Police were called because the man was threatening to kill the woman and himself. The police came, their entire job is to deescalate the situation. Instead they shot both of them.

Arguably these people would have been better off if the police hadn't come.

Normally I would be on the side of the media only talking about the things that go poorly and that they can't all go well, but given the report from the other day from the coroner saying how badly police are handling these cases, I don't think they get an out on this one.

It was a knife. Why didn't they use a taser? The woman was shot and killed after she picked up the knife to threaten the police because they just shot her partner.

I'm happy to wait for a wider report to pass judgement but I can't see any way such a report would reflect kindly on police.

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemmy.nz -1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Given the failure rate of a tazer, there's no way in hell I'd use one on someone in that state wielding a knife, and I don't think that's a reasonable expectation of police either.

[–] BalpeenHammer@lemmy.nz 4 points 2 days ago

What's the failure rate of tazer?

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 8 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I disagree. There was no risk to the public here. The police's entire job was to protect these people. Regardless of mental state, police's job is to de-escalate and save the lives of these people.

I'd change my mind if it turns out this was international best practice, but I think that's unlikely.

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemmy.nz -2 points 2 days ago (2 children)

There was no risk to the public here.

The dude running after a woman with a knife wasn't a danger to the public?

Seriously?

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

A domestic violence incident. I mean the wider public.

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemmy.nz 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Was this person not someone who deserved to be protected?

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 3 points 1 day ago

That's my point. They killed the person they were there to protect.

[–] BalpeenHammer@lemmy.nz 2 points 2 days ago

The police had already shot him though. You'd think that would satisfy your thirst for punishment.

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemmy.nz -1 points 2 days ago (3 children)

I think you'll find it's standard practice anywhere to shoot someone that's advancing towards you with a knife.

Every time something like this happens, a bunch of people who've clearly led very sheltered lives will come out and say they should have used tazers, or pepper spray, or hugs or whatever, regardless of how realistic that statement is.

Some people just aren't able to be talked down.

[–] BalpeenHammer@lemmy.nz 4 points 2 days ago

The police are supposedly trained to handle people with knives without shooting them.

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 5 points 2 days ago (2 children)

This isn't a surprise knife attack, it was the entire reason for the call. I'd expect some standard approach that plans for the scenario of the person turning on police.

Every time something like this happens, a bunch of people who've clearly led very sheltered lives

100% me, hence my comment that I'd happily change my mind if a review found they did this as well as they could. But the report the other day called out police as doing this poorly, and learning little in the past 10 years. Hence they don't get the benefit of the doubt anymore.

[–] BalpeenHammer@lemmy.nz 5 points 2 days ago

Why is he comparing people who have led sheltered lives with supposedly trained police force. The police should most definitely not act like people who lead sheltered lives. Their entire job is to deal with these types of situations.

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemmy.nz 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I'd expect some standard approach that plans for the scenario of the person turning on police.

I very much think the response we saw here would be a standard one across police forces worldwide.

[–] BalpeenHammer@lemmy.nz 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You are very wrong. It's extremely rare for the police to gun down citizens in Europe.

[–] absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

To be fair; it is also extremely rare in NZ.

Police figures showed 55 people had been shot dead by an officer between 1916 and the end of the last year - and just one of those who died was a woman.

55 in 108 years; that is just over 0.5 per year.

[–] BalpeenHammer@lemmy.nz 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'd like to see that plotted year over year.

[–] absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Normalised to population

[–] BalpeenHammer@lemmy.nz 2 points 1 day ago

Exactly. Also broken down by the parties in government.

[–] hanrahan@piefed.social 3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Then why bother attending if they're just going to shoot people dead.

[–] AWOL_muppet@lemmy.nz 2 points 1 day ago

I've been joking at work for years that we can no longer follow the best practice and how it's now about finding the least-worst practise. Its a shame to think the police might be the following the same M. O.

(Mostly sarcasm)

[–] Ilovethebomb@lemmy.nz 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Because someone would get brutally murdered with a knife if they didn't show up?

[–] leftzero@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago

Which is worse than getting brutally murdered with a gun?