@ScienceTeacher

and/or if they stay intact enough for them to be recoverable.

be well and have a good one.

A metal bullet can be forensically traced to a particular gun, allowing identification of the person responsible for the use of that gun. I do not know but it seems likely that it would be much more difficult to identify the source of a particular rubber bullet. This could be an intentional way for cops to evade individual responsibility.

Any officer who has fired a gun into a crowd that is not engaging in efforts to seriously endanger others should be terminated. None of the videos I have seen showed the police under any threat of immanent threat of harm. This includes live feed from CNN and a long, unedited film segment from Reuters. Much of the police violence was "provoked" by verbal insults or the simple presence of the person they attacked. I did see a couple of airborne water bottles thrown at the police. Water bottles are not lethal weapons even if the cops were not kitted out in full battle regalia.

High-school kids like to toss water bottles and pencils to their friends. This was not permitted in my classroom. I worried that a pencil might hit someone in the eye, but the water bottle concerns were more about the possibility of making a soggy mess. Student got a couple of warnings and then maybe an after school detention at most. It never occurred to me to shoot them with rubber bullets or anything else, or to taze them. I would have refused and resigned on the spot if ordered to do so. Even our least-favorite administrators would have refused to participate in this sort of abuse. As Mandated Reporters (of child abuse) every one of us would have reported any attempt to engage in this sort of violence.

@mimi

they are merely not lethal, not harmless or non-dangerous, and some have even died from being hit with them. I think most cops know how to do serious harm with them, and believe that they try to do so. They are absolutely never to be aimed at certain part of the body, and those places seem to be the cops' favorite targets, far too often to be accidental.

be well and have a good one.

they are considered non-lethal. Wouldn't that encourage a police officer to shoot them without much thinking, as they are supposedly not killing the targets?

Disarm the cops.

@Johnny Q

and surfaces that could generate them because the trajectory is uncontrolled. They aren't supposed to be just shooting at crowds, but at specific threats and, Joe Biden be praised, only at the legs.

be well and have a good one.

doesn't "proper" use of those rounds involve ricocheting it off another surface before going for the fleshy goodness? Not only are they committing atrocities, they're doing it wrong.

@thanatokephaloides
I wonder why not and how it came to be.

be well and have a good one.

FWIW, a Denver court just outlawed their general use without direct command from a ranking officer. They were never intended to be used willy nilly against protesters, demonstraters, crowds and the like, nor against the press, and serve only to illegally suppress free speech and assembly when used in that manner. They may only be used against violent attackers, YAY!
Of course, the police union is sure to appeal, but it is a small crack in the wall.

I don't think Denver's police are unionized.

And long live the Denver courts!

@thanatokephaloides
they were unarmed, or not, and for the better or worse. At any event, you are right, it is the attitude, and the weaponry just makes it easier.

Although there is a strong case for disarming the police, taking the guns away from MPD would not have saved George Floyd; Derek Chauvin murdered him with no more murder weapons than he was born with.

Guns or no guns, it's still cops like Derek Chauvin that are at the root cause of this problem. The Minneapolis City Council is right: MPD delendum est.