Killings by police in L.A. County jump sharply

Absolutely Marly.A pro-active organization does its utmost to prepare for any expected and/or unexpected event which may occur,looks ahead and plans,in detail.Training IS an important aspect of said department.A reactive leo organization waits for something to pop and just hopes they can handle any given situation.A lot has to do with the moral ,command structure and wheather or not the mayor/city manager micro manages the dept. from his/her office.

The L.A.Sheriffs Dept. and L.A.Police Dept. have always been one of the best trained and most selective ,of its employees as any leo organation.The citizens of that area can be proud to be served by a professional group of people who are known to be a PRO ACTIVE police and sheriffs dept. rather that a REACTIVE leo organization.I concur with the administration that a newer and more advanced method of responding to said calls may be a reason for a spike in said shooting.I too,am proud to have served with a proactive police Division.Again,my friends ,wheather ye be civilian or uniform let me reiterate what all leos keep in mind if they want to make it home at the end of the shift."Better to be judged by twelve,than carried by six"He who hesitates is not only senseless,but DEAD.......

The interactive map appears to have historical data as well, but the "summary graphic" of a single year makes it fairly uninteresting as an analysis, as you already pointed out.

A 60% spike is significant - but watch it when the media engages in 'faux analysis.' The stats show for the Los Angeles county. That is a whole lot of folk. We're talking about police use of deadly force occurring in a patrol area of 10 million people.

Annnd...this article's breakdown of the Coroner's graph leaves a LOT to be desired.

Where's the breakdown of call type response previous to 2011?? And what the heck is "Other"??

Chief Beck attributes the spike, in part, to 'strategies.' Can we say 'getting there faster'? Hot spots/patrol concentration, etc. In other words, technology and training closing the gap during which suspects could flee, elude capture, etc. Chief Beck does not raise the spectre of increased numbers of armed suspects. Of course we know that John Q, soaked in media dramatics, is utterly clueless at to what leads up to an officer-involved shooting. I you know anything about the streets of Los Angeles, the article's interactive map tells plenty.

Cause for pause...the article matches number of responses to shots fired to another stat -

"By contrast, 12 shootings were set in motion not with a call for help, but rather with an officer's choice to initiate contact with someone he believed was acting suspiciously. In seven of those cases, the person shot by police was armed with a weapon."

Ok. That's seven armed out of twelve. But what happened?? And so it goes on.

This spike should give the public pause to wonder about whatever LAPD policy changes might also be coming into play. No doubt the public recalls LAPD has been under very tight scrutiny in recent history. Do they want that kind of spotlight again?? No! Enforcement strategies, hot spots, saturated patrols, response time...a LOT goes into it. Training, training, training.

Frankly, I am far more interested in what caused the downward trend until 2010. Fewer cops on the street?? More armed suspects getting away with crime?? Stats related to homicides, it goes on.

More should be forthcoming. As it stands, we all know the aftermath of the taking of a human life is a profound wound. One we ask our law enforcement community to suffer on behalf of our safety.

MarlyB--as far as what caused the rebound...a perfect storm of recession, unemployment, tightening budgets (and fewer cops)? What do you think?

Groan. KTLA again. This article's breakdown of the Coroner's graph is silly.
Where's the breakdown of call type response previous to 2011??

s the issue of increased numbers of armed suspects.
The spike does give the public pause to wonder about whatever
LAPD policy changes also come into play- but LAPD has been under
pretty tight scrutiny in recent history.

Apart from media drama, John Q has no idea what leads up
to an officer-involved shooting.

Frankly, I am far more interested in what caused the downward trend until 2010.
Fewer cops on the street??

Since our actions are dictated by the actions of the offender, let's call these what they really are: "Officer Involved Shootings" where the offender died as a result. These are not indiscriminate and or random killings.