I dont get why all these cops just let the shot person lay there and bleed out. They dont even attempt to staunch the wounds and put pressure or do cpr if there is no breathing or heartbeat. Its like they have absolutely zero empathy. If I was a cop and some criminal pointed a gun at me, and I had to shoot him, i would STILL tend to their wounds after i removed the weapon. But these cops just stand around and let the people bleed out. Pretty much confirming their disregard.
Is society was made of coral our world would be floral.
At face value means the caller repeatedly said the gun is possibly/likely fake. There were not shots fired, no reports of assault, no reports of rape or murder. Someone waiving what is possibly/probably a fake gun was the call.might be fake is irrelevant and the police can't go on might. they have to take the call at face value. there is a guy in the park pointing a gun in different directions.
and now the strawman occurs. way to make an invalid point.
The kindergarten comment was sarcasm, as you know. The sideways point is kids point fake guns at other people all the time, from a very young age. It's not a good idea and probably frowned upon these days, but it's not a capital offense.
Belt? Or pocket? Pulling up his drawers? Reaching for the gun to show them it's fake? We don't know, and the police didn't have time to do anything but shoot and kill him.You can see it in the video him reaching for his belt.
What threat did the kid communicate to the cops that is more serious than you reaching inside your jacket? If the cops roll up on you and you reach for your ID, then they should, according to your theory, shoot you in the chest and kill you.again your strawmans and stacked hypotheticals don't hold up. you can't shot me for just having a gun in a holster. I have to be showing some kind of threat.
IE if we are arguing and I reach into my jacket and you see it then yes.
But he'd been sitting at the table for several minutes, and the cops didn't review the video, so didn't see any of that. They had a report that said he was pointing what is probably/possibly a fake gun.this kid was pulling the gun and pointing it in random directions that can be seeing in the video.
There was no one nearby when they killed Rice, he was pointing at no one when he was killed.they were protecting the other people in the park from someone randomly pointing a gun at them.
And I thought you said the police's own safety was key. Now it's bystanders? OK, but what threat did he pose at that moment to anyone?
Of course they shot with the intent to kill. That's what they're trained to do.prove they shot him with the intent to kill you bias is getting in the way of reason and logic. they didn't stand around 4 minutes.
they called in an ambulance and he died in the hospital from the wound.
The reports are they administered no first aid, no CPR. That didn't happen until the FBI agent arrived, who did both, before the ambulance arrived. They did wrestle his distraught sister to the ground and put her in handcuffs, though!
No, but if they suspect it's fake it absolutely changes the acceptable options. You're demanding they use no common sense and treat all threats the same.the police can't take that on her word. nor should they. it wasn't a fake gun it was a bb gun. while not life threatening can still cause injury to other people if they are shot with it.
the fact is they can't take someone's word that it is a fake gun.
Call about multiple gunshots, person down feared dead, suspect was last seen at so and so park is just NOT THE SAME AS "hey, there's this person waving around a gun, I think it might be fake, but he's scaring people." Those are not equivalent situations and treating them as such is a failure of their duty.
I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK
I don't believe that, however. What these incidents do is give the good cops a bad name, especially when the actions are defended as appropriate.
I can understand there being legitimate disagreement about whether or not a murder charge is appropriate. I suspect the officer was trying to do a good job and made a tragic mistake in the blink of an eye. The reason I support a trial is that's the standard that would apply if that kid shot someone - we wouldn't be giving him the benefit of the doubt if the victim was a white man with a carry permit reaching for his wallet.
But what I can't understand is pretending that this officer did his job well, or handled the situation appropriately.