Rainbow Six
New member
I can see how my post could have come across wrong but I never meant to be condescending and imply that I don't care what non-LE thinks. That's not the case at all. In fact I am one of the seemingly few these days that do care how I treat people and how they feel about their experience with me as a LEO. I conduct my business with the public like I would want to be treated and like I would want my family treated if they needed an officer for something. I have nothing to defend on that front and nothing to prove. Just making a point in reply to your comment.
My actual point was, and is that until you've been under the same stress an officer was under in a given situation you don't know exactly how you yourself would have reacted. Even if you've done something many times you're not guaranteed to do it right, or even the same way next time it happens. I've seen seasoned officers have brain freeze on scenes and drop the ball (luckily so far nobody was hurt as a result) on things that they had handled many times before. It's called being human and making mistakes.
I never meant that public opinion of LE actions isn't warranted or justified. I believe it absolutely is. I'm definitely not a "Police State" type. I like my freedom and the checks and balances just as much as most other citizens. What I meant was that people who haven't walked a mile in the officer's shoes and operated under the stress they operate under in some situations have no right to blow off at the mouth and Monday morning quarterback an officer's actions as if they know they could/would have handled it better. Having the opinion that the officer *REALLY* flubbed up and should be fired is one's own prerogative. I have no beef with that. What I have a beef with is the folks who blast off at the mouth saying that there's no way it could be an accident. They have no idea what can happen under the stress we are under sometimes.
They also have no idea what the true, exact circumstances were when the incident took place. They make these rash judgements based on the face value of this article of unknown accuracy and the almost guaranteed sketchy details at best. And that, sir, holds no weight with those of us who have walked that mile. That was my point. It would be the same if I were reading an article about someone making a mistake on their job in the heat of the moment and blasting off my judgement of them without having been under the same conditions and also without the totality of the circumstances.
I'm sorry if my original comment was worded poorly and you took it as condescending. I never intended it to come across that way. I was simply stating that some here have made comments as if they know what they are talking about but unless they've "been there and done that" they have no clue. I hope that makes better sense.
