- Joined
- Sep 14, 2011
- Messages
- 26,629
- Reaction score
- 6,661
- Location
- Florida
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
It wasn't premeditated but from what I saw the cop rolled up right on top of the kid and started pulling the trigger. It may have been the worst display of tactics I have ever seen. There was no attempt to diffuse the situation and, as far as I could tell, nobody else was in the immediate vicinity so there wasn't an imminent threat to public safety.
No, that came when the perp reached for his weapon.
WHat in what i said was hyperbole? Was he in fact walking up and down the sidewalk terrorizing people to the point that it was called in to the police? Did the police respond to a "man with a gun" call? Did he in fact jump up when the cops arrived and raise his shirt and reach for his weapon?Hyperbole much?
1. It was a 12 year old kid.
2. It was not a real gun, rather a BB gun which is legal.
3. The kid was just doing as kids do, playing.
4. The kid was not breaking the law.
Still doesn't make it murder given the circumstances. Just like we found in the Zimmerman case...stupidity does not equate to murder. I'm guessing this is manslaughter.
they didn't now it was a bb gun. the kid had removed the orange signal tip to show that it was a bb gun. without the tip it really does look a like 1911 colt.
I hope you would use more logic in your posts on things like this.
the cops can't tell at a distance more so with it in his pants that it is a bb gun. if you look at the gun itself it looks very real.
and a 45 cal gun is nothing to sneeze at. it can do some serious damage.
The kid was reaching as the Officer said he was, which is an imminent threat.
His response to a lethal threat with lethal force was appropriate, as such his life should not be put in jeopardy for acting appropriately.
As for the way the driver approached. And? That may or may be a reason to give him more training, but does not negate the other Officer's correct action in responding to the threat.
The police never saw the tip, because Tamir Rice never withdrew the toy from within his waistband. So your point is moot.
If I'm reading Ohio murder statutes correctly then they could come up with a first degree (Aggravated Murder) charge as Rice was under the age of 13. They would need to prove that the cops actions were intentional and that may be difficult. However, if this gets in front of a jury I figure that Reckless Homicide is a given.
You also mentioned Zimmerman and I just want to note that his situation was somewhat different in that he had no idea that he was going into a potentially deadly situation. That's a significant distinction.
Bull****. This wasn't legal by any means. The cop drove up and shot no questions asked.
You'll be amazed at how many 12 year olds will listen to an authority figure as compared to a more defiant adult.
Again if all comes down to the video really. I still can't pull it up. I haven't been to a computer yet though. They block it at my office. But if the kid make actions reaching for the weapon...well the officer has a right to be worried.
This stuff is very convoluted. The gun damn sure looked real to me.
Question - If the police were so terrified, why did they roll up so close to the boy? Couldn't they simply stop a few yards away and yell out for the boy to drop the supposed firearm?
Yea. That damn sure looks real. And in the time of mass shootings being common? I would understand being paranoid about it. But then again...game wardens approach armed people all the time without shooting them.
Maybe we should stop hiring cops who have never fired a gun before?
Again if all comes down to the video really. I still can't pull it up. I haven't been to a computer yet though. They block it at my office. But if the kid make actions reaching for the weapon...well the officer has a right to be worried.
This stuff is very convoluted. The gun damn sure looked real to me.
Lets hope citizens stop calling in complaints about thugs with guns terrorizing people in parks, and lets hope if citizens DO call those complaints in the cops refuse to respond. That way, when they kid that is on video walking up and down the sidewalk terrorizing citizens with what looks like a very real gun gets approached by cops the kid doesnt jump up and raise his shirt and reach for what the police were told is a gun and get shot.
The police never saw the tip, because Tamir Rice never withdrew the toy from within his waistband. So your point is moot.
so, according to you, the police should have let tamir actually pull the weapon, and then what?
he was going for a weapon? yes or no?
do you abdicate the person actually pointing it at a cop before the officer can respond?
is that what you are saying?
Question - If the police were so terrified, why did they roll up so close to the boy? Couldn't they simply stop a few yards away and yell out for the boy to drop the supposed firearm?
That in no way shows what you claimed. Especially as the Judge totally ignored what was on the known video unless it was illegally edited, which I would not put beyond a possibility being that the lawyer was Crump.From the link in the op.
“We are very much relieved and it is a step towards procedural justice and people having access to their government,” Madison told the Guardian.
The judge’s finding followed community leaders taking advantage of a little-known law to appeal directly to the judge to commence a prosecution of the officer, as is permitted in Ohio and a few other states.
“State law does provide an avenue for a private citizen having knowledge of facts to initiate the criminal process,” Adrine wrote in his order.
Madison said the judge’s finding showed “the police are public servants and not the public’s master”.
First, there was no weapon in Tamir Rice's possession.
2nd, Tamir Rice didn't have time to draw or drop the toy. The police didn't know if he was going to draw his weapon or drop it on the ground. He never had time to do anything BUT die. In fact, they didn't even give him time to show the tip and therefore see if it's a toy or not.
So to answer your question, yes. Give him time to relinquish the "weapon".
3rd, you and others keep repeating the lie that Tamir Rice pointed the toy at the officers. He never actually pointed anything at the officers. The other lie is to continue to call the toy he was holding a weapon. It was not a weapon, even though it looked like one.
:dohBull****. This wasn't legal by any means. The cop drove up and shot no questions asked.
You'll be amazed at how many 12 year olds will listen to an authority figure as compared to a more defiant adult.
so, according to you, the police should have let tamir actually pull the weapon, and then what?
he was going for a weapon? yes or no?
do you abdicate the person actually pointing it at a cop before the officer can respond?
is that what you are saying?
Depends. I wonder if they know the difference between cover and concealment and just how ****ty a car is for cover?
Tell me...do you think they decided to execute this kid? Or do you think they were being jumpy morons? It is important to think about that. A dumbass rookie may do something stupid...but just because it is a 12 year old kid...doesn't erase the very real looking gun. Would you be shocked to hear a story about a kid firing shots at officers?
You can't decide guilt based on what should have been done. Only what was done.
First, there was no weapon in Tamir Rice's possession.
2nd, Tamir Rice didn't have time to draw or drop the toy. The police didn't know if he was going to draw his weapon or drop it on the ground. He never had time to do anything BUT die. In fact, they didn't even give him time to show the tip and therefore see if it's a toy or not.
So to answer your question, yes. Give him time to relinquish the "weapon".
3rd, you and others keep repeating the lie that Tamir Rice pointed the toy at the officers. He never actually pointed anything at the officers. The other lie is to continue to call the toy he was holding a weapon. It was not a weapon, even though it looked like one.
Tamir Rice NEVER pointed the toy at the police.
What do you mean they?They had no reason to pull up like that.
The Officer who shot was not being overly aggressive.because they were in fact overly aggressive.
Dishonesty.It was the cops who ran up on the kid. It was the cops were pulled their weapons first (I know this because the kid only had time to lift his shirt before being shot).
Guilt? iLOL :lamoWhat was done seals their guilt,
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?