Do police ever justify why when they're in a standoff with a person who doesn't have a hostage and can't hurt anyone else why they must breech and clear and murder them other than their bloodlust? We have gasses that can knock people out or maybe put some tranquilizer on those drones and robots they love to bomb people with. Hell even starving/thirsting them out is an option. A lot of the time these are mentally unwell people who just need help. Just something I was wondering because I never see it brought up when it happens.
Here in klanada, this is the framework police are taught for using force:
Note that that as soon as someone is perceived as passively resisting an officer (i.e., not doing everything they're told) that "soft" physical control is an option. But what is "soft" physical control? Well, according to the pigs, soft physical control includes hand-cuffing someone, using pressure points or joint locks, "soft takedowns", open hand strikes/"soft" strikes, and various "soft control" techniques. God forbid you actively resist their "soft physical control", like blocking their "soft" strikes (which are totally not hard strikes!!!) or tensing up when they try using pressure points, then they can use the "hard" physical controls on you!
Their training dictates that they can begin beating someone if this person doesn't comply with what they're told. The slightest bit of resistance - whether intentional or not - can be used to justify hitting you, tackling you, cuffing you, and/or more - softly, of course. And conveniently, there are different standards for reporting "soft" and "hard" physical control. Officers don't need to report using "soft" takedowns and strikes, but they are required to report "hard" takedowns and strikes.