Pennsylvania - fourth deadliest state for police in the United States

[Jigsaw]

1. Texas
2. Florida
3. California
4. Pennsylvania

I think this is a problem with our court system that we need to get tougher with the repeat offenders and the people we know that are out there causing problems

http://kdka.com/local/Pennsylvania.p...2.1355771.html


The article is also interesting with basic trends

While total U.S. police fatalities have dropped from 124 last year to 117, police deaths from gunfire is up 21 percent from 38 last year to 46 so far this year.

"We are seeing that increasingly people are challenging the police, not just with weapons but just in general," says Pittsburgh FOP President Dan O'Hara.

[eXceLon]

It's kind of hard to talk percentages when a single incident, like with Poplowski in Pittsburgh, can radically change the statistics. The numbers are just too small to work with.

When they refer to the 20% increase in firearms related police fatalities, half of that can be explained by that one incident alone.

It's also interesting that of the 117 police fatalities this year, less than half of them were by firearms.

[Jigsaw]

It's kind of hard to talk percentages when a single incident, like with Poplowski in Pittsburgh, can radically change the statistics. The numbers are just too small to work with.

When they refer to the 20% increase in firearms related police fatalities, half of that can be explained by that one incident alone.

It's also interesting that of the 117 police fatalities this year, less than half of them were by firearms.

If a radical incident takes three or four lives, then the statistics will of course change. Not only does that skew a statistic in a certain direction for a certain type of incident, it gives light of another problem (such as mass casualty incidents). This is indeed applicable to the increase, but whether it is 20% or 200%, it is still an increase.

And you are correct, there are less than 50 percent of police-firearm deaths but that works as an argument on the same lines of the statistic claiming a "20 percent increase" - basing it off the proverbial "correlation does not mean causation," there are a ton of reasons why people would be killed. So instead of one saying "less than half of police deaths are from firearms," look at it like this...

Accidental: 1
Aircraft accident: 4
Assault: 2
Automobile accident: 32
Duty related illness: 2
Gunfire: 44
Gunfire (Accidental): 2
Heart attack: 7
Motorcycle accident: 4
Struck by vehicle: 5
Vehicle pursuit: 2
Vehicular assault: 9
http://odmp.org/year.php?year=2009&Submit=Go

Now does it appear as if there is no correlation between firearms and police deaths? Granted, there are three deaths not totaled, but it would not change the stats dramatically nor would it make one type of death surpass gunfire. So of all the deaths that one may encounter, firearms are the most prominent - and that is the point they are trying to make.

[granuale]

"We are seeing that increasingly people are challenging the police, not just with weapons but just in general," says Pittsburgh FOP President Dan O'Hara

God Damn right you are Dan!!! You have drawn a line in the sand between your boys in blue and the rest of us. I get it. I'm with the rest of us. As FOP head you are at the top of the list for defending scumbag cop behavior. Like you did during and after the G20 protests, like you did with Paul Abel, etc., etc.. You wanted it this way and you're getting it.

[DaveM55]

God Damn right you are Dan!!! You have drawn a line in the sand between your boys in blue and the rest of us. I get it. I'm with the rest of us. As FOP head you are at the top of the list for defending scumbag cop behavior. Like you did during and after the G20 protests, like you did with Paul Abel, etc., etc.. You wanted it this way and you're getting it.

So you're advocating killing cops...?

[gnbrotz]

So you're advocating killing cops...?

I think that's a bit of a stretch. O'Hara's remarks were far broader than just addressing violence against police.

As someone who is likely to be categorized as one of those O'Hara is talking about, it's apparent to me that granuale is drawing a correlation between the ongoing willingness within their own ranks to accept and excuse bad police behavior with an increase in disgust and intolerance by non-LEOs - to the point that we are indeed increasing our willingness to "challenge" the police by asserting our rights, usually before a hint of trouble may even appear, simply as a prophylactic measure.

[GunLawyer001]

I think that's a bit of a stretch. O'Hara's remarks were far broader than just addressing violence against police.

As someone who is likely to be categorized as one of those O'Hara is talking about, it's apparent to me that granuale is drawing a correlation between the ongoing willingness within their own ranks to accept and excuse bad police behavior with an increase in disgust and intolerance by non-LEOs - to the point that we are indeed increasing our willingness to "challenge" the police by asserting our rights, usually before a hint of trouble may even appear, simply as a prophylactic measure.

You're probably contemplating a trend which has yet to bear results.

It's true that the police seem more and more willing to hassle and oppress citizens who are not even suspected of crimes. I think that this has happened in the past, particularly with respect to blacks, gays, vagrants, drunks, and other groups without the numbers to fight back. That was knocked back by the Supreme Court for a while, but now the police are increasingly treating gun owners the way police used to treat the local drunk.

Still, otherwise law-abiding gun owners are not the ones shooting cops. It's still mostly an urban phenomenon, as generations of unaccountability have bred legions of punks who kill without any sense of wrongdoing or evil; armies of teen thugs who literally don't see other people as "people".

Perhaps when the police are going door to door in the upscale communities, seizing guns and shooting dogs and kicking children, then maybe we'll see the mainstream community shooting back at cops. Maybe. But it didn't happen in New Orleans, and it didn't happen during any of the infamous instances of police oppression involving PAFOA members. We protest, we assert our rights, we send letters to the Chief, and we file lawsuits. But we don't kill cops.

So we're sure as Hell resentful of police treating guns as criminal implements that we are privileged to possess through some obscure technicality, and we are indignant over police feeling free to seize guns simply because they are guns, then run the numbers "just to see if they're stolen" or who they're "registered" to.

But we aren't the people shooting cops, not yet. So far, we can sometimes find justice in the courts, even though we NEVER seem to get justice or sympathy from the employers of those thugs in blue. When the courts shut out the law-abiding, then I'd expect some of those folks to turn to the dark side, because some people won't just bend over and take it. Patrick Henry was a guy like that. George Washington. Thomas Jefferson. Guys who saw citizens treated like subjects, and ran out of places within the system to seek justice. So they sought justice outside the system.

I work within the system. There is still hope to obtain justice within the legal system, despite a PA Supreme Court that's willing to look at a database containing names of gun owners and the make, model, and serial number of guns they've bought, and not seeing "gun registration". But our courts will sometimes overturn Sheriff's revocations and denials, they will award damages against rampaging cops, they will order the return of seized guns. And our legislature recognizes the sizable number of Pennsylvanians who believe in a right to keep and bear arms of our choice.

[DaveM55]

You're probably contemplating a trend which has yet to bear results.

It's true that the police seem more and more willing to hassle and oppress citizens who are not even suspected of crimes. I think that this has happened in the past, particularly with respect to blacks, gays, vagrants, drunks, and other groups without the numbers to fight back. That was knocked back by the Supreme Court for a while, but now the police are increasingly treating gun owners the way police used to treat the local drunk.

Still, otherwise law-abiding gun owners are not the ones shooting cops. It's still mostly an urban phenomenon, as generations of unaccountability have bred legions of punks who kill without any sense of wrongdoing or evil; armies of teen thugs who literally don't see other people as "people".

Perhaps when the police are going door to door in the upscale communities, seizing guns and shooting dogs and kicking children, then maybe we'll see the mainstream community shooting back at cops. Maybe. But it didn't happen in New Orleans, and it didn't happen during any of the infamous instances of police oppression involving PAFOA members. We protest, we assert our rights, we send letters to the Chief, and we file lawsuits. But we don't kill cops.

So we're sure as Hell resentful of police treating guns as criminal implements that we are privileged to possess through some obscure technicality, and we are indignant over police feeling free to seize guns simply because they are guns, then run the numbers "just to see if they're stolen" or who they're "registered" to.

But we aren't the people shooting cops, not yet. So far, we can sometimes find justice in the courts, even though we NEVER seem to get justice or sympathy from the employers of those thugs in blue. When the courts shut out the law-abiding, then I'd expect some of those folks to turn to the dark side, because some people won't just bend over and take it. Patrick Henry was a guy like that. George Washington. Thomas Jefferson. Guys who saw citizens treated like subjects, and ran out of places within the system to seek justice. So they sought justice outside the system.

I work within the system. There is still hope to obtain justice within the legal system, despite a PA Supreme Court that's willing to look at a database containing names of gun owners and the make, model, and serial number of guns they've bought, and not seeing "gun registration". But our courts will sometimes overturn Sheriff's revocations and denials, they will award damages against rampaging cops, they will order the return of seized guns. And our legislature recognizes the sizable number of Pennsylvanians who believe in a right to keep and bear arms of our choice.

It was a member of this forum and otherwise law abiding OCer who killed the three cops in Pittsburgh.

[GunLawyer001]

It was a member of this forum and otherwise law abiding OCer who killed the three cops in Pittsburgh.

Seriously?

"Poplawski had once tried to join the Marines, but was kicked out of boot camp after throwing a food tray at a drill sergeant..."

"Harper confirmed police had responded to calls from the Poplawski house several times but said the incidents were still being investigated."

"At 7 a.m., Sciullo and Mayhle responded to a 911 call from Poplawski's mother"

Perhaps we have different understandings of what the term "otherwise law-abiding" means. Personally, the police have never been called to my house for a domestic disturbance, not by my mother, not by anyone. In fact, nobody in my family has ever felt the need to call the police to protect them from me, none of my family members ever hid in the basement while I donned a bulletproof vest and armed up. Nor have I thrown a tray or any other object at a drill sergeant, boss, coworker, neighbor, or anyone else not involved in a game requiring hurled footballs or Frisbees or dodgeballs. And I'm betting you haven't, either.

Sounds like this guy is a douchebag who regularly acted out his baser impulses in an unlawful manner. Maybe he had no criminal convictions, or at least none that were prohibiting offenses. But he was not the typical, law-abiding gun owner. He was a hate-filled punk who didn't fit in anywhere, certainly not on PAFOA. He shot those cops before they had time to oppress him, or do anything other than be shot. This was not an example of law-abiding citizens being pushed by jack-booted thugs into finally shooting back, this was an asshole loser who sought suicide by cops, but failed at that, too.

[AxiTech]

So you're advocating killing cops...?

I don't think that iswhat he meant by his post. I think he was trying to illuminate the wrong-headed thought process of "we are the police, bow before us and submit to our authority ,you lowly civilian". I think most people are sick and tired of it, and this is why cops are seeing less 'willful, ready, instant compliance" with their every whim, and more resistance to the JBT behavior.
I seriously doubt you could find one person here who would advocate killing cops. I think you missed his point. I HOPE I'm right.