Right, that job basically doesn't exist right now. You'd have to invent it.
It's like a combination hostage negotiator / doctor / cab driver. Or at least those skills need to be represented by whatever combination of people show up.
Or we could just keep doing it this way. It's basically fine. People mostly comply. It mostly doesn't end up in this kind of catastrophe.
I just tend to look at it from a game theory perspective. There are two possibilities: 1) the person is either inclined to be cooperative and compliant or 2) they aren't.
If they are, then it basically doesn't matter who the authorized state actors are responding to the situation. (Well, I mean they need to be competent, but they don't necessarily have to be cops and they definitely don't have to be armed.)
If they aren't so inclined...well...I'm not sure that *starting* with armed cops who are 100% committed to taking the person into custody no matter what is the best approach.
But, you know, these are edge cases. The mere existence of the weaponry guarantees that people are going to get killed every now and then, it's just baked in. Like I said, people seem to be mostly fine with that.
|
(
In response to this post by 133743Hokie)
Posted: 06/14/2020 at 3:41PM