Poll: Would You shoot at Protestors?

[Cid Silverwing]

Because of my Lawful/Chaotic Good nature, I'd defect to the protesters.

 

[Jinx_Dragon]

Thanks for lumping me in with the people saying Military = Police. If you bothered to read my post instead of your Military law books you might have seen I didn't comment on any of that shit you listed in your post as me being "WRONG!" so in the future please choose a quote that fits your actual reply, not just one that looks like it might fit well with your arguement. You might think I am being harsh but your post comes off as quite condescending.

So, from your seven words I am meant to come away with something other then 'it was a order, you do it' mentality?

Now, if I was a police officer and was told to fire upon a crowd with tear gas and etc I would do it. Why? Because your leader has given you an order and unless you want to be fired ans jobless you do it.

So you chose between the risk of Jobless or in jail for grievous boldly harm and potential murder?

Hmmm, wonder which is the better choice to take right there....

Cause if you did use lethal force, and don't kid yourself using tear gas and rubber bullets is a level five response, the excuse of 'I am obeying orders' isn't going to get you off the hook. Unless you clearly where in a situation where the protectors are assaulting you in a life threatening way then the best you can do is arrest them... not shoot at them! If the call comes down to fire on people who are not a direct threat then you have duty to refuse it... not doing so is still crime even if the department will shield you behind the blue line.

Notice I also said risk of unemployment, because no board is going to find you incompetent for refusing to fire on a crowd when there is no clear defined threat. The very worse you will get is being reassigned to another division where you won't have to face that choice once again and at best they will hand the head of the person who gave the order over to the DA in hopes it makes all the media attention go away. Sure the people giving the order will be pissed at you but even they know they have no legal grounds to do anything about it. If they did fire you then the media will have a field day as you sue their arse into oblivion and bring all the dirty laundry to light. Everyone who gave the order would be pulled into the spotlight, having to defend themselves and no jury will fail to side with you when you take the moral high ground that firing blindly into a crowd is a bad thing....

Now, to flank the argument that everyone is using that 'they are violent protesters' this does all change if potentially lethal force is being applied but you know what... I didn't see even a hint of that in the opening post. As it stands all we have is a group of people who refused a legal order to disperse by organising a sit down, a form of passive resistance, and that is it! Then you are asked the question, would you obey a order to fire on these people.

This sort of post is done deliberately, because no one in their right mind can say they wouldn't defend themselves in a violent situation. I sure hell don't blame the police when they are faced with a violent threat and have to respond with lethal means, it is a real hazard of the job. Yet when faced with a group of non-violent individuals and the order to use violence on them... that the way these examples go so your faced with a true moral decision to make.

The correct, legal and moral, response is to start arresting the organisers of the protest and warning the rest they will be arrested as well if they don't comply... not to just summarily shoot at them.

 

[Tyshalle]

It is an order. You do it.

WRONG!
Even the military allows for you to disobey a morally or legally questionable order, in fact it is your duty! If any of you ever bothered to look at the military law books then you would know this fact. It is why 'I was just following orders' has never been seen as a justifiable reason if you are caught breaking the law.

The police... smile even less on that excuse then the military does. There is even less of a 'you must obey a orders' mentality in the police force. The worse that can happen if you refuse a order is a demand of resignation. If you refuse they can do a competency hearing and fire you if you are found to be incompetent but that is it! No jail time, no records or anything... you just get fired.

After all isn't illegal at all to disobey your boss, but it isn't productive to a long carrier if you do. People need to stop grouping the military and police force together... they are NOT the same! Law enforcement is a civil position, not a military one, and you are a citizen not a soldier.

This. I would panic, since my only options would be to violate the constitution or mutiny.

It isn't mutiny. While you desert from the military, you just quit from the police force.

QFT. Thank you. You said most of what I wanted to say.

 

[Wicky_42]

More money than it costs to fire rubberbullets at feminists and idiots who obviously deserve what is coming to them.

Since when do feminists deserve what's coming to them?

Actually, in your view, what the hell do feminists deserve?

I'd shoot those muslim protestors claiming British soldiers to be slaughtering there brothers and disgracing army funerals, they should be trialed, sentenced to death for treason and hung drawn and quartered in public. Or we could just get napalm and set them on fire. Or capture them and send a rat up there arses. Or just shoot them but make sure they die bleeding.

I've got a gun, and they're annoying. Hell yes I'll open fire at them.

W..What?

See, this is what I'm talking about. You'd seriously open fire on civilians because they're annoying? And you'd seriously burn people to death for protesting?

That's absolutely insane.

*sensible things*

The correct, legal and moral, response is to start arresting the organisers of the protest and warning the rest they will be arrested as well if they don't comply... not to just summarily shoot at them.

Oh thank God! There are sensible people in this thread! I was beginning to despair (and get reported... oops...)

I think 'morality' should be made a compulsory lower-school subject. Threads like this reveal just how unethical people can be :/

 

[Jinx_Dragon]

A interesting note:

A studies on the British Journal of Surgery, by one R. Millar for those interesting in hunting more information down, focused on the use of rubber ammo. They found that 1 in 100 people are KILLED by using these weapons. Roughly 1 in 5 of people fired on will be permanently crippled or disfigured by this type of ammo. Almost half of the people fired on will need hospitalisation....

And you will obey a order to fire these things into a crowd of hundreds who are just 'sitting around, blocking traffic?!'

 

[HT_Black]

"Private, why did you join the army?"
"I wanted to learn how to beat people to death."

Assuming I somehow get coerced into signing up for Uncle Sam's goon squad, I'm going to take every chance I get to discharge a firearm at somebody; as much as I hate violence, I signed up for a S.W.A.T. team.

 

[Jinx_Dragon]

Oh thank God! There are sensible people in this thread! I was beginning to despair (and get reported... oops...)

I think 'morality' should be made a compulsory lower-school subject. Threads like this reveal just how unethical people can be :/

I agree. This thread has worried me like no other, I get the feeling we might have an unsettlingly large amount of psychopaths on here.

I really can't see how anyone could say things like some have said on here. It's people like these that's the reason wars are conducted so brutally.

I put it down as "I'm completely autonomous on this page, so I can get my dick out and wave it to appear 'tough.'" In reality the vast majority of these 'shoot them dead, and let god sort it out' responses would hesitate if they are put into a situation where they would have, even in self defence, to pull the trigger on someone else. Make that a situation where there is no threat to themselves, a cold blooded pulling of the trigger, and I bet they wouldn't be able to do it. Reports on the fact we seem to have blocks when it comes to shooting other humans have been vastly documented.

But it makes the posters feel big to say they would, didn't it?

Not to say this mentality isn't dangerous!

Both less-lethal as well as traditionally-lethal weapons are being over used by the current generation of police because this mentality exists. It is a blank check to those few psychopaths who find themselves in such a position to get away with inflicting pain on another. This hollow justification also has spawned a whole generation of police officers who consider these weapons 'non-lethal' who poorly utilise these weapons, even in good faith, because there is no back lash for doing so. The mentality needs to be addressed, cause even with those blocks against shooting at each other we all seem to justify that it has to be done to one degree or another... and that mentality is hidden behind as a excuse.

People need to start being damn honest, instead of saying what they think will make themselves seem big in the eyes of the crowd!

 

[GrinningManiac]

Rubber bullets and tear gas? Oh god forbid! It's not as if they invented those things for the sole purpose of dispersing crowds without killing people!

Sure I'd shoot 'em!

The real question is: with live ammunition? To which I answer thus:

No, I would, in fact, defect to the protest/rebel side. If I'm on the side of a government who has resolved to shoot its own populace, I don't think I want to be part of that system

 

[Madkipz]

More money than it costs to fire rubberbullets at feminists and idiots who obviously deserve what is coming to them.

Since when do feminists deserve what's coming to them?

Actually, in your view, what the hell do feminists deserve?

I'd shoot those muslim protestors claiming British soldiers to be slaughtering there brothers and disgracing army funerals, they should be trialed, sentenced to death for treason and hung drawn and quartered in public. Or we could just get napalm and set them on fire. Or capture them and send a rat up there arses. Or just shoot them but make sure they die bleeding.

I've got a gun, and they're annoying. Hell yes I'll open fire at them.

W..What?

See, this is what I'm talking about. You'd seriously open fire on civilians because they're annoying? And you'd seriously burn people to death for protesting?

That's absolutely insane.

*sensible things*

The correct, legal and moral, response is to start arresting the organisers of the protest and warning the rest they will be arrested as well if they don't comply... not to just summarily shoot at them.

Oh thank God! There are sensible people in this thread! I was beginning to despair (and get reported... oops...)

I think 'morality' should be made a compulsory lower-school subject. Threads like this reveal just how unethical people can be :/

Your taking it slightly out of context, feminists and socialism is good in small dosage but us in the west have gone overboard, too much socialism promotes a corrupt government and allows scum to infiltrate society because everyone are special right? Just face it, the right side is right.


I have nothing against a peaceful protest that has followed the legal procedures and keeps on following them is by all means not one you fire rubber bullets into. If it breaks into a riot and your SUPERIOR officer, who has more experience and education on the subject. Starts to throw in the heavy shit. I would definately throw in the heavy shit alongside him to prevent further chaos and regain order.

 

[Ricotez]

Would I shoot at...

No. Not even if I don't agree with them at all and they're actually propagating violence, because that would just put me on par with them and make me equally evil. People should have the right to express their opinion, though some people have to remember that giving your opinion and insulting people are two different things. Still, I wouldn't shoot at them. Unless they shoot at me, that is.

 

[GrinningManiac]

Your taking it slightly out of context, feminists and socialism is good in small dosage but us in the west have gone overboard, too much socialism promotes a corrupt government and allows scum to infiltrate society because everyone are special right? Just face it, the right side is right.

You and me are not going to get along. So let me just give you a piece of advice that will keep our soon-to-be-legendary debates friendly and on-topic rather than personal and hurtful:

Do Not, under any circumstance, Force Your Beliefs On Others

I'm fine with your pro-right ideals and I accept that freedom of speech allows you to say what you think, but don't assume that means you can tell other people that, and I quote, to "Just face it, the right side it right"

If we're going to start with stuff like that, I could say "remember, when the chips are down, only the left is left", but I won't, because I'm not here to force or advertise, I'm here to debate.

So bash socialism all you want, but accept the flak

 

[Jinx_Dragon]

/snip

Ummm, you screwed up your quotes. While even just a mistake I still feel dirty just having those mistaken words assigned to me....

 

[Wicky_42]

Your taking it slightly out of context, feminists and socialism is good in small dosage but us in the west have gone overboard, too much socialism promotes a corrupt government and allows scum to infiltrate society because everyone are special right? Just face it, the right side is right.

Intolerance and capitalism are manageable in moderation, but us in the West have gone overboard. Too much capitalism corrupts people and governments, benefiting the minority through the exploitation of the many (because if you're poor you deserve it, are probably stupid or criminal, and don't deserve the same rights as the obviously opposite rich people, right?) and is unsustainable indefinitely without reform. Intolerance leads to xenophobia and racism, as well as mindless conservatism and a stubborn, unthinking resistance to change.

Just face it, the world needs more education and understanding.

 

[DefunctTheory]

Let's say you joined the Police/Army and called out to face the mob of the day.

Some are protesting War, corrupt Governments, Workers rights.

So they're basically sitting there jamming up traffic, reducing tourism.

Your commanding officer orders you to start throwing tear gas and shoot rubber bullets and those hippies.

What do you do and why?

You're not being very specific. An illegal protest (one that is on public streets without permits and permission and such) would not be dealt with by such force... most likely, tear gas along with riot police using shields, batons and snag, obtain, detain tactics should do the job fine.

Now, a RIOT, on the other hand, is completely different. Typically, protest that turn into riots are dealt with in the same way as stated above. Riot police will target instigators (riot leaders) and detain them, in hopes of taking away the steam that drives the engine so to speak. If the riot has gotten to a level where there are no leaders, just a mob of crazy people, well... not much you can do at that point but gas everyone and go for the bean bag rounds. Its not pretty and people still die, but its better than the alternative.