The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2017.Philippines' Duterte says police can kill 'idiots' who resist arrest
MANILA©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.
20 Comments
Login to comment
Andy
He does have a point. Whatever the reason for the police to try and talk to you, detain you, arrest you - if you brandish a weapon in order to prevent them from doing so, and often times it's a gun the person is firing against the officers, the officers have no courtesy to lay down their guns and leave you be.
noypikantoku
Duterte's War on drugs has so many anomalies. Kian was executed by three cops with two gun shots at the back of his head. How can that be a defense shot? He was a suspected drug runner and what's the police's basis for this accusations? Social Media! Now how can we assure that these 12,000 filipinos killed by Duterte's campaign are really drug dealers or not? Duterte is a monster!
Bintaro
Crazy leaders are in fashion this summer.
Goodlucktoyou
Human rights abuser. I know there is a serious crime problem, but killing suspects?
smithinjapan
Hope he remembers his own words when they inevitably come for him.
theeastisred
The Asian Trump.
Toasted Heretic
Duterte's murderous regime has all the hallmarks of turning into the types seen in Chile, Argentina and (to a lesser extent) Brazil some 40 years back.
It's gone beyond a police state now; it's a murder state.
lostrune2
In America, many police wear bodycams now
But if plain-clothes policemen are off-the-clock.........
mmwkdw
The key phrase is "Violently Resist Arrest"... I guess if you're trying to arrest someone who thinks by Killing you they can run away would could as such as situation.
noypikantoku
Robert S Abenz
so that's all you can say???
katsu78
It is a poorly-trained LEO who doesn't understand the principle of de-escalation. If a suspect appears likely to be violent to other people, I will not dispute that deadly force may be necessary. But if the suspect is only being violent to get away from the police, then a competent officer needs to de-escalate the situation, not escalate violence to deadly violence.
Any LEO needs to ask themselves: fundamentally is their purpose to exercise power over others or is their purpose to support the rule of law. LEOs who decide on the former have no place in free societies and LEOs who choose the latter need to understand how to use deadly force as a truly last resort.
mmwkdw
@katsu78 - faced with an existing Drug epidemic, and a rising threat of Islamic Extremism... I think he's doing what needs to be done. Pacifists are those who got us into this situation in the first place!
Kuya 808
In principle, I agree completely with your position but I think it is very important to understand that this is the Philippines we are talking about. This is a nation of vendettas, blood feuds and revenge killings. This is a culture of machismo and personal honor, corrupt politicians, crime lords with private armies, political violence, crushing poverty and just about any other social ill that you can think of. The Republic of the Philippines is a Third World country and, at times, life there can get pretty rough and tumble.
I've witnessed Philippine cops demonstrating the principle of de-escalation like you described, and with good results. They looked pretty competent so I'm assuming they had training. I've also witnessed what happens when someone shoots at the cops. Once the bullets start flying any and all training the cops might have had about de-escalation and negotiation are out the window. By shooting at the cops, the soon to be victim, not only insulted their personal and professional honor but challenged their very manhood.
Enculturation trumps training every time, at least in the Philippines.
katsu78
Read my post again. Did I say anything about pacifism? Of course I didn't. So why are you bringing it up under the false pretense that it is relevant to anything I said?
It is a standard rhetorical straw man among people who dislike questioning the status quo to equate the choice not to commit violence in one situation where it is not warranted with a total commitment to pacifism. Please do better than that.
It sounds like you think the Philippines are a special case where the rules don't apply (or where culture doesn't permit the rules to apply). All I can say is that provides all the more reason to make the rules apply. A person doesn't count as an LEO if at the first sign of trouble/cultural influence they decide it's okay to be lawless.
noypikantoku
mmkwdw
You mean killing innocent victims like Kian? is the right thing to do???
Toasted Heretic
Death squads? Extrajudicial activity? Really; that's the answer is it?
How did pacifism lead to all this, do tell.