'My son was murdered': father reacts to video of police shooting unarmed teen

[Captain Adverse]

That's because you don't care about the Officers lives. You think everything is a ****ing TV show. Here's the truth, for everyone of these unarmed shoots, how many times does the PERP have a gun and gun down a cop? Do you even care?

Sorry, straw man argument coupled with a blatant appeal to emotion.

If there is a gun present (even a toy one)? The officer typically gets the benefit of the doubt.

NO gun present? Different story, and no amount of appeals to emotion can change that. :coffeepap:

 

[Renae]

Sorry, straw man argument coupled with a blatant appeal to emotion.

If there is a gun present? The officer typically gets the benefit of the doubt.

NO gun present? Different story, and no amount of appeals to emotion can change that. :coffeepap:

No.

Your ignorance and indifference to the danger negates anything you have to say on the matter. IF you disobey a police officer, act as if you may have a weapon, YOU MUST BE TREATED that way by the officers. That keeps them alive.
Here's a guy that didn't show a weapon, officer didn't know.. until it's too late.


And this one, this guy says "No no weapons... " Watch the final moments.

Uploaded on Mar 25, 2011
The "dash cam" doesn't blink, but the roomful of reporters who witnessed the recorded shooting of two Tampa Police officers did -- myself included. Without the slightest warning, the dash cam shows Donte Morris produce a handgun and in the space of one second, shoot the officers in the head.

You want officers to wait till they see a gun, you want them dead?

 

[ajn678]

Hand behind you, in your pocket, ignoring police, coming towards police... Darwinian death.

I agree with you, read my post at #24.

 

[Absentglare]

No.

Your ignorance and indifference to the danger negates anything you have to say on the matter. IF you disobey a police officer, act as if you may have a weapon, YOU MUST BE TREATED that way by the officers. That keeps them alive.
Here's a guy that didn't show a weapon, officer didn't know.. until it's too late.


And this one, this guy says "No no weapons... " Watch the final moments.





You want officers to wait till they see a gun, you want them dead?

Ridiculous appeal to emotion aside, you're barking up the wrong tree.

Your argument is basically saying that if you don't immediately comply with an officer's demand, your life should be forfeit. This is, of course, both false and ludicrous.

 

[Renae]

Ridiculous appeal to emotion aside, you're barking up the wrong tree.

Your argument is basically saying that if you don't immediately comply with an officer's demand, your life should be forfeit. This is, of course, both false and ludicrous.

No appeal to emotion. Pointing out the fact of the matter.

Also, the strawman that you just built is amusing. Do ask yourself before hitting send: "IS my post of value"? If the answer is no, like yours I quoted was, erase it and go away.

 

[Absentglare]

No appeal to emotion. Pointing out the fact of the matter.

Also, the strawman that you just built is amusing. Do ask yourself before hitting send: "IS my post of value"? If the answer is no, like yours I quoted was, erase it and go away.

There are cases where the use of lethal force is justified and a gun is not present. CA did not seem to attempt to provide an exhaustive set of circumstances, rather, an appropriate response loosely based on these specific circumstances.

My opinion is that the officer was too quick to exercise lethal force based on the limited evidence we have here. Whether they should face any consequences as a result is questionable and that seems to be at their jurisdiction's discretion. I don't think this is an open and shut case where the officer deserves prison time, but the scale of the consequences merit serious consideration.

 

[ajn678]

There are cases where the use of lethal force is justified and a gun is not present. CA did not seem to attempt to provide an exhaustive set of circumstances, rather, an appropriate response loosely based on these specific circumstances.

My opinion is that the officer was too quick to exercise lethal force based on the limited evidence we have here. Whether they should face any consequences as a result is questionable and that seems to be at their jurisdiction's discretion. I don't think this is an open and shut case where the officer deserves prison time, but the scale of the consequences merit serious consideration.

Is the officer supposed to just go up to the guy and hug it out? He was walking towards them with his hand behind his back. What would you suggest an officer do in this case? Run away like cops in England?

 

[mike2810]

Ridiculous appeal to emotion aside, you're barking up the wrong tree.

Your argument is basically saying that if you don't immediately comply with an officer's demand, your life should be forfeit. This is, of course, both false and ludicrous.

Interesting. I did not get that from Renae's post.

What I did get from this thread is if you are careless on how you deal with a lawful stop by a LEO, you may get hurt.

imo, many of these cases one should wait till all the facts are known.

 

[Blue_State]

Suicide by cop in my opinion.

 

[Renae]

There are cases where the use of lethal force is justified and a gun is not present. CA did not seem to attempt to provide an exhaustive set of circumstances, rather, an appropriate response loosely based on these specific circumstances.

My opinion is that the officer was too quick to exercise lethal force based on the limited evidence we have here. Whether they should face any consequences as a result is questionable and that seems to be at their jurisdiction's discretion. I don't think this is an open and shut case where the officer deserves prison time, but the scale of the consequences merit serious consideration.

Your untrained, bias opinion is noted against the evidence, and dismissed. Do try to think about what I said in regard to posting.

 

[ksu_aviator]

With 2 bullets in his chest already it's not clear that he could even comply if he wanted to. Guy's probably in lots of pain and his nervous system is probably going bat **** crazy. Do you honestly think at that point the first thing on his mind is listening to what the cop's saying?

Secondarily, and arguably more important he's on the ground with his pointed at the cops. Just how much of a threat do you think he is at that point? Just how fast do you think he can grab a weapon and get off a shot - even an inaccurate one? Seems to me at that point he's no longer a real threat and if he did have a gun and actually managed to pull it they'd have plenty of time to deal with him.

No those shots seem gratuitous.

It doesn't matter if he could follow them. When he doesn't, the officers must think of the safety of themselves and the general public. If he does reach for and start shooting a gun, who is he going to hit? The cop, the 5 year old playing in her backyard? These decisions are not easy when faced with them. Even under the microscope of a body cam reply we can make the case for shooting so it was justified. In the heat of the moment, it is unlikely any officer would have done anything different.

 

[Gaius46]

It doesn't matter if he could follow them. When he doesn't, the officers must think of the safety of themselves and the general public. If he does reach for and start shooting a gun, who is he going to hit? The cop, the 5 year old playing in her backyard? These decisions are not easy when faced with them. Even under the microscope of a body cam reply we can make the case for shooting so it was justified. In the heat of the moment, it is unlikely any officer would have done anything different.

It does matter especially given the guy was no longer a threat. Sorry I cannot buy that a guy with 2 in chest, on the ground pointed away the cops is in any way a realistic threat. And certainly not a threat that requires being shot because he's most likely incapable of complying with a command.

I also have to question why they didn't deploy a taser. There were two of them, one could have deployed a taser while the other covered him. However, given that that wasn't the case I don't have a problem with the first two shots and think the officers showed a lot of restraint with the kid initially, I would have probably shot him sooner if I had been in their position. However, once he was on the ground as far as I can see he stopped being a realistic threat to anyone.

We'll see what the investigation comes up with.

 

[Cryptic]

It doesn't matter if he could follow them. When he doesn't, the officers must think of the safety of themselves and the general public. If he does reach for and start shooting a gun, who is he going to hit? The cop, the 5 year old playing in her backyard?

The police also have to justify their actions besides just saying: "Well, it was remotely possible that "X" might have happened".

In short, this use of force, as Gaius illustrates, needs to be broken down into two parts:

A- Initial two shots (justified)

B- Following two shots on an incapacitated subject because it was remotely possible he could rapidly produce a hidden weapon, then quickly harm somebody with it (questionable use of force on shot three, very questionable on shot 4.

 

[Gaius46]

Suicide by cop in my opinion.

Yeah that could be. I'm watching the video and thinking "wtf is wrong with this asshole." He seemed to be begging to be shot.

 

[Goshin]

Looks like the police may have overreacted to me.

This is especially true when their original report read:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...es-matter-protest-dylan-noble-shooting-fresno

However, from what I can see of the video the kid was laying on the ground between the pick-up and the curb when at least two of the shots were fired.

Now I can't speak for the first two shots, there is no video. However, no gun was present at the scene, and this speaks volumes about the need (or lack thereof) for deadly force during the encounter.

Agree. I can't speak for the first two shots, but the last two were almost certainly excessive.


There's a reason why, when my son started driving on his own, we had a serious conversation about dealing with the police. I told him that it was best to assume they wanted to shoot him and would do so if he even gave them half an excuse, and to act accordingly: stay in the car, hands on the wheel or in sight at all times, immediate compliance with any orders no matter how stupid, don't argue: if they're wrong, we'll beat them in court not on the side of the road.


I hated to have that conversation with him. I am an ex-cop and wish the people could trust the police more... but we have to be real. Officer Safety is now the god of LE and most cops view every routine stop as a risk of running into a gang of heavily armed gangsters or cop-haters and are on a hair trigger.

Only good way of dealing with that is 1- try not to draw the attention of LE and 2- If you do, be careful and compliant, don't make a move unless told to, act like you're dealing with someone who is looking for the slightest excuse to kill you.

 

[Gaius46]

Agree. I can't speak for the first two shots, but the last two were almost certainly excessive.


There's a reason why, when my son started driving on his own, we had a serious conversation about dealing with the police. I told him that it was best to assume they wanted to shoot him and would do so if he even gave them half an excuse, and to act accordingly: stay in the car, hands on the wheel or in sight at all times, immediate compliance with any orders no matter how stupid, don't argue: if they're wrong, we'll beat them in court not on the side of the road.


I hated to have that conversation with him. I am an ex-cop and wish the people could trust the police more... but we have to be real. Officer Safety is now the god of LE and most cops view every routine stop as a risk of running into a gang of heavily armed gangsters or cop-haters and are on a hair trigger.

Only good way of dealing with that is 1- try not to draw the attention of LE and 2- If you do, be careful and compliant, don't make a move unless told to, act like you're dealing with someone who is looking for the slightest excuse to kill you.

Sadly I've had the same conversation with my son. And we're not even black.

Best way to deal with the situation and to follow the officers directions, make sure he can always see both hands and do whatever you have to to make sure he knows you aren't a threat to his safety.

 

[Absentglare]

Is the officer supposed to just go up to the guy and hug it out? He was walking towards them with his hand behind his back. What would you suggest an officer do in this case? Run away like cops in England?

I don't know- clarify the perp to stay where they are, show their hands, and then stop moving.

Our police often appear to inappropriately escalate situations when they still had avenues to diffuse them. I expect that they have room for improvement. Maybe you think they're perfect and beyond reproach, i don't.

Did you see the two shots in the video ? Pretty clearly excessive. It looks excessive to me. Don't know if it rises to the level of charges, but it seems to me that this officer should have behaved differently in this situation.

 

[dirtpoorchris]

Agree. I can't speak for the first two shots, but the last two were almost certainly excessive.


There's a reason why, when my son started driving on his own, we had a serious conversation about dealing with the police. I told him that it was best to assume they wanted to shoot him and would do so if he even gave them half an excuse, and to act accordingly: stay in the car, hands on the wheel or in sight at all times, immediate compliance with any orders no matter how stupid, don't argue: if they're wrong, we'll beat them in court not on the side of the road.


I hated to have that conversation with him. I am an ex-cop and wish the people could trust the police more... but we have to be real. Officer Safety is now the god of LE and most cops view every routine stop as a risk of running into a gang of heavily armed gangsters or cop-haters and are on a hair trigger.

Only good way of dealing with that is 1- try not to draw the attention of LE and 2- If you do, be careful and compliant, don't make a move unless told to, act like you're dealing with someone who is looking for the slightest excuse to kill you.

Ouch.

 

[Absentglare]

Interesting. I did not get that from Renae's post.

What I did get from this thread is if you are careless on how you deal with a lawful stop by a LEO, you may get hurt.

imo, many of these cases one should wait till all the facts are known.

Then you weren't paying attention. CA noted that the police is expected to treat a situation involving a gun differently than one without. Renae implied that cops should assume all situations have guns because criminals can surprise people with them.

 

[Absentglare]

Your untrained, bias opinion is noted against the evidence, and dismissed. Do try to think about what I said in regard to posting.

I don't recognize your "ability" to dismiss my opinion.

You basically posted that perps should all be treated as both armed and guilty until proven innocent simply because police officers lives are in potential jeopardy. While i empathize for the sacrifices that police officers routinely endure, i reject such an authoritarian police state.

 

[Goshin]

OK I saw the body cam footage... yes, suicide by cop.

 

[Captain Adverse]

Got the video here:



Suicide by cop, likely.

Still, he had been shot twice before he fell...at that point it is possible has was unable to hear them and was trying to touch his wounds.

I'd say the first two shots were good to go...the last shots? I'm no so sure. :shrug:

 

[DiAnna]

The body cams exonerate the officers. He clearly walked towards them while concealing a hand. I don't know what he thought he was doing, but he brought it on himself.

Then they damn well better release that video, because the kid was clearly on the ground right beside the open car door, which means he couldn't have taken more than a step toward them before he was dropped. And I'd really, really love an explanation of why they felt the need to pump two more shots into him while he was on the ground.


Edit: Just saw the body cam footage. The kid wasn't anywhere near the truck when it started, and they did warn hell out of him to get his hand out from behind his back before firing. First two shots were justified.

The last two were not, in my opinion. He was instinctively grabbing his bleeding chest with both hands, moaning. He was not a threat at that point and probably unable to even understand the instruction to put his arms out.

 

[mike2810]

Then you weren't paying attention. CA noted that the police is expected to treat a situation involving a gun differently than one without. Renae implied that cops should assume all situations have guns because criminals can surprise people with them.

and how are the police expected to react if they don't know if the person has a weapon or not?

Would you have them assume their was no weapon and react that way?

 

[Absentglare]

and how are the police expected to react if they don't know if the person has a weapon or not?

Would you have them assume their was no weapon and react that way?

I don't expect the police to assume, i expect them to be clear and exercise responsible judgement. I believe that every police officer i have ever met was able to do so. I would encourage them to exercise caution for the sake of their own safety, but i deny them the ability to excuse senseless collateral damage in virtue of an overreaction.

Now, clearly, the deceased made either an egregious error in judgement or an intentional decision, and the officer responded with deadly force.