|
On the news they said the kid was shot after refusing to put the gun down. http://www.abc57.com/story/27463141/cleveland-police-fatally-shoot-12-year-old-boy quote:Police say the toy looked like a semi-automatic hand gun and the boy refused to put the toy down after repeated orders to do so. Cole posted:Well that was literally my point... Which still stands.
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 06:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 23:39 |
|
|
I can't think of a justification for shooting a 12 year old, even if I thought he has a gun and might shoot me. I am an adult, and its my responsibility to look after those who depend on me - like a 12 year old child, for instance. Any human adult should take a bullet for a child.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 08:51
|
|
|
klen dool posted:I can't think of a justification for shooting a 12 year old, even if I thought he has a gun and might shoot me. I am an adult, and its my responsibility to look after those who depend on me - like a 12 year old child, for instance. Um, you wouldn't be taking a bullet for a child, you'd be taking a bullet from a child.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 09:08
|
|
|
i would destroy a child soldier, with a lethal velocity barrage of shots from my many guns
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 10:21
|
|
|
Shockingly, the police statement even admitted that the kid didnt threaten or point the gun at anyone during the incident. I'm guessing if he was white the cops would have just kept yelling at him until he complied instead of opening up with their sidearms. I swear, its like cops are getting more trigger-happy instead of taking a hint from all these incidents.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 11:19
|
|
|
I just became aware of Wisconsin's police accountability law that was passed a few months ago. Since its passage, have there been any concluded investigations into police-related deaths? Has anything substantial come of them? I couldn't really find anything online after a few cursory searches.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 14:32
|
|
|
Here's something http://nypost.com/2014/11/23/new-hs-class-teaches-kids-how-to-deal-with-cops/ New high school course: ‘How to deal with cops’ quote:The principal of East Side Community HS invited the New York Civil Liberties Union to give a two-day training session last week on interacting with police. Cue dozens of NYC kids getting police beatdowns for "mouthing off" and "resisting".
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 14:51
|
|
|
klen dool posted:I can't think of a justification for shooting a 12 year old, even if I thought he has a gun and might shoot me. I am an adult, and its my responsibility to look after those who depend on me - like a 12 year old child, for instance. That seems arbitrary. If one 12 year old cancels you out you can't carry out any of your responsibilities now can you? The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few young man. *double tap*
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 15:55
|
|
|
Mr.48 posted:I swear, its like cops are getting more trigger-happy instead of taking a hint from all these incidents. Next to public acceptance, perceived persecution is the fastest way to bring ugliness out to the surface. The harder they feel they have push back, the more they lean on the primary tactics that brought outrage in the first place. And so, the spiral continues on.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 18:40
|
|
|
Chokes McGee posted:Next to public acceptance, perceived persecution is the fastest way to bring ugliness out to the surface. The harder they feel they have push back, the more they lean on the primary tactics that brought outrage in the first place. And so, the spiral continues on. Also they're all recruited from the military and military contractors. They are also being given military surplus gear...so yeah. Situation is gonna be a while lot more hosed before it's fixed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
Welp time for riots. GG St. Louis, couldn't even be loving bothered to go to *trial* before letting a killer back onto the streets?
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 04:50
|
|
|
This picture is too good to not repost here. For content: how do we stop this from happening? Obviously, a large law enforcement presence was prudent given the circumstances, and I'm not one to argue that officers on duty don't have a right to protect themselves in potentially dangerous situations. I think we all agree that they need to not charge onto the scene looking like stormtroopers painted black, however. That kind of display only breeds escalation. I can't immediately think of a decent solution though. Simply painting their armor a different color surely wouldn't work, but it seems careless to suggest that all an officer on riot duty needs is a flakie and a helmet. The seemingly best idea I can think of is that we deal with riots and riot control in a fundamentally wrong way and need to spend way more time, effort, and money on prevention, engagement, and dissipation so we don't need officers that look like they're about to roll into loving Fallujah from ten years ago. I can't help feeling like this kind of change in methods is a pipe dream if not completely impracticable though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 09:02
|
|
|
Going to work, so I can't, but try going back through the thread, there are many good suggestions for increasing police accountability and building relations up between cops and their communities again. Until someone is willing to do that, though, there's not many peaceful options left.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 09:10
|
|
|
I might also just not be educated enough about this particular situation to discuss it intelligently. I know that there has been at least token political engagement with this set of circumstances, hell, Obama was mouthing some relatively empty if otherwise decent words even as the action was breaking out. Urging calm and quoting the victim's father urging for peace. That's a step in the right direction at least. What I don't know is if the local political structure and police department were also attempting to engage the inflamed sections of populace. The president giving a little speech about how the civil processes are the ones to follow is utterly meaningless if you're not getting a chance to air your grievances and be taken seriously by people you are in contention with.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 09:24
|
|
|
quote:U.S. attorneys prosecuted 162,000 federal cases in 2010, the most recent year for which we have data. Grand juries declined to return an indictment in 11 of them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 09:39
|
|
|
Grem posted:Um, you wouldn't be taking a bullet for a child, you'd be taking a bullet from a child. Um, you would be taking a bullet as opposed to giving the bullet to the child. If you are faced with a child with what looks like maybe is a gun, you don't shoot the child. You take the bullet for the child, even if its the child shooting the bullet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 09:44
|
|
|
klen dool posted:Um, you would be taking a bullet as opposed to giving the bullet to the child. If you are faced with a child with what looks like maybe is a gun, you don't shoot the child. You take the bullet for the child, even if its the child shooting the bullet. What if he shoots two people? And is actually a threat? Aren't you a bit lovely public servant?
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 10:01
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:What if he shoots two people? And is actually a threat? Aren't you a bit lovely public servant? I don't understand what you are asking.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 10:29
|
|
|
klen dool posted:I don't understand what you are asking. What if after you take the bullet, the kid goes on to shoot someone else? In a situation in which there exists the possibility that someone has a gun, the lives of the bystanders also need to be taken into consideration. Someone who just shot a cop is likely to be a threat to everyone in the immediate area as well, thus it's not just about your own life. It's one of the more frequent lines of argument you see law enforcement take in these situations. The cops have to escalate the situation because they can't waste time when lives might be at risk, and then they must use maximum force when the situation escalates because not only is the cops life at risk, but possibly everyone in the area.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 10:35
|
|
|
GhostofJohnMuir posted:The cops have to escalate the situation because they can't waste time when lives might be at risk,
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 10:44
|
|
|
If you're curious, here is the entire grand jury transcript from the Wilson hearing. It covers what looks to be at least a week of testimony, and is very long. http://graphics8.nytimes.com/newsgraphics/2014/11/24/ferguson-assets/grand-jury-testimony.pdf
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 10:45
|
|
|
GhostofJohnMuir posted:What if after you take the bullet, the kid goes on to shoot someone else? In a situation in which there exists the possibility that someone has a gun, the lives of the bystanders also need to be taken into consideration. Someone who just shot a cop is likely to be a threat to everyone in the immediate area as well, thus it's not just about your own life. Its still a good risk to take. Since the child is innocent, 10 adults dying trying to stop the child is worth it. I think the cops argument is a purely utilitarian one which weighs up lives as if they can be compared one to one.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 18:42
|
|
|
GhostofJohnMuir posted:What if after you take the bullet, the kid goes on to shoot someone else? Someone who just shot a cop is likely to be a threat to everyone in the immediate area as well, thus it's not just about your own life. A threat to other cops maybe, but it's a stretch to extend that threat to anyone else. Pretending that everyone that interacts with police is just a hairsbreadth from going postal is exactly the kind of police-state bullshit that is the problem. There are plenty of reasons for someone getting into a confrontation with police other than being a homicidal maniac. Certainly there should not be an assumption that any time a cop starts shooting they are "protecting the public". Kaal fucked around with this message at 18:50 on Nov 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 18:47
|
|
|
Kaal posted:A threat to other cops maybe, but it's a stretch to extend that threat to anyone else. Pretending that everyone that interacts with police is just a hairsbreadth from going postal is exactly the kind of police-state bullshit that is the problem. There are plenty of reasons for someone getting into a confrontation with police other than being a homicidal maniac. Certainly there should not be an assumption that any time a cop starts shooting they are "protecting the public". Of course not, but neither is the situation some heroism bullshit where the other poster can "take a bullet" for a kid and all is well.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 19:34
|
|
|
Kaal posted:A threat to other cops maybe, but it's a stretch to extend that threat to anyone else. Why are you devaluing the lives of any group of people?
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
you see in this theoretical example, i am perfectly justified in shooting a child.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 20:00
|
|
|
Kaal posted:A threat to other cops maybe, but it's a stretch to extend that threat to anyone else. Pretending that everyone that interacts with police is just a hairsbreadth from going postal is exactly the kind of police-state bullshit that is the problem. There are plenty of reasons for someone getting into a confrontation with police other than being a homicidal maniac. Certainly there should not be an assumption that any time a cop starts shooting they are "protecting the public".
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 20:00
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:Of course not, but neither is the situation some heroism bullshit where the other poster can "take a bullet" for a kid and all is well. Being a "hero" is a good thing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
Forgall posted:But what if the child was Palestinian. Please dont. Keep that poo poo contained to the designated thread.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 20:28
|
|
|
klen dool posted:Being a "hero" is a good thing. The hero worship and the imaginary "valor" is what clouds the judgement of Americans when they should be treating cops like trash drivers or water workers and evaluate their actions just like everybody else gets evaluated. If you allow heroism graah and all that, then it goes to "but you see, I as a hero, saw this situation blahablahablaha". Someone getting a job as a cop, soldier or firefighter does not make anyone a hero, even if their jobs occasionally require a bit of discipline. (just like other jobs). Getting shot for no gain most certainly does not make you a hero. Vahakyla fucked around with this message at 20:37 on Nov 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 20:33
|
|
|
don't kill children imo
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 21:46
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:The hero worship and the imaginary "valor" is what clouds the judgement of Americans when they should be treating cops like trash drivers or water workers and evaluate their actions just like everybody else gets evaluated. Your first paragraph makes little sense grammatically, and I don't understand what you are saying. The adult in this situation would not be getting "shot for no gain", they are getting shot to save a child's life. Let's not forget that the chances a child would be in possession of a real gun is pretty slim, especially relative to the chances its a toy. Even if it was a real gun, what's the chances the kid would even use it against a non threatening adult? Even if the adult was threatening (as it seems cops default behaviour is), and the child tried to shoot, what's the chances it would hit the adult? And even if it did hit the adult, what's the chances the other adult wouldn't be able to disarm the kid? What's the chances the shot adult would actually die, considering a 12 year old probably isn't trained like a cop to shoot. Its not a choice between adult gets shot or child gets shot. Those cops were faced with a choice of vanishing small chance they would die, versus the almost certain chance the kid would die.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 01:03
|
|
|
I made the mistake of bringing this up in the Mike Brown thread, but it's probably a better topic here - wouldn't we see better outcomes by creating a degree of separation between police and firearms by keeping guns in a locked space, like a center console or car trunk? I understand the arguments against generally disarming police in a country like the United States, but even adding a basic step between a cop and his ability to use deadly force seems like it would discourage escalation at the drop of a hat by requiring some explicit decisions to bring a situation to that point. At the same time, the risk of suspects going for officers' firearms should basically disappear since they wouldn't even be accessible in the first place unless there was a reason to use deadly force.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 01:39
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:I made the mistake of bringing this up in the Mike Brown thread, but it's probably a better topic here - wouldn't we see better outcomes by creating a degree of separation between police and firearms by keeping guns in a locked space, like a center console or car trunk? I understand the arguments against generally disarming police in a country like the United States, but even adding a basic step between a cop and his ability to use deadly force seems like it would discourage escalation at the drop of a hat by requiring some explicit decisions to bring a situation to that point. At the same time, the risk of suspects going for officers' firearms should basically disappear since they wouldn't even be accessible in the first place unless there was a reason to use deadly force. There's basically one actual example of routine officers armed like that. Norway keeps guns in a locker in the car and officers take em out from there based on their judgement. Sometimes depending on the call type, sometimes if they plan to walk somewhere or go get dinner, for example. There is no solid policy on it as far as I know. There are no other countries that do that, besides Armed Officers in the UK taking larger weapons, such as Mp5s or rifles from the car, but they are not "routinely patrolling" officers due to the major lack of firearms in the UK compared to Norway where cops are armed, but do not carry, if that makes sense.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 01:42
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:There's basically one actual example of routine officers armed like that. Norway keeps guns in a locker in the car and officers take em out from there based on their judgement. Sometimes depending on the call type, sometimes if they plan to walk somewhere or go get dinner, for example. There is no solid policy on it as far as I know. This seems to be working - http://www.nrk.no/rogaland/svensk-politi-skyter-og-dreper-mest-1.11911161 Has there been a downside?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 01:48
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:I made the mistake of bringing this up in the Mike Brown thread, but it's probably a better topic here - wouldn't we see better outcomes by creating a degree of separation between police and firearms by keeping guns in a locked space, like a center console or car trunk? I understand the arguments against generally disarming police in a country like the United States, but even adding a basic step between a cop and his ability to use deadly force seems like it would discourage escalation at the drop of a hat by requiring some explicit decisions to bring a situation to that point. At the same time, the risk of suspects going for officers' firearms should basically disappear since they wouldn't even be accessible in the first place unless there was a reason to use deadly force. Not going to happen in an America where so many people carry and possess firearms, and cops continue to be ambushed and/or routinely confronted by armed subjects not only on traffic stops and "routine" calls, but also simply while eating a mid shift meal too. You can never really plan ahead for firearm need, especially when you might need it within a split seconds notice.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 01:50
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:This seems to be working - http://www.nrk.no/rogaland/svensk-politi-skyter-og-dreper-mest-1.11911161 Here's the reason this will never, ever, ever, ever, ever work in the US. Every gun manufacturer donates to political campaigns.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 01:51
|
|
|
Untagged posted:Not going to happen in an America where so many people carry and possess firearms, and cops continue to be ambushed and/or routinely confronted by armed subjects not only on traffic stops and "routine" calls, but also simply while eating a mid shift meal too. You can never really plan ahead for firearm need, especially when you might need it within a split seconds notice. Is this actually a statistically significant threat? And perhaps more the point, how does it compare to the number of people shot by police?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 01:52
|
|
|
Back on the topic of Police reform - http://thefreethoughtproject.com/cops-beat-man-7-month-pregnant-wife-deleted-video-survived-cloud/ Imagine, a brown man beaten for having drugs. Trying to get rid of evidence does not warrant that level of force. SSJ_naruto_2003 fucked around with this message at 03:49 on Nov 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 03:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 23:39 |
|
|
Grem posted:Here's the reason this will never, ever, ever, ever, ever work in the US. "Every Gun Manufacturer Donates To Every Political Campaign" Should be noted. Money talks... If only there were a vehicle firearm lock lobby. Nathilus posted:This picture is too good to not repost here. Ask anyone in the military...UN Peacekeepers have the most absurd uniforms and are far and away some of the worst people in combat zones.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 05:08
|
|