I could be mistaken, but I think lethal force should be reviewed much more rigorously than routine police interactions. Which is not to say those routine actions shouldn't be reviewed. But the stakes involved are far higher when guns are drawn.
I reject the argument that this represents a blanket condemnation of all police. The second officer on the scene didn't lose his mind. But there are those who should not be on the force while armed. And this guy should not get a similar job with another department after this incident. His training might have been lax, his skills might be below par, or he may not deal with stressful situations well.
But it should not take a death to make the HR judgement that he is not fit to be an armed police officer.
Arguing the Kaepernick is being emotional or over the top is simply avoiding the main question by concentrating on who is reacting the right way. The right thing to do is to make sure this person, and others like him who cause deaths needlessly, do not work at this same position again. Then you update the training for all departments to prevent it (and weed people out) before more deaths occur.
It doesn't matter if he shot Castile, the Pope, my grandmother or my dog, he doesn't belong in uniform carrying a gun if this is how he handles himself. Did his training fail him? Maybe, but we will never know* because he will be brushed off the front page and the odds are that nothing will change.
*If anyone discovers a piece describing what might have gone into this from a training or personal perspective, post a link.
Reply With Quote