• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Teenager Shot and Killed by an Officer on Foot Patrol in the Bronx

Ahlevah

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 21, 2009
Messages
14,599
Reaction score
5,012
Location
Pindostan
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
The suspect, Shaaliver Douse, was believed to be part of a youth gang on East 169th Street that called itself the Nine. He lived at a nearby housing project, and the police said he had been caught with a gun at least one before; his last brush with the law involved his arrest for attempted murder, after a rival gang member was shot in May. All this, the police said, at age 14.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/05/n...-armed-teenager-in-bronx-police-say.html?_r=0

We're asking the wrong questions here, folks. For example, we should be asking what this 14-year-old hoodlum was doing out on the streets at 3:00 AM. He was already a suspect in another shooting, was carrying a gun, which he fired several times, and the cops, naturally, shot him. So my second question is why is anyone questioning this? I mean, it's tragic that the kid died at such a young age, but it says a lot about the state of our society when a New York police commissioner has to hold a press conference in which he issues an apology for killing someone who might have been targeting his own officers. From my point of view, if he's old enough to be trying to kill people in the dead of night then he's old enough to get shot without an apology.
 
We're asking the wrong questions here, folks. For example, we should be asking what this 14-year-old hoodlum was doing out on the streets at 3:00 AM. He was already a suspect in another shooting, was carrying a gun, which he fired several times, and the cops, naturally, shot him. So my second question is why is anyone questioning this? I mean, it's tragic that the kid died at such a young age, but it says a lot about the state of our society when a New York police commissioner has to hold a press conference in which he issues an apology for killing someone who might have been targeting his own officers. From my point of view, if he's old enough to be trying to kill people in the dead of night then he's old enough to get shot without an apology.



It's a shame someone went down that road so young, but that's how that road ends, and IMO the cops owe no one any apologies for doing what they had to do.
 
"Tragedy"......

The tragedy here isn't that poor little Shaaliver got shot. That was probably going to happen sooner or later anyway. The tragedy is that some so called "family" allowed this kid to get into that kid of situation in the first place.
 
"Tragedy"......

The tragedy here isn't that poor little Shaaliver got shot. That was probably going to happen sooner or later anyway. The tragedy is that some so called "family" allowed this kid to get into that kid of situation in the first place.

Well, who knows? He might have been President someday. ;)
 
We're asking the wrong questions here, folks. For example, we should be asking what this 14-year-old hoodlum was doing out on the streets at 3:00 AM. He was already a suspect in another shooting, was carrying a gun, which he fired several times, and the cops, naturally, shot him. So my second question is why is anyone questioning this? I mean, it's tragic that the kid died at such a young age, but it says a lot about the state of our society when a New York police commissioner has to hold a press conference in which he issues an apology for killing someone who might have been targeting his own officers. From my point of view, if he's old enough to be trying to kill people in the dead of night then he's old enough to get shot without an apology.

That is a misstatement of what the article actually says. The police commissioner did not apologize for the shooting, which he insisted was justified. He offered condolences to the boy's family on the loss of their loved one. Big difference.
 
They headed east on East 151st Street to find a chase unfolding, one person running down the middle of the street, another following with a handgun. The officers ordered the second figure to drop his gun. Instead, another shot rang out.

One of the officers fired a single shot. The bullet struck the gunman in his lower left jaw, killing him.

But the circumstances justified the shooting, he said, showing a pair of videos. In the first, a figure who Mr. Kelly said was Shaaliver can be seen approaching a group of several men, including one who Mr. Kelly said was Shaaliver’s target.

Shaaliver can be seen raising a weapon and firing three shots, Mr. Kelly said; the group then scatters. A second video, taken around the corner, showed the next moment: the target running fast around the corner in the middle of the street, a bullet flying past him and slamming into a wall on the far side in a puff of smoke. Mr. Kelly said that after the teenager was ordered to drop his gun, he fired again, though it was unclear whether he was aiming for the fleeing man or the officers.

lol @ anyone taking issue with this.
 
That is a misstatement of what the article actually says. The police commissioner did not apologize for the shooting, which he insisted was justified. He offered condolences to the boy's family on the loss of their loved one. Big difference.

OK, that's a fair observation. But something still sticks in my craw about this press conference. I guess it's the idea that the cops have to defend what was clearly a justifiable shooting AND offer their condolences. I wonder if they offered condolences to the family of the kid Douse was suspected of shooting.
 
"Tragedy"......

The tragedy here isn't that poor little Shaaliver got shot. That was probably going to happen sooner or later anyway. The tragedy is that some so called "family" allowed this kid to get into that kid of situation in the first place.

His family--if he even has such a thing--is trash, anyway. Most probably, his mom is smoking crack and his dad is pushing up daisies.
 
OK, that's a fair observation. But something still sticks in my craw about this press conference. I guess it's the idea that the cops have to defend what was clearly a justifiable shooting AND offer their condolences. I wonder if they offered condolences to the family of the kid Douse was suspected of shooting.

Given that cops, especially NYC cops, are becoming more aggressive in violating citizen's rights, they damn well need to be watched, questioned, and be held publicly accountable for their actions.
 
That is a misstatement of what the article actually says. The police commissioner did not apologize for the shooting, which he insisted was justified. He offered condolences to the boy's family on the loss of their loved one. Big difference.

The voice of reason
 
Good shooting for a couple of rookies. :thumbs:
 
We're asking the wrong questions here, folks. For example, we should be asking what this 14-year-old hoodlum was doing out on the streets at 3:00 AM. He was already a suspect in another shooting, was carrying a gun, which he fired several times, and the cops, naturally, shot him. So my second question is why is anyone questioning this? I mean, it's tragic that the kid died at such a young age, but it says a lot about the state of our society when a New York police commissioner has to hold a press conference in which he issues an apology for killing someone who might have been targeting his own officers. From my point of view, if he's old enough to be trying to kill people in the dead of night then he's old enough to get shot without an apology.

If there is one thing parents should teach their young men in the inner city, it's to immediately obey a law enforcement officer. Because they will kill you in the right circumstances.

If you are running after someone in the street with a gun in your hand, and when LEOs tell you to drop your weapon you instead fire another shot? You are going to die.
 
Police offer condolences to the family members of everyone they shoot, as well as usually being the ones that have to break the news to family about killed loved ones even when they are not the killers.
 
And yes. Fire a round after an LEO has told you not to? You're gonna get dropped.
 
We're asking the wrong questions here, folks. For example, we should be asking what this 14-year-old hoodlum was doing out on the streets at 3:00 AM. He was already a suspect in another shooting, was carrying a gun, which he fired several times, and the cops, naturally, shot him. So my second question is why is anyone questioning this? I mean, it's tragic that the kid died at such a young age, but it says a lot about the state of our society when a New York police commissioner has to hold a press conference in which he issues an apology for killing someone who might have been targeting his own officers. From my point of view, if he's old enough to be trying to kill people in the dead of night then he's old enough to get shot without an apology.

I think we're fortunate one of the officers was black.

The local media is already making Trayvon Martin comparisons.
 
Given that cops, especially NYC cops, are becoming more aggressive in violating citizen's rights, they damn well need to be watched, questioned, and be held publicly accountable for their actions.

So officers under fire should not return fire?
 
OK, that's a fair observation. But something still sticks in my craw about this press conference. I guess it's the idea that the cops have to defend what was clearly a justifiable shooting AND offer their condolences.

The cops should have to defend every use of force incident they're involved in.

Every use of force by police should be investigaged just as thoroughly as if it had been a civilian using force.

No shooting is "clearly justified" until it's been investigated and adjudicated as justified.

The police don't "have to" offer anyone condolences, but it makes for good PR.

Since the police are paid by and accountable to the public they should make every effort to maintain decent relations with that public.
 
The cops should have to defend every use of force incident they're involved in.

Every use of force by police should be investigaged just as thoroughly as if it had been a civilian using force.

No shooting is "clearly justified" until it's been investigated and adjudicated as justified.

The police don't "have to" offer anyone condolences, but it makes for good PR.

Since the police are paid by and accountable to the public they should make every effort to maintain decent relations with that public.
All police shootings are investigated. He is on leave right now, relieved of his service weapon. He will come back to therapy and counseling and will have his actions questioned for the rest of his carreer and life.
Thats all before the black panthers and sharpton get involved and put a dollar figure on his head.
 




..............................................
 

Bulls do **** and police officers have just as much of an interest in staying alive as you do.

You might not care if police officers live or die but surely you can appreciate that they do actually care.
 
Bulls do **** and police officers have just as much of an interest in staying alive as you do.

You might not care if police officers live or die but surely you can appreciate that they do actually care.

And that is exactly why they use heavy handed tactics based on that logic

History, specifically recent history show there to be too many incidence where cops shoot when they should not have
 
Back
Top Bottom