2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures bomb books budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal portland mayor president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes television terrorism theater third parties timber payments transportation union university of oregon violence washington water wildfire women

The willingness of people to jump to the conclusion that a police officer involved in a shooting could have handled things differently is unabashed hubris.  And to assume that you would do it better is - well - nuts. Neither stances are helpful.  

Would it make a difference if patrol officers were dispatched in pairs?  Would taxpayers be willing to pay for this?

Grace

posted 3 years, 2 months ago
view in context