- JUDITH HARROWER
- February 22, 2014 - 08:45
While this incident is minor, it does clearly indicate the growing ingrained police culture of using potential & real deadly force to resolve situtions. In the western provinces, BC in particular, the increasing number of civilian deaths is alarming - most involve the individual being under the influence of aldohol/drugs, suicidial, or have mental health problems. RCMP over react by becoming highly aggressive, authoritarin, demanding if the individual is holding a hatchet, knife or some blunt instrument. The latest inquest in BC a veteran Greg Matters shot twice in the BACK, in isolated rural rea, alone, suffering mental disorder, with RCMP overkill in having multi armed officers, dogs, helicopter, ERT, - quite frankly capturing this chap was a training excerise for the boys in red serge to practice only they murdered the confused terrified, mentally confused war veteran -waste of life because the Mounties feed on their culture of machoism and entitlement of power and control at all costs.
- New Veteran
- February 21, 2014 - 11:37
Interesting article and comments. Having been to the former Yugoslavia, Haiti, Lebanon and Afghanistan in service to Canada, I thought you should know that Canadian Military personnel would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6. If you weren't there, you don't know.
- No I knows
- February 21, 2014 - 09:45
All the more reason to arm our city employees. I'm sure the guys who got knocked by Ed Drove felt threatened too. That's only a $750 dollar crime for dines sake! Unless they have a good lawyer of course!
- Stephen Redgrave
- February 21, 2014 - 08:34
Well said Brian. Stray police bullets have killed many innocent people in Canada. I promote the RNC as having a cool restraint with their P-226, but , in this case there was a breakdown of sorts.They'll sort it out. Meanwhile , I'm glad no one was killed--for the cop's sake only.
- February 21, 2014 - 08:08
Thank you Brian Tobin. Now we have gun violence too.
- Cashin Delaney
- February 21, 2014 - 07:38
Anyone who faithfully watches The Republic of Doyle knows this is standard modern policing. Jones seems to want to fabricate a grand Murdochian mystery of this ongoing police work, as if he were a 19th century alienist. Why not be overt about his SUV reference and contrast Ed Drover's SUV attack with this one, instead of patting himself on the back for calling dirtbags, dirtbags, and plaguing, taunting the RNC with innuendo? I hope the CBC soon airs a third law enforcement-based show, set in the future, where RNC management may learn that an EMP pistol is the appropriate protection for them and for city workers to have on hand. Safe, clean, protection charged by the coming power of the great Muskrat Falls! No dirtbags harmed, young nor old. The RCMP deals with serial killers Brian, I don't know who deals with serial bores - let me know.
- February 21, 2014 - 10:43
If you're using Republic of Doyle as your baseline for modern policing you need your head examined...and if we're holding our police to that standard then we have failed.
- February 21, 2014 - 13:54
DW, If you couldn't pick out the humorous sarcasm in Cashin Delaney's post, you're taking yourself wayyyyyy to seriously. Brian, does this mean that police officers can't be politicians either.
- February 21, 2014 - 18:34
Yes, I take plain clothes police officers opening fire at a university very seriously. I take criminals using SUVs as potential weapons seriously. Comments like these aren't sarcastic, they're sad and out of touch. Fortunately for us, the RCMP does not deal with serial killers in NL, but the nature of crime in NL is changing very quickly and that's no joke...
- February 21, 2014 - 22:07
Jay - I picked out the sarcasm, but there was definitely no humour...
- February 21, 2014 - 06:45
I guess the Criminal Code of Canada is responsible for the law to allow a police officer or anyone the ability to use as much force necessary to defend themselves, although just enough force. In this case the criminal had a weapon which he attempted to use on the officer or at least in a manner the officer felt his life was threatened. The offender went from minor property offender to a violent crimes against persons offender. He appears to have had intentions of doing whatever it takes to elude capture. Would this comments and questions be different if the offender had killing innocent people while fleeing in his adrenaline rush state. Would the question be "Why did the police not shoot this person?". Who knows but keep it in mind that it is sheer luck the offender did not kill anyone as he escape was no Sunday drive to the point he left the vehicle in flames. We entrust the police to protect themselves while protecting us and ask that they be emotionless and unaffected by actions of others.