Because the cop showing up doesn't know before hand whether or not the motorist have a gun. There's a lot of other things they don't know. The person could be a drug/human trafficker, or have a warrant out for him. In which case, they are armed.
The fact that the officer believes the person he's dealing with is (more) likely to have a firearm can have an impact on the outcome of the interaction. The fact that the person doesn't have one doesn't mean the officer doesn't have to worry that they do, it just hasn't come into play yet.
Having your weapon drawn right from the get go is not a good thing. It tends to make calm people nervous. As far as getting out of the vehicle most police don't like surprises so if things go step by step according to the person with the gun things go much better.
If you stay in the car you have a much easier time dealing with a person who can't easily get into your personal space and limiting the options you have to protect your self.
Why doesn't that happen when suspects confront parking enforcement? Because it's pointless: parking enforcers aren't armed. If stopped by clearly marked traffic compliance officers who aren't armed, how likely is it that a suspect will fire a weapon at them?
Even when faced with self-preservation concern, suspects are already extremely unlikely to fire on police.
As someone who carries on a regular basis, the #1 rule when dealing with the police is compliance.
Yes sir, no sir, the weapon is on my hip, my hands are on the steering wheel and you don't move unless told to do so. A cop is always on edge during a traffic stop but even more so after you tell them you have a weapon. Quick movements after you tell them you are armed is not going to end well.
Obviously we don't know the whole story here as the video starts after the shooting, but hopefully there is body cam footage to clear everything up.
A police office would be more likely to overreact to a situation if he/she believed a suspect carried a firearm (in fairness, for the sake of the officers own defence). In a state where guns aren't common, the police officer would feel less threatened and be less likely to overreact.
Clearly the cop doesn't have self-defense as his top priority, or he wouldn't be in that situation at all. He'd make sure he was somewhere else when the possibility of violence manifested itself. Like, say, I would.
Police officers shouldn't be shooting people on the off chance that a suspicious bulge might be a gun, but it seems pretty unreasonable to expect police officers to put their self-defense as the very lowest priority and wait until bullets actually come out of a gun-like-object being pointed at them before shooting.
How do you know he didn't have a gun? You were told her has a gun, you get to the house and the person letters his arm and then raises it and starts pointing it at a fellow officer... What do you do?
I don't think this particular incident is as cut and dry as you think it is.
Depending on where it is, rural police may be less willing to follow up on complaints if the suspect is armed (lack of manpower compared to urban counterparts, and greater distance to fire station, hospital etc. in case something happens).
This is ridiculous. Just because the crime involves firearms doesn't mean the person being arrested is a cold blooded murderer. Being afraid of arresting someone who has a gun but shows no intention to kill or hurt anyone is like refusing to drive because there are other cars coming in the opposite direction. Oh sure, they might switch into the wrong lane and kill me, but there's nothing to gain from that. It's stupid.
Because the law enforcement officers have to protect their own lives. This is America, where anyone could be carrying an implement that requires two seconds to kill.
Stray bullets and accidental shots are just as lethal as aimed ones. The point is that someone pulled over at a traffic stop can keep a gun hidden and take the first shot if they want to. Each and every traffic stop is a nervous bundle of potential danger for a cop, and they aren't paid to endanger themselves. That's why we go out of our way to make cops comfortable during a traffic stop. Keep your hands where they can be seen. No sudden movements. Polite interaction.
This is what happens when every traffic stop is billed as a combat situation. Cops feel like their dangerous (and they are) because America can't pass sensible gun restrictions.
Kit or no kit, they still don't administer aid alone while there is still a potential threat. Getting that guy out of the car requires holstering your weapon and going in the car when you still might not know where the weapon is.
Safer for the officer to wait for backup. That was my point.
I would imagine that guns are for those immediately life threatening emergency situations where there really is no other option. If an officer could make it back to his car, grab his gun, bring it back again and face the suspect, my guess is that would not qualify as the sort of immediately life threatening circumstance that warranted the use of deadly force
reply