Dave wrote:Irrelevant because the guy was not holding a can opener or a stout ink pen. He was holding a knife and he attempted to use it.
This is the case, but what Rook is saying is relevant in that he's pointing out cops may resort to certain actions almost procedurally when in some cases (not all, and not necessarily this one) there is the option to err on the side of hesitation and resort to non-lethal alternatives.
I dont know what happened here, but for the cop to nearly get stabbed he'd have to have been very close to the guy (unless the guy took a running start). If this was the case I'd think the cops should have held their distance and waited for proper non-lethal alternatives to present themselves. Cops do take it upon themselves to end a situation swiftly, but in doing this they rush in and in many cases antagonize the situation, escalating it instead of making things calmer. This isnt to say they arent in the right to rush in, but being the ones with the authorized use of deadly force, I think they should be responsible for exhausing EVERY non-lethal alternative before resorting to such measures. If this takes a 2-3 day standoff, then so be it.
Cops should be there primarily to keep other citezens safe, and that would be keeping them away from this guy until he's safely subduable (seeing that he had a knife and was thus contained to the extent of his arm, unlike if he had a firearm). The more distructive law enforcement mindset is to force him into submission, which causes an escalation of emotions and can lead to more violence.