“So before anyone starts casting stones about police politics and police involvement please remember while you are cozy in your bed at home my friend/brother-in-law/childs uncle or someone like him is in harms way to give you the right to sleep comfortably at night.”

************

Me thinks you underestimate this blog or have pre-conceived notions of liberal thinkers. No one outpaces me in my regard for those who put their safety on the line to protect the public. I have given police the benefit of the doubt in most instances and believe “ties” go their way. However, if they do cross the line (which does not appear to be the case here), their actions need to be criticized since they are empowered by the state with the choice to meet out irreversible decisions about the use of deathly force on the citizens with whom they interact. I applaud your brother-in-law based on what I know, and I support him in his important work. I also support removing any bad apples in his department who might hinder or jeopardize the critical task he is charged with doing by the citizens and law of the land to which he stands accountable.

I don’t think you have to worry about that from the regulars here in this case. The focus of Prof. Turley’s posting, and indeed the relevant part of the story, was the product liability issue. Now if he were misbehaving, that’d be another story all together, but you realize that hence your preemptive posting. I didn’t get the impression either of the officers acted improperly, only that their equipment didn’t protect them. I hope your brother-in-law has a speedy and full recovery.