Turn on thread page Beta

It's always the polices fault. watch

Announcements
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    3 repeat offenders stole a car and crashed into a lake and drowned, now people are blaming the police.
    http://www.theroot.com/articles/news...girls_who.html

    http://www.fox5ny.com/news/129525273-story

    People are claiming it is due to racism but be honest would you go into a 15 ft deep lake at night with low visibility and no safety equipment in what is basically a suicide mission, I wouldn't.

    It's a tragic accident but don't blame the police the blame lies entirely with the 3 criminals.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    It was entirely the responsibility of the criminals, the police may have a responsibility towards protecting public interest but they also have lives and families of their own and diving in seriously difficult circumstances would have put additional lives at risk.

    I suppose the question is, is it fine for the police to make no attempt after assessing damages or is that an act of cowardice?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    3 repeat offenders stole a car and crashed into a lake and drowned, now people are blaming the police.
    http://www.theroot.com/articles/news...girls_who.html

    http://www.fox5ny.com/news/129525273-story

    People are claiming it is due to racism but be honest would you go into a 15 ft deep lake at night with low visibility and no safety equipment in what is basically a suicide mission, I wouldn't.

    It's a tragic accident but don't blame the police the blame lies entirely with the 3 criminals.
    The question you should ask is whether the police officer would have jumped into the water to save the people, if they were the officer's children or relations. My guess points towards a yes.

    Personally, I think that Police Officers should be trained for several situations. If they are untrained to jump into the water then the rapid response of emergency services should be used.

    Finally, ask yourself an honest question, if it was a member of your family (even though they were repeat offenders), would you blame the police for not, at least, trying to save them? You don't have to answer on TSR. Just answer to yourself. If you would blame the officers, then you will be guilty of hypocrisy.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    3 repeat offenders stole a car and crashed into a lake and drowned, now people are blaming the police.
    http://www.theroot.com/articles/news...girls_who.html

    http://www.fox5ny.com/news/129525273-story

    People are claiming it is due to racism but be honest would you go into a 15 ft deep lake at night with low visibility and no safety equipment in what is basically a suicide mission, I wouldn't.

    It's a tragic accident but don't blame the police the blame lies entirely with the 3 criminals.
    The police, like any other emergency service, have a public duty and are empowered to respond and to assist members of the public who are in difficulty. Whether the victims were criminals or not is largely irrelevant to the story.


    The police, unlike in a Banana Republic, do not get to pick and choose who they should help and who they shouldn't.

    As for the actual situation, 15ft of water is nothing. I would have expected the police officers to put their own lives on the line to save the lives of others. Soldiers put their lives on the line, even sometimes volunteering for suicide missions, in an effort to protect the public from harm.

    That is the ultimate duty, the ultimate sacrifice.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Name:  lol.jpg
Views: 109
Size:  51.2 KB
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    The police, like any other emergency service, have a public duty and are empowered to respond and to assist members of the public who are in difficulty. Whether the victims were criminals or not is largely irrelevant to the story.


    The police, unlike in a Banana Republic, do not get to pick and choose who they should help and who they shouldn't.

    As for the actual situation, 15ft of water is nothing. I would have expected the police officers to put their own lives on the line to save the lives of others. Soldiers put their lives on the line, even sometimes volunteering for suicide missions, in an effort to protect the public from harm.

    That is the ultimate duty, the ultimate sacrifice.
    No one has to kill themselves in their job.

    15ft of water is over double the height of the officers they couldn't even see the car so what possible chance was there? Do you honestly believe we should force police officers to die?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DanteTheDoorKnob)
    It was entirely the responsibility of the criminals, the police may have a responsibility towards protecting public interest but they also have lives and families of their own and diving in seriously difficult circumstances would have put additional lives at risk.

    I suppose the question is, is it fine for the police to make no attempt after assessing damages or is that an act of cowardice?
    They didbmake an attempt tobsave then ot was just the conditions of the lake made it impossible for them to do it.
    Offline

    3
    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    Whether the victims were criminals or not is largely irrelevant to the story.
    I think the fact that they were criminals is extremely pertinent - if they hadn't stolen a car and driven it recklessly they wouldn't have been in 15 feet of water in the first place
    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    Soldiers put their lives on the line, even sometimes volunteering for suicide missions, in an effort to protect the public from harm.
    Soldiers and police officers sign up for completely different things.

    Ultimately don't steal a car and drive recklessly and then you won't be in a situation where you're relying on others to put their lives on the line to save you.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    >Girls have priors for stealing cars
    >Girls steal cars
    >Police chase them
    >Girls drive into lake
    >Police try to save them but assess situation and can't
    >Girls drown

    "Those girls were angels and the police were cowards who stood there doing nothing while the poor darlings died"

    Only in the West.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JBLondon)
    I think the fact that they were criminals is extremely pertinent - if they hadn't stolen a car and driven it recklessly they wouldn't have been in 15 feet of water in the first place
    Criminals are not the only members of the public who drive recklessly. Saying that they were criminals, and therefore deserving of less help than ordinary members of public is not only morally reprehensible, but completely inhumane.

    Soldiers and police officers sign up for completely different things.

    Ultimately don't steal a car and drive recklessly and then you won't be in a situation where you're relying on others to put their lives on the line to save you.
    Soldiers and other emergency services sign up to protect the public from harm, giving their life if need be. That is why we respect them so much and praise them and award them honors when they do good by protecting the public.

    They should be selfless people, not self-serving.

    (Original post by joecphillips)
    No one has to kill themselves in their job.
    But there is an expectation that as a public official, you go above and beyond your duty to protect members of the public.

    15ft of water is over double the height of the officers they couldn't even see the car so what possible chance was there? Do you honestly believe we should force police officers to die?
    Of course they could see the car, which is why you can hear the officers say that "it's going down now", which is about a minute into the video. God knows how long they were standing there before someone started to film it.

    When a car is driven into water, it doesn't sink straight away. It floats for a couple of minutes, taking water in all the time. Depending on how close the officers were, it could be reasonable to expect them to make efforts to save the girls.

    Taking off your holster and belt and then deciding that you think you're life is worth more than those that you have sworn to protect is a cowardly and selfish act.

    The officers are a disgrace to their profession.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    The police, like any other emergency service, have a public duty and are empowered to respond and to assist members of the public who are in difficulty. Whether the victims were criminals or not is largely irrelevant to the story.


    The police, unlike in a Banana Republic, do not get to pick and choose who they should help and who they shouldn't.

    As for the actual situation, 15ft of water is nothing. I would have expected the police officers to put their own lives on the line to save the lives of others. Soldiers put their lives on the line, even sometimes volunteering for suicide missions, in an effort to protect the public from harm.

    That is the ultimate duty, the ultimate sacrifice.
    What sanctimonious claptrap!

    The first rule of life-saving, as anyone who has taken a course knows, is You must never die in the attempt. In other words, if there is a serious risk to yourself do not take it.

    This applies no matter who the victim is, no matter who the possible life-saver is, and no matter what the situation is.

    The second rule, in the case of water rescue is Entering the water is a last resort and should only be undertaken by competent swimmers in safe conditions. In this case, the water was deep, obstructed and cold, and it was dark - all factors that militate against entry.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    It is rarely the police's fault.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    Criminals are not the only members of the public who drive recklessly. Saying that they were criminals, and therefore deserving of less help than ordinary members of public is not only morally reprehensible, but completely inhumane.



    Soldiers and other emergency services sign up to protect the public from harm, giving their life if need be. That is why we respect them so much and praise them and award them honors when they do good by protecting the public.

    They should be selfless people, not self-serving.



    But there is an expectation that as a public official, you go above and beyond your duty to protect members of the public.



    Of course they could see the car, which is why you can hear the officers say that "it's going down now", which is about a minute into the video. God knows how long they were standing there before someone started to film it.

    When a car is driven into water, it doesn't sink straight away. It floats for a couple of minutes, taking water in all the time. Depending on how close the officers were, it could be reasonable to expect them to make efforts to save the girls.

    Taking off your holster and belt and then deciding that you think you're life is worth more than those that you have sworn to protect is a cowardly and selfish act.

    The officers are a disgrace to their profession.
    Its good to see how highly you rate the officers right to live.

    They took their belts off and tried to help but couldnt do you not realise that a lake bed isnt flat and it is hard to yet through.

    You donrealise that it was dashcam footage that records from the beginning of the shift.

    Even selfless people dont always decide to kill themselves.

    Im not saying that they deserve less help where have i said that? The fact that they are repeat offenders shows the type of people these were and that they have been rosking something bad happening before

    Why dont you come out and just say that the police dont have a right to live, you seem to think they have to kill themselves.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    Its good to see how highly you rate the officers right to live.
    Do I think they were selfish? Yes.

    Do I think they would have jumped in there if it was a close friend or family member? Yes.

    Does the fact that they were chasing criminals made it less likely that they would help them? Probably.

    Do I believe they should put their life on the line unconditionally? Goes without saying.

    They took their belts off and tried to help but couldnt do you not realise that a lake bed isnt flat and it is hard to yet through.
    What did they think they could achieve by taking their belts off? Were they going to lasso the car or something?

    You donrealise that it was dashcam footage that records from the beginning of the shift.
    I apologise but that didn't seem like the full video. Of course, they could make the full video available, especially if they are turned on from the start of the shift.

    Even selfless people dont always decide to kill themselves.
    Selfless people don't usually commit suicide, correct, but neither do they weigh the lives of people they are sworn to protect against their own life and feel like their own life is worth more, because they have an interest in living it.

    Im not saying that they deserve less help where have i said that? The fact that they are repeat offenders shows the type of people these were and that they have been rosking something bad happening before
    So the officers did the taxpayer, and the wider society, a favour by not sacrificing their own lives (if it came to that)?

    Why dont you come out and just say that the police dont have a right to live, you seem to think they have to kill themselves.
    I expect the police to uphold the law and pledge loyalty to the members of public, whom they have sworn to serve.

    I do not expect to condone, praise or reward the police for their roles as judge, jury and executioners - through their negligence.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    Do I believe they should put their life on the line unconditionally? Goes without saying.

    What did they think they could achieve by taking their belts off? Were they going to lasso the car or something?

    neither do they weigh the lives of people they are sworn to protect against their own life and feel like their own life is worth more, because they have an interest in living it.
    Police officers do not have a duty, either moral or legal, to put their lives at risk to help others. Some have done so, but that does not mean others must. That deals with your first and last statements, which are nonsense.

    On the second statement, you have obviously never learned about life-saving. If you had you would know that a useful technique is to create a chain from victim to a person anchored on land, and this can take the form of people holding looped belts or ropes, in order not to lose a rescuer. The water turned out to be too deep for this to work, of course.
    Offline

    3
    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    Criminals are not the only members of the public who drive recklessly. Saying that they were criminals, and therefore deserving of less help than ordinary members of public is not only morally reprehensible, but completely inhumane.
    If they hadn't stolen that car, would they have been in the water?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    They're the police. Their job is to enforce the law. They're not a rescue service.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JBLondon)
    If they hadn't stolen that car, would they have been in the water?
    If the police had not been chasing them, would they have driven into the lake?

    If there were no cars, could they have stolen one?

    If prison had reformed the girls, would they have felt the need to commit a crime?


    If you care to spend an afternoon playing the "but for game" and asking me to engage in redundant hypotheticals, then kindly play it with someone else.
    Offline

    3
    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    If the police had not been chasing them, would they have driven into the lake?

    If there were no cars, could they have stolen one?

    If prison had reformed the girls, would they have felt the need to commit a crime?


    If you care to spend an afternoon playing the "but for game" and asking me to engage in redundant hypotheticals, then kindly play it with someone else.
    The fact remains if they hadn't committed a crime, they wouldn't have ended up in the water. That's not a 'redundant hypothetical', but a fact.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    .
    They have a duty to uphold the law, not to go all suicidal frogman trying to pull out a sinking car with their bare hands smh

    You seem to understand nothing of the situation, and I doubt you have read up on the case beyond sensationalist headlines, otherwise you would have seen the reports saying they waded in but mud, silt, and weeds prevented them from going further. You would also have seen the dive team reports saying there was 0 visibility in the water, and that there was nothing the patrolmen could have done. A little more background knowledge and you would know that rescuing individuals from inside a closed, sinking car is one of the hardest rescue operations possible in any situation, even for trained professionals. And if you had looked into rescue operations, you would have seen a core tenet is "do not add to the casualties", and come to the conclusion the police followed their training by not jumping in head first. Anything beyond that is overly emotional nonsense that has no relevance beyond your self-gratifying hatred of the police.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you think parents should charge rent?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.