UK Cops Disarm Man Wielding a Machete | Firsthand | CBC

What Hacker News said

Cites alistairSH · 2019-12 · on “ACLU to police using robots: Tell us more”

I was going to bring that up. Totally agree - further normalizing the use of violence by the police should be avoided. While not a sniper, this is the police in the UK apprehending a suspect with a machete. I've never heard of similar tactics being used in the US. And conversations with police have led me to believe they would actively avoid such tactics and instead resort to violence. [this video]

Cites chrisseaton · 2020-06 · on “Mapping Police Violence”

> If you were a police officer, would you, unarmed, engage another person wielding a hatchet? I'd say that's unlikely. Would you even take the job if you were unarmed? Great example! Here's how the UK engage someone wielding a machete, without guns or any other weapons beside extendable batons. [this video] They try to deescalate, they bring in reinforcements, they surround, then they disarm him using shields, not weapons, and he survives to stand a fair trial. No guns needed. And if they thought they couldn't arrest him using shields they could call in a specialist firearms unit, who are specifically trained, authorised, and accountable.

Cites cygx · 2021-01 · on “Infosec implications of the US Capitol physical breach”

Circumstances matter, but it can be done (eg [this video] made the news a while ago). Here in Germany, people wielding knives get killed from time to time as well. Pepper spray tends to get used first, and I do not remember any case where a dozen rounds were fired[1] (German police fire on the order of 50 rounds total per year, cf [LINK] ). [1] edit: apparently, this does happen, cf [LINK]

Cites BoorishBears · 2021-05 · on “Leaked emails show crime app Citizen is testing on-demand security force”

This is missing the forest for the trees so badly it hurts. Why do you think I said I'd be forced to shoot? Because even without training common sense tells you "not allowing the attacker to close enough distance with you to use the knife" is a pretty good course of action By your logic the moment a person calls 911, the people who are supposed to help, the person has been sentenced to death. Think about that for a second. 1. The cops will arrive 2. "avoid knife getting close to me" 3. Less than lethal is not reliable, hell even lethal force isn't instant, I feared for my life, they're shot very dead. - It's not an easy problem, but how is that ok? There's not many ways to fix it other than

Cites mrsuprawsm · 2021-12 · on “Man dies after he is shot by the police with a stun gun and catches fire”

There’s a fair number of videos from eg the UK where they do exactly this. The usual playbook seems to be: get a few people distracting the guy from the front, and another few rush them from the back whilst distracted and hit them with batons or just jump on them. Or just distract them for a long while and wait for more backup and people with shields. [this video] It takes a bit of effort and coordination but is obviously massively preferable to being executed on the spot by the state.

Cites throw0101a · 2022-07 · on “Former PM Abe Shinzo dies after being shot”

In most other countries, training encourages the use of lethal force as a last resort. In Germany (pop. 84M), in 2015, a total of 101 rounds were discharged by police for the entire year: * [LINK] How the UK police dealt with a machete-wielding individual: * [this video]

Cites ceejayoz · 2023-03 · on “Gang Members Hold Positions at ‘Highest Levels’ of LA Sheriff’s Department”

> if you want to enforce the law for dangerous and violent people, doesn’t it seem reasonable you’ll need at least equally if not more dangerous and violent people to do so? No. There are other ways. For example, mobbing with massively superior numbers, resulting in no harm to anyone, and a suspect getting the hospital care they needed: [this video]