Question about the terminology used in police manhunts...

N

ninjarealist

New member
TFL might not be the right place to ask this question but I've recently become curious about this subject and have been unable to find any answers. I know there are many LEOs and Criminal Attorneys that use this forum so I thought some of you might be able to answer this question.

Basically, when a gunman is being hunted by the police, police reports tend to describe the gunman one of two ways:

a) armed and dangerous

b) armed and extremely dangerous

Now that may seem like a pointless distinction, and indeed it may have no significance, but does it actually mean something? Is it just a dramatic flourish used by some?

As for why I'm asking, the reason is pure intellectual curiosity. I know intellectual exercises are sometimes frowned upon here and so I apologize if this question goes too far into the territory of "pointless questions that help no one". But it's something that I've been extremely curious about lately.

I apologize too if this topic is just too sensitive for TFL. I am a new user so I'm still trying to get a feel for the culture here.

Maybe some of you have been curious about this too or have strong feelings on this choice of words.
 
I'm no lawyer nor am I a LEO.
I think the words are used to to get the reaction they do get. When the TV anchorperson or police spokesperson uses those words about a suspect, they are attempting to gain your undivided attention. They want you to look at the drawing, listen to the description or watch the surveillance tape. If you can identify the suspect, make the call.
IMHO, it's just that simple.

If someone has used a firearm to shoot a store clerk in a robbery, then I'd have to say that by default he's armed and dangerous. And his actions have proven it to my satisfaction.
 
The terms (forgive me, but my English professor would say that there is no such discipline as the study of terms, this the suffix 'ology' does not go with the affix 'term', and everytime someone says the word 'terminology', the word 'terms' is sufficient and more eloquent) used in an APB is often for effect upon the listener.

There generally is no distinction in most law enforcement Standard Operating Procedures or General Orders which distinguishes the difference between 'Armed and Dangerous' and 'Armed and Extremely Dangerous'. The word 'extremely' is usually tossed in to create an effect of immediacy and to catch the listeners attention.

It is similar to what the FBI does when they name the bank robbers that they are pursuing. The FBI attaches the monikers to make the listener/public remember and to draw attention to the bandit, while at the same time, not glamorize the bank robber.

Here is a story on this issue.

http://fox5sandiego.com/2014/10/29/how-naming-serial-bank-robbers-helps-the-fbi/
 
Difference between " Armed and dangerous" and "Armed and extremely
dangerous" is that Armed and dangerous ,means you have have arms
and not used them.
Armed and extreamly dangerous, means you have already used said arms.

Just my opinion. .........................Jack
 
Spooler41 said:
Difference between " Armed and dangerous" and "Armed and extremely
dangerous" is that Armed and dangerous ,means you have have arms
and not used them.
Armed and extreamly dangerous, means you have already used said arms.
Click to expand...

I am pretty sure the terms are just kind of thrown around, but if there was a formal definition, that would be a very good one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top