I saw a white man with a gun. I heard a policeman saying, "Place the weapon down on the ground, ple

A hint, but not much more:



http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Reasonable+Person

Two things about that:
a) It's not mine; I'm not defending it.
b) Yes, I see problems with it.

Ya, I agree for you it's easy...just look in a ******* mirror!

Upon further examination it was the assault weapons ban that ended in 2004. The requirement to collect data on use of force and police/public interaction is still part of the law and is still conducted annually by the BJS.

http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=dcdetail&iid=251

It is not a comprehensive collection of all data. It is only a survey.

Thank you for checking...what I was referencing was an inititive by the ICPA.

The Sam Bee report had a guy talking about the complete lack of 'policing' of data acquisition. And her rhetorical 'Why would agencies not want you to know this?'

I see problems with it too! That's the reason why I question such terms. It's not easy to quantify an individual's ability at "reasonable" since it's such a subjective word.



What is "sound judgement?" "Fair and sensible" based on what criteria?

You people sound like Clinton asking what the definition of is is.

That's because your simple mind fails to comprehend the difficulty in trying to define words that are mostly subjective.

Oh pardon me master of the English language...

It aint rocket surgery...stop trying to impress us with how much you think you know about English...you're trying to hard...looks silly.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

There was no law passed by Congress to have the ICPA do anything. There certainly wasn't a failure of Congress to renew it.

The law only requires that data be collected and reported on every year. It was initially part of the 1994 Assault weapons ban law.

Thank you for helping me demonstrate my point.

I wasnt referring to a law I was referring to FUNDING of a program initiated by the ICPA. The federal funding was not renewed...I thought I was more than clerar on the issue.

No need to thank me...any time I can bring a dumb ass like you to self awareness regarding your unreasonableness is thanks enough.

Congress didn't fund the ICPA program specifically. It merely wrote the law that still exists. It is the Clinton administration that set up the 4 year study by the ICPA. It was then the Bush administration that failed to reauthorize it in 2001.

It was originally funded by the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994...this did sunset in 2004 but you are incorrect by saying that it wasnt re authorized by Bush...it was in 2005 sans the assault weapon ban. The ICPA program continued and was funded by the ICPA itself.

Oh my...all these histrionics by FBM...The sky is falling, The sky is falling.
Read the facts:

The International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) National Police Use
of Force Database is the first substantial aggregation of state, county and
local law enforcement use of force data. What follows are some of the recent
and noteworthy findings from the data. Information in this report is based on years 1991-2001 representing a composite population of 149,940,551;
45,913,161 calls for service (CFS); 177,215 use of force incidents, and 8,082
use of force complaints. In some cases single data years are represented to
show current levels of use of force. In other cases, multiple years are
grouped to provide a larger sample of incidents.

􀂉 How often do police use force?
Data for 1999, the last year for which complete data from participating
agencies is available, shows that police used force at a rate of 3.61
times per 10,000 calls-for-service. This translates to a rate of use of
force of 0.0361%. Expressed another way, police did not use force
99.9639% of the time. Data on the calculated rates of police use of
force are presented in Table 10 (on page 12).

The IACP has created a measure of excessive force that assumes a
force-related complaint, sustained as alleged equals an incident of
excessive force. Between 1994 and 2000, of the 7,495 force-related
complaints reported to the project, 750 were sustained. This total
number of sustained force-related complaints was produced by a total
of 174,820 total reported incidents. Expressed as a percentage of total
incidents, excessive force was used 0.42% of the time. Again
looking at this another way, excessive force was not used in 99.583%
of all reported cases. Complete data on calculated rates of excessive
use of force are presented in Table 8 (on page 10).


THE FULL REPORT
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCgQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theiacp.org%2FPortals%2F0%2Fpdfs%2FPublications%2F2001useofforce.pdf&ei=4ps9VLTVH6WN8QGhk4CAAg&usg=AFQjCNGy8gB8CzULymw5bHdL-qRTBAepHg

HERE YA GO FBM cant wait to see how you dismiss this evidence.

Dead people don't complain.

1999 data?

I'm talking about the erosion of trust. I'm sure nothing has changed since 1999.

Mobile phones that can record video.

Two effects

UFO sightings down
Police brutality incidents up

Just sayin'

And of course their relatives would be mute on the subject.....ues your head before you engage your mouth.