Cleveland the new Ferguson, MO?
-
thavoiceIt still comes down to what do you do when the cops ask you to do something.
Had a real life scenario yesterday. My wife pulled out of a McDonalds yesterday. Seconds later was surrounded by State Highway patrol. They approach her with caution (smart guys) and ask to search her vehicle and BAC test. She complies even though she didnt do anything or give them a reason to.
Apparently what happened was a vehicle matching her description sideswiped a car, was driving erracticly and left the scene of the accident. It was apparent very quickly to them that it wasnt her, but she still complied to what they wanted. Some people would be just assholes and provoke the situation. -
salto
ta da!SportsAndLady;1677885 wrote:Or teach them not to carry a toy gun in public.
TedSheckler;1677887 wrote:Point realistic looking toy guns at people and you may end up getting shot with a real gun. Kid was dumb.
x2 -
salto
The police officers have nothing to worry about if they follow the rules.like_that;1677970 wrote:It's a waste of money for starters, and Id prefer police to do their job without worrying what big brother is going to do to them for their every little action. -
HitsRus
http://www.newsnet5.com/news/local-news/cleveland-metro/tamir-rice-shooitng-video-warning-cleveland-police-release-surveillance-video
That video link posted earlier tells only part of the story....
This is the FULL video released by CPD and shows the kid menacing a nearby person walking (police are trying to find this individual) and brandishing his realistic looking toy gun.....as the officers pull up to the scene he has the gun in his hand and it falls to the ground when they shoot him.... with both officers training their guns on him, one officer moves and kicks the "gun" away.
I have no doubt that the officers thought the gun was real. -
thavoice
How much you wanna bet they dont find that witness or the story gets changed?HitsRus;1678899 wrote:http://www.newsnet5.com/news/local-news/cleveland-metro/tamir-rice-shooitng-video-warning-cleveland-police-release-surveillance-video
That video link posted earlier tells only part of the story....
This is the FULL video released by CPD and shows the kid menacing a nearby person walking (police are trying to find this individual) and brandishing his realistic looking toy gun.....as the officers pull up to the scene he has the gun in his hand and it falls to the ground when they shoot him.... with both officers training their guns on him, one officer moves and kicks the "gun" away.
I have no doubt that the officers thought the gun was real.
No doubt they thought it was real, those things can look like the real deal.
I side with cops and authority most times and yeah, technically I guess they could be right this time with a person with a gun, but couldnt they stayed behind their car, behind cover, and try to get the kid to drop it before flanking him? -
HitsRus
I don't have law enforcement training so I don't know what the correct procedure is. My limited firearms training tells me that if I feel the need to pull the trigger on someone, I'm going to shoot the neutralize the threat. Aiming to merely wound is a television fabrication, and shouting multiple warnings in a firearms standoff is a sure way to get killed.
-
Glory Days
Define "too many". Because in reality, its a very very small number.Old Rider;1677972 wrote:Because there are too many cops that are just as corrupt as the criminals they are arresting. Also, if the cop screws up just slightly while making the arrest and the guy is found innocent or the case is dismissed...then the cop looks like the dumbass (on camera and mic'd) and maybe loses his job for it! -
WebFire
No. You don't hide behind something in hopes that the subject doesn't shoot you when they already have a gun in their hand. Unfortunately you can't really see the kid after the cruiser pulls up. Perhaps the kid was pointing/aiming the gun at him and hence the quick shooting.thavoice;1678907 wrote:How much you wanna bet they dont find that witness or the story gets changed?
No doubt they thought it was real, those things can look like the real deal.
I side with cops and authority most times and yeah, technically I guess they could be right this time with a person with a gun, but couldnt they stayed behind their car, behind cover, and try to get the kid to drop it before flanking him? -
Glory Days
Sufficient cover? the kid was about 7-10 feet from the passenger side of the vehicle when they pulled up. the cop on the passenger side had ZERO cover.thavoice;1678893 wrote:Those cops could be in trouble. As I suspected, the cops had sufficient cover. There is no reason why they couldnt have stayed behind the vehicle and not shot until it was imminent the kid was gonna shoot. Looked pretty empty atthat place so there wasnt a ton of people around in danger -
HitsRus
When you look at the video , after the kid is shot, you can see the gun lying on the ground to his right.... So he had to have had it drawn.
-
like_that
Except for the pr disaster when they legally kill somebody (aka Darren Wilson). Nice fail.salto;1678897 wrote:The police officers have nothing to worry about if they follow the rules.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk -
ZWICK 4 PREZ
Why do you pull up 10 feet from someone you know has a gun? Idiotic to me. -
majorspark
I thought this as well. It would seem to me you turn in the street with the hood of your vehicle facing the suspect and exit using your open doors as cover and demand hands in the air from that vantage point.ZWICK 4 PREZ;1678933 wrote:Why do you pull up 10 feet from someone you know has a gun? Idiotic to me. -
WebFire
I wondered that too. If anything was to be pointed out as a mistake by the officers it would be this.ZWICK 4 PREZ;1678933 wrote:Why do you pull up 10 feet from someone you know has a gun? Idiotic to me. -
ZWICK 4 PREZ
Well the fact you pulled up 10 ft from the kid and shot him immediately just gave the defense all the ammunition it needs to say that you already had no doubt in your mind that you were going to shoot this kid.
-
WebFire
Not really. If have the intent to shoot someone you still wouldn't pull right up next to them and put yourself in danger's way. I would almost think the opposite. The fact they did makes it seem like the weren't expecting to see what they did and had to react accordingly.ZWICK 4 PREZ;1678941 wrote:Well the fact you pulled up 10 ft from the kid and shot him immediately just gave the defense all the ammunition it needs to say that you already had no doubt in your mind that you were going to shoot this kid. -
ZWICK 4 PREZ
Oh bullshit. They knew he had a gun and pulled up to him with guns drawn and fired immediately. If they weren't expecting it then guns wouldn't have been drawn.WebFire;1678945 wrote:Not really. If have the intent to shoot someone you still wouldn't pull right up next to them and put yourself in danger's way. I would almost think the opposite. The fact they did makes it seem like the weren't expecting to see what they did and had to react accordingly. -
WebFire
I still don't think you would pull right up on him like that. Too easy for him to shoot you. And then why would you bother getting out first?ZWICK 4 PREZ;1678946 wrote:Oh bullshit. They knew he had a gun and pulled up to him with guns drawn and fired immediately. If they weren't expecting it then guns wouldn't have been drawn.
IDK, makes no sense to me. -
ZWICK 4 PREZ
Bc he didn't have his gun in his hand. They did. They had upper hand.
-
shook_17
This is what pisses me off with some people. (Not saying you're one) uneducated people say oh police should just shoot to wound not shoot to kill. WRONG. We/they are trained to neutralize the threat.HitsRus;1678910 wrote:I don't have law enforcement training so I don't know what the correct procedure is. My limited firearms training tells me that if I feel the need to pull the trigger on someone, I'm going to shoot the neutralize the threat. Aiming to merely wound is a television fabrication, and shouting multiple warnings in a firearms standoff is a sure way to get killed. -
WebFire
Gun had to be in his hand. It fell to the ground when he was shot.ZWICK 4 PREZ;1678949 wrote:Bc he didn't have his gun in his hand. They did. They had upper hand. -
ZWICK 4 PREZ
Not when they rolled up to him.WebFire;1678951 wrote:Gun had to be in his hand. It fell to the ground when he was shot. -
WebFire
I watched it again and paid closer attention to detail. It does appear he reaches for his waistband when the officer exits the car. So it seems you would be right that he did not have the gun in his hand when they pulled up. It does also seem the officer had his gun drawn once he exited. You can't see it, so we only make assumptions on when exactly he drew. I still have no idea why they pulled up like that. That makes no sense to me no matter the circumstance or any intentions.ZWICK 4 PREZ;1678956 wrote:Not when they rolled up to him. -
salto
like_that;1678931 wrote:Except for the pr disaster when they legally kill somebody (aka Darren Wilson). Nice fail.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You originally said -
What DW did is a "little action"?like_that;1677970 wrote:It's a waste of money for starters, and Id prefer police to do their job without worrying what big brother is going to do to them for their every little action.
If the cop (DW) would of had a video camera on in the shooting, the same outcome (riots) would happen?
mmhmm.
"Nice fail" -
I Wear Pants
Seems like if the kid was actually a violent person with a gun that the cop would have been fucked.WebFire;1678958 wrote:I watched it again and paid closer attention to detail. It does appear he reaches for his waistband when the officer exits the car. So it seems you would be right that he did not have the gun in his hand when they pulled up. It does also seem the officer had his gun drawn once he exited. You can't see it, so we only make assumptions on when exactly he drew. I still have no idea why they pulled up like that. That makes no sense to me no matter the circumstance or any intentions.