First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next  Last
12 Year Old Boy With Fake Gun Fatally Shot By Police Officer
52119 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Tiphares
Offline
Posted 11/30/14

SoldierSangria wrote:

The cop was absolutely wrong to shoot the boy so this is not in defense to him, but why on EARTH didn't the child put up his hands when the OFFICER told him to MORE THAN ONCE?

Why didn't the boy listen?


Well... I assume he panicked.
Posted 11/30/14 , edited 11/30/14

SoldierSangria wrote:

The cop was absolutely wrong to shoot the boy so this is not in defense to him, but why on EARTH didn't the child put up his hands when the OFFICER told him to MORE THAN ONCE?

Why didn't the boy listen?


boy was probably acting hard hence why police were called..showing off..feeling good.

it's sad but kids can't play outside anymore. better stick to those video games.
Posted 11/30/14

Nasigno wrote:

I guess I'll be the only differing opinion for a bit. First lets walk through the whole video,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L97aihRvZtQ

We already got a point he is brandishing it around earlier without a care in the world, keep in mind in many states that could realistically get you shot by anyone when you are pointing firearm at someone like he did as it can be perceived that you threatened them in such a manner. Between you and me, if I had something realistically as that pointed at me, more than likely mine would be out too. I'm not gonna gamble my life on a random person having a fake or real gun when you cannot even tell from feet apart.

I will agree on one point, that the kid should not be dead by for vastly different reasons than that have been stated. First of all, you shouldn't be giving a kid a replica firearm, especially in which a point they have painted or otherwise removed ANY marking denoting it as a fake, that is a already a major issue that is one at the parental level. Next, you should be teaching your kid NOT to go around brandishing it like a idiot outside in public, as my ABOVE statement applies.

As for the cops actions, I won't say pulling up to him was the bright idea in the world, but personally it changes very little in what could of happened. Just looking at the video, you get a glimpse of him dragging his jacket up and doing something, is he reaching for it? Potentially, can anyone here tell? Nope. The only 2 people that can are the cops, since after all they are the only alive ones today. Did they have chest cameras? I don't know, but we'll find out eventually if they did or did not.

That said, if your first act when a squad car comes to a stop in front of you, and cops get out is to start reaching for ANYTHING, you best be prepared to be assumed to be a risk. Guns and knives can be easily concealed and police aren't going to take a risk with that. Remember, 21 feet or less is covered in Tueller drill, and guns are easy enough to draw within seconds. Why take either risk? Why did the kid not just stop and put his hands up? What did he reach for? Why did he even reach for it? These are all questions NONE of us can answer here.

Remember this isn't a happy rainbow world where everything is perfect, people say training and what not, but realistically we live in a world where teenagers ARE involved in shooting at people.


For once, someone who doesn't form an opinion based on how angry/disgusted/indignant they are. You brought up some interesting points.

I, personally, don't have an opinion on this. It's merely one stupid mistake that resulted in even more stupid mistakes. There is no innocent here. Should he have died? Maybe not, but he did so perhaps there's something to be learned here so no one else dies this way. And no, it's not that white cops hate black people.
Posted 11/30/14

severticas wrote:

boy was probably acting hard hence why police were called..showing off..feeling good.


That's what I thought as well - acting all badass trying to impress no one. Stupidity, that's what.
Posted 11/30/14 , edited 11/30/14

SoldierSangria wrote:


severticas wrote:

boy was probably acting hard hence why police were called..showing off..feeling good.


That's what I thought as well - acting all badass trying to impress no one. Stupidity, that's what.


if police were called then that person who called was first to mislead. easy to probably judge from someone's action if they are just acting hard or not. no offence. how long before anyone got on the scene? if it took ages and nothing was happening yet, that should tell you if it was serious.

i'm not one to watch videos and do homework i'm afraid lol.

on to police; you could probably react faster than a bloody kid , just a warning shot to scare the crap out of him would suffice, no?

whatever happened, i'm sorry towards both kid and cop tbh.
Iregi 
5189 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 11/30/14 , edited 11/30/14

BlueOni

And then there was Finland, where the firearm related crime rate is relatively low, the firearm ownership rate is relatively high, and the process of obtaining a firearm involves an extremely strict bureaucratic regimen. That throws a wrench in the gears of both sides of the argument! Muhahahahahahaha! *folds hands*

No, but really. The point is that there are factors beyond the strictness of gun laws which will impact gun crime, and I question whether strict licensing regimens are even the most productive way to reduce such crime. It seems to me that endeavors to diminish the poverty rate and increase economic and educational opportunities have proven themselves to be more effective, though strict licensing regimens do not (at face value) appear to hurt.


I actually read an interesting paper where the idea was to arm every single person in a crime ridden city and watch what happened. The persons idea is that gun crime would skyrocket for the first few weeks and then crime would take a sharp down turn because criminals would be too afraid to even try jacking grandma's social security.

The fact is criminals usually have a bully mentality. They won't mess with someone that MIGHT be able to hurt them back. School bullies don't target the football team, they target the chess club. Muggers don't target bodybuilders they target people who look out of shape or weak. If everyone was packing a firearm then everyone would be a "hard target" and that's not good for business.

To bring it back around to the topic of this little boy. He wouldn't have been brandishing a firearm at a public park if he knew he would be shot by the parents of other children trying to protect their children. Sadly this is on the kids parent's, and in a related vein on society in general. If children were disciplined without it being called child abuse alot of this shit wouldn't happen. Being afraid of an ass whooping kept me from doing alot of really stupid stuff as a kid.

Where I grew up I knew not to point my BB gun at people or property because 1) the people who I threatened would probably whoop my ass, that's if they didn't shoot me. 2) my old man would whoop my ass when I got home 3) my mother would whoop my ass once my dad got done. 4) my brother would whoop my ass after mom got done.

The cops maybe did things wrong. Hindsight is 20/20 though. When you're in a situation where someone has a gun at a park you're going to try to protect the other people there. That's probably why they drove up so close to the kid. Get his attention away from other people and deal with it from there. Cops have every right to shoot someone who is brandishing a weapon, they can't take risks on maybes and what ifs. Honestly if you want to blame someone blame the dispatcher for not relaying all the information.
42866 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
47 / M / Memphis, TN
Offline
Posted 11/30/14 , edited 11/30/14

severticas wrote:


SoldierSangria wrote:


severticas wrote:

boy was probably acting hard hence why police were called..showing off..feeling good.


That's what I thought as well - acting all badass trying to impress no one. Stupidity, that's what.


if police were called then that person who called was first to mislead. easy to probably judge from someone's action if they are just acting hard or not. no offence. how long before anyone got on the scene? if it took ages and nothing was happening yet, that should tell you if it was serious.

i'm not one to watch videos and do homework i'm afraid lol.

on to police; you could probably react faster than a bloody kid , just a warning shot to scare the crap out of him would suffice, no?

whatever happened, i'm sorry towards both kid and cop tbh.


Warning shots must come down somewhere--that's why most departments forbid them. Fire at the ground? Ricochet and still hit the kid or some bystander who's not brandishing a weapon (real or replica). The video released to the public has no sound, so no one watching it can say whether or not the cops told the boy to drop the weapon--and yes, you can speak from a police car, either by PA system or an open window, even as a car is moving (your voice from the window travels in the same direction as the car's movement--look up Doppler Effect). The truth is that if you weren't there, you don't fully know what happened--so quit guessing! A child is dead and two officers now carry that with them. This situation is too serious for armchair quarterbacking! Please quit turning personal ignorance into a public virtue. It is disrespectful to all three victims of this incident and their families.
2346 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
46
Offline
Posted 11/30/14
Nobody here listened to the police dispatch call to the officers I bet.

There were a bunch of mistakes made, the kid coloring in/removing the orange tip.

The dispatcher's call to the officer called them in hot.

Officers lights off came too close to the kid.

Those last two mistakes are the big ones.

Both officers should be fired as well as the dispatcher. Charges should also be looked into.
Posted 11/30/14 , edited 11/30/14

moonhawk81 wrote:


severticas wrote:


SoldierSangria wrote:


severticas wrote:

boy was probably acting hard hence why police were called..showing off..feeling good.


That's what I thought as well - acting all badass trying to impress no one. Stupidity, that's what.


if police were called then that person who called was first to mislead. easy to probably judge from someone's action if they are just acting hard or not. no offence. how long before anyone got on the scene? if it took ages and nothing was happening yet, that should tell you if it was serious.

i'm not one to watch videos and do homework i'm afraid lol.

on to police; you could probably react faster than a bloody kid , just a warning shot to scare the crap out of him would suffice, no?

whatever happened, i'm sorry towards both kid and cop tbh.


Warning shots must come down somewhere--that's why most departments forbid them. Fire at the ground? Ricochet and still hit the kid or some bystander who's not brandishing a weapon (real or replica). The video released to the public has no sound, so no one watching it can say whether or not the cops told the boy to drop the weapon--and yes, you can speak from a police car, either by PA system or an open window, even as a car is moving (your voice from the window travels in the same direction as the car's movement--look up Doppler Effect). The truth is that if you weren't there, you don't fully know what happened--so quit guessing! A child is dead and two officers now carry that with them. This situation is too serious for armchair quarterbacking! Please quit turning personal ignorance into a public virtue. It is disrespectful to all three victims of this incident and their families.


what exactly bothers you about what i wrote? and i do apologize, don't know how to fake caring i'm afraid. practice makes perfect. i'll try to get better senpai.

lorreen is watching so i must edit today. lol
Posted 11/30/14
btw, i have quit guessing hence no more comment on the incident.

lol
698 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M
Offline
Posted 11/30/14 , edited 12/1/14
A few things: professionals are all trained to make every shot count. Only trick shooters would try for a knee or an arm. All normal people who are trained as soldiers or cops are trained to aim at center of mass. Most people will miss a leg or an arm (each of which has a major artery anywho, you have good odds of bleeding out). Aiming for a non-lethal shot almost never works in the real world kids. Officers also go in with lights off and sirens quiet for a variety of scenarios where it is possible that a gunman could take a hostage or flee toward civilians. For some scenarios that is procedure. I've worked security and have been trained on procedure for a number of scenarios for my area.

The video is time lapse, that was not two seconds, but without more information it is not possible to know for sure how long it was. Without knowing the rate the vid was captured at all we can do is guess even if you are a professional who installs and maintains such systems. In the video it looks like the kid may have been reaching for his pocket. If you go for a pocket after a cop hollers "hands up!" you will get shot more often than not. The account also says that the officer was yelling at the boy to put his hands where they could see them as they pulled up, so before the car was even at a stop.

Racism may have been involved here. A white guy recently got shot when confronted by a cop because he hitched up his pants. The cop was black. Racism may have been involved there. There isn't very conclusive evidence in either case to my knowledge. It is entirely possible that racism was not a factor in either.

The officers in every nation should be required to wear chest cams and mics. Witness testimony has been shown by reliable scientific study to be wrong enough to warrant being thrown out in the majority of instances. Video footage off secured feeds is reliable.

The parents have gone on record stating that they do not know how their boy got that gun (fake or not isn't the issue since it was largely indistinguishable). My best guess is that a "friend" gave it to him.

Based on the data available to me I would not find fault with the officer. There should be a more thorough investigation by qualified professionals obviously, despite what expertise and data I have the professionals should have more of both.

As to racial bias, one interesting study that has been replicated has shown that officers of every single race in the US are more likely to incorrectly identify a random object held by a black male as a weapon. The study authors concluded that there is a media-induced bias that encourages that assumption. America has a very laissez-faire attitude toward violence. Our children or inundated with violence in their entertainment and play without realistic consequences being depicted. We shouldn't completely shelter them from violence, but we should make sure their exposure is limited so that they are not dealing with more than they can handle. We should also make sure that they are aware of the realistic consequences of violence. Sure, when you grow up you "know" better. Just because you know better though doesn't mean that your view won't have been skewed by past experiences that, while fictitious, still influence your thoughts. This is part of why so many supposedly sensible adults do idiotic things, their expectations are subtly skewed by unrealistic presentations.
Iregi 
5189 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 11/30/14
Also want to add on the whole "aim for an arm or leg" suggestion. Police are trained, taught, and required not to do that. There is too much risk of shots hitting people behind the target either from penetration or missing when you hit an arm or leg. Chests stop bullets pretty well, it's a harsh but realistic fact.
36990 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / Bellingham WA, USA
Offline
Posted 11/30/14
This story is just sad and unfortunate from every angle. Nobody wants to see a kid get shot over being a dumb kid. And no cop would just wake up in the morning saying "Oh hey I sure hope I have the chance to kill a 12 year old boy today!" He'll have to live with that decision for the rest of his life. And I can't damn him because what if it was a real gun? These people are out there every day risking their lives to protect my rights and safety.

Very unfortunate.
42866 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
47 / M / Memphis, TN
Offline
Posted 11/30/14 , edited 11/30/14

severticas wrote:

btw, i have quit guessing hence no more comment on the incident.

lol


I apologize if it seemed that my entire response was directed towards you--it was not. I was specifically addressing your suggestion of warning shots. The remainder of the post was directed towards the discussion itself. While it is important to discuss such issues in the hope of eliminating them, such discussion--to be truly objective and useful--must first acknowledge the ignorance of its participants to the full case in question. Those of us who weren't there don't know what happened in totality. We have only limited bits of evidence to consider. If the conversation proceeds with this in mind, then I'm all for it. But what so often happens is that discussion participants want to convert their exposure to certain facts/evidence into a belief that they know what happened, and then try to guide the discussion under that guise. Spreading ignorance or misinformation does nothing to advance the cause of understanding or address the underlying tragedy of a situation, especially one so serious as the death of a child.
Posted 11/30/14

moonhawk81 wrote:


I apologize if it seemed that my entire response was directed towards you--it was not. I was specifically addressing your suggestion of warning shots. The remainder of the post was directed towards the discussion itself. While it is important to discuss such issues in the hope of eliminating them, such discussion--to be truly objective and useful--must first acknowledge the ignorance of its participants to the full case in question. Those of us who weren't there don't know what happened in totality. We have only limited bits of evidence to consider. If the conversation proceeds with this in mind, then I'm all for it. But what so often happens is that discussion participants want to convert their exposure to certain facts/evidence into a belief that they know what happened, and then try to guide the discussion under that guise. Spreading ignorance or misinformation does nothing to advance the cause of understanding or address the underlying tragedy of a situation, especially one so serious as the death of a child.


I gathered as much. there's never anything wrong with anything i write lol. could explain my thinking; shooting at the sky is something you see in TV shows haha i feel you rolling your eyes...good sir. So, they'd use it as a distraction and it would seem effective.

better than shot to the chest, right? but as you pointed out, what goes up, must come down *cough*. i'll discard that argument. what's been done is done.

and unfortunately, people use these kind of incidents to drive home an agenda indiscriminately. i think scrutiny is always welcome and lack of
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.