
>>61436

They must have been back far enough not to be hit by a bomb.
After all, they were far enough away not to be hit by their own bomb when it went off.

>>61424
At what point did you become retarded? Birth?

>A cop has to make sure the subject is alive
The fuck he does. He has to protect those around the offender. You're batshit insane if you think cops are there to protect offenders. Instant justice, such as bombing suspects, save us money. Plus, we dont have to hear about his hurt feelings during his trial.

Fuck you, liberal.

>>61497
Hahaha - my sides
Most definitely NOT a liberal - stop throwing around knee-jerk labels - such labels are the preserve of the weak mind and even weaker arguments.
I did not say "A cop has to make sure the subject is alive" - there is absolutely NO such obligation.
Nor did I say "think cops are there to protect offenders". - Not say that at all.

I guess you only saw what you wanted to see.
I know that the argument is too nuanced and doesn't fit with your "Fuck You" bravado (small hands - big bravado)

>>61413
I won't imagine I'm a soldier in Syria because I'm not a lackey of the US government. Only sickos sign up for this.

But you certainly implied it when you say they are obliged to bring them in to be tried in a court of law, which is to bring them in alive...

>>61512
>As a police officer you are obliged to use the minimum force to get the job done and to bring the perpetrator to justice to be tried in a court of law. Also, you also have an obligation to the perp as they are also likely to be a fellow citizen.

Your words, buddy. By the way, only liberals defend cop killing terrorists.

>>61527
It's defense of the process. There are lawyers who can defend a terrorist.
A subtle distinction I know, but sit down, have a drink, place a cool wet towel on your forehead and I'm sure it will come to you.

If not go ask a grown up. Using crayons might help.

>>61290
Man who killed several police officers? Blow the bastard up.

All seems okay to me.
The guy had already killed that day, several times.
What makes you think he couldn't be feigning injury or pretending to give up only to send a hail of bullets when the officers peak around the corner?
No. Many lives were lost that day fighting a competent enemy, they did not want to lose another one so they did what any rational human being(s) would have done.
Remove the threat in the safest way possible to minimise the chance of another police life lost.

The guy was surrounded. This means that he could either; A, give up. B, Not give up.
With his track record of shooting cops I'd say B was more likely.

He got what was coming to him.

>>61527
poor thing, using 2 words that it doubtfully can define with any accuracy

maybe one day it will look beyond it's intellectual safe-space here at /pol/, and look critically at the bounty of contradicting information out there, just waiting for it's precious little eyes

>>61625
you've exposed yourself, commie kike liberal. get gassed