• @Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        2
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Correct. I wasn’t referring to this situation.

        I was referring to the parent comment, where they suggested responding officers should wait around outside, while the kid is trying to kill his family members inside.

        This kid charged as soon as the first officer made verbal contact with the occupants. So, when called to a domestic dispute, where a family member has been reported using a weapon, parent comment seems to suggest adopting a policy of “stick thumb up ass and wait until we have overwhelming force” before even approaching the scene.

        Ignore that the enraged attacker is trying to kill people inside. Ignore that the occupants are calling for help. Just stand by and wait for more people.

        That’s what police did at Uvalde. Parent comment is recommending a policy consistent with the bungled response at Uvalde.

        “Uvalde Gambit” concisely implies the problems with parent comment’s suggestion: waiting consistently leads to worse outcomes than immediate actions.

    • @Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      19 months ago

      Oh so those are the choices? No engagement at all until a third party intervenes or charging in like a Call of Duty player?

      That’s not a good faith argument.

      • @Alph4d0g@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        19 months ago

        The other choice is what most humans would do. That’s remove yourself from what you perceive as a dangerous situation. I know it hurts fee fees when ego is on the line but better than killing someone.

        • @Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          29 months ago

          Right? The kid was no longer threatening the family. Lead him to your partner. Do a dance around the patrol car.

          Nope straight to shooting kids.