• 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!

Cleveland boy with fake pistol killed by police

TheNextEra said:
How many officers have died in the line of duty from shootings? Sorry but if you are going to grab a gun (fake or not) after an officer tells you to put your hands up, you are an idiot. There is a time and place to challenge authority and in the right way. This wasn't one of those times.
Click to expand...

A kid with a fake gun is not legitimate target. Sorry.

Threat assessment is not currently at a proper level to actually assess the threat. Shoot first, ask questions later is not acceptable protocol of the government against its own citizens.
 
Re: The next Ferguson ?

Goshin said:
Maybe. We don't know all the details. It's still a damn shame, and I think I would have risked myself a little more to give him another second to drop the thing.
Click to expand...

Of course it is a shame. However, my father-in-law being a retired cop and my brother-in-law who is a cop, both said they would most likely have shot.

I agree it is a horrible shame. In this day and age when citizens don't have any problem shooting at an officer to escape a warrant, I don't blame them for shooting when some idiot grabs a gun (fake or not) AFTER they tell them to put their hands up.
 
Ikari said:
A kid with a fake gun is not legitimate target. Sorry.

Threat assessment is not currently at a proper level to actually assess the threat. Shoot first, ask questions later is not acceptable protocol of the government against its own citizens.
Click to expand...

At that time they didn't know and those guns are realistic. Tell you what, you go fight the good fight and do the same thing to an officer and let us know how your "protest" goes.

It also isn't acceptable for citizens to fire on cops but that is what happens. Just take a look at the deaths each day.

I'm sure you "care" just as much when an officer gets shot and killed.
 
Re: The next Ferguson ?

1 - it was just a kid.
2 - it was BLACK kid (racist policeman, huh?)
In my childhood, we were often playing in "civil war" with toy guns, and, you will not believe, policemen watched and laughed, keyword - laugh. They did not shot us, did not shout "HANDS UP, NOW!" They just laughed...
 
TheNextEra said:
At that time they didn't know and those guns are realistic. Tell you what, you go fight the good fight and do the same thing to an officer and let us know how your "protest" goes.

It also isn't acceptable for citizens to fire on cops but that is what happens. Just take a look at the deaths each day.+
Click to expand...

They have a job that innately puts them into dangerous situations which may threaten their lives. This is already known. It is not excuse for "shoot first, ask questions later". The police are to SERVE the People, not themselves and not the government. Of course it isn't acceptable for citizens to shoot at cops, those who do will be arrested and punished. But that does not mean that cops get to become roaming death squads. That's stupid.
 
Re: The next Ferguson ?

Winchester said:
So they say. I don't believe it.
Click to expand...

That particular bit of data will be on the tape. Both the call and the dispatch. Whether or not it will make any difference to the race baiters remains to be seen.
 
Ikari said:
They have a job that innately puts them into dangerous situations which may threaten their lives. This is already known. It is not excuse for "shoot first, ask questions later". The police are to SERVE the People, not themselves and not the government. Of course it isn't acceptable for citizens to shoot at cops, those who do will be arrested and punished. But that does not mean that cops get to become roaming death squads. That's stupid.
Click to expand...

They didn't just shoot first and ask later. In fact they ordered the kid to put his hands up. The kid ignored that warning and grabbed the gun. THAT was stupid.

At what point do you "allow" the cop to fire? After a suspect fires at the cop and possibly kills him?
 
TheNextEra said:
They didn't just shoot first and ask later. In fact they ordered the kid to put his hands up. The kid ignored that warning and grabbed the gun. THAT was stupid.

At what point do you "allow" the cop to fire? After a suspect fires at the cop and possibly kills him?
Click to expand...

That's certainly a telling data point that would allow one to reasonably return fire. Probably shouldn't be shooting little kids with toys, you apparently are OK with that. But given the frequency of this act, it would appear that what we teach cops as threat assessment is severely limited. Cops are government, government is restricted. We cannot allow this continued "shoot first, ask questions later" policy to keep going forward. Too many innocent people are being killed by the police.
 
Ikari said:
That's certainly a telling data point that would allow one to reasonably return fire. Probably shouldn't be shooting little kids with toys, you apparently are OK with that. But given the frequency of this act, it would appear that what we teach cops as threat assessment is severely limited. Cops are government, government is restricted. We cannot allow this continued "shoot first, ask questions later" policy to keep going forward. Too many innocent people are being killed by the police.
Click to expand...

Again, at what point do you allow a cop to fire then? You haven't answered. You are quick with the rhetoric, but not quick with answering a simple question.
 
TheNextEra said:
Again, at what point do you allow a cop to fire then? You haven't answered. You are quick with the rhetoric, but not quick with answering a simple question.
Click to expand...

That point would vary upon situation. You don't get a "one size fits all" response. In this case, you may have to wait till the kids shoots to fire back with a firearm. And until that point, you may have to use less-than-lethal options such as a tazer. If there were hostages, the situation would change. if the cops new the gun was real, the situation would change.
 
Re: The next Ferguson ?

timslash said:
1 - it was just a kid.
2 - it was BLACK kid (racist policeman, huh?)
In my childhood, we were often playing in "civil war" with toy guns, and, you will not believe, policemen watched and laughed, keyword - laugh. They did not shot us, did not shout "HANDS UP, NOW!" They just laughed...
Click to expand...

What race is the police officer?

The 12 year old knew better. He had several friends tell him what he was doing was stupid, could hurt others, and would lead to him getting in trouble with the cops.

Unless the kid was mentally retarded, he knew better than to go for a gun (albeit a BB gun) when told by the police to raise his hands. If he was retarded, his friends and family did him a disservice by not taking his gun from him.
 
Ikari said:
That point would vary upon situation. You don't get a "one size fits all" response. In this case, you may have to wait till the kids shoots to fire back with a firearm. And until that point, you may have to use less-than-lethal options such as a tazer. If there were hostages, the situation would change. if the cops new the gun was real, the situation would change.
Click to expand...

You haven't answered ANY situation. So let's be specific, in a scenario like this where the kid had a real gun are you seriously saying that the cop should only open fire AFTER he is shot or dead?
 
TheNextEra said:
You haven't answered ANY situation. So let's be specific, in a scenario like this where the kid had a real gun are you seriously saying that the cop should only open fire AFTER he is shot or dead?
Click to expand...

I have answered, you just need to learn to read. Lethal weapon response in this situation would likely necessitate being shot at or some other was to assess the authenticity of the weapon, but then again that would have to be decided by a panel of more experienced individuals than myself. Less-than-lethal is authorized. Tazer, bean bags, flash bang, etc. There are plenty of tools available to the authority that isn't just bullets.
 
Ikari said:
Lethal weapon response in this situation would likely necessitate being shot at or some other was to assess the authenticity of the weapon, but then again that would have to be decided by a panel of more experienced individuals than myself. Less-than-lethal is authorized. Tazer, bean bags, flash bang, etc. There are plenty of tools available to the authority that isn't just bullets.
Click to expand...

So your solution is dead cop then. Got it.
 
TheNextEra said:
So your solution is dead cop then. Got it.
Click to expand...

Nope, that doesn't mean dead cop. Plenty of less-than-lethal responses that can be taken instead.

Is hyperbole and intellectual dishonesty the only methods through which you can argue? It's pathetic and sad.
 
Ikari said:
Nope, that doesn't mean dead cop. Plenty of less-than-lethal responses that can be taken instead.

Is hyperbole and intellectual dishonesty the only methods through which you can argue? It's pathetic and sad.
Click to expand...

LOL that's funny since you claimed I like dead kids. Might want to get off your soapbox there before you claim that one on me.

Sorry but tazers are not a guarantee and depending on the distance in-effective. Again, you should really get educated on walking a beat before you say such silly things like that.
 
Re: The next Ferguson ?

Goshin said:
Yeah. Like I said, if it was an adult, I wouldn't give him much if any benefit of the doubt.

A 12yo, I'd take a little risk to try to avoid shooting him, if circumstances permitted.


Bottom line, I wasn't there so maybe I shouldn't judge harshly.... but it is a pity this happened, and I feel that it is symptomatic of a shoot-first mentality brought on by Officer Safety becoming more important than Public Safety.
Click to expand...

Man I am with you. And it's honorable to at least try to defuse the situation and prevent this very thing.

My goal is to provide some information about what I know as far as the airsoft guns go. I won't claim or act like I know anything more about what goes through an officers mind. I have the utmost respect for officers and always give them the benefit of a doubt. I have done a lot of training with officers for active shooter and hostage situations and I know our local guys go above and beyond to keep from pulling the trigger.

It is indeed a damn shame this happened the way it did. There are no winners. A life was lost, a family is without a son, a cop has taken a life and has to live with that.
 
TheNextEra said:
LOL that's funny since you claimed I like dead kids. Might want to get off your soapbox there before you claim that one on me.

Sorry but tazers are not a guarantee and depending on the distance in-effective. Again, you should really get educated on walking a beat before you say such silly things like that.
Click to expand...

Nothing is a guarantee. You get no guarantees in life, and in situations where you risk life; there are no guarantees either. So what's the point? It's all about probabilities and understanding probabilities. There are plenty, not just Tazers, of less-than-lethal tools to be used in this situation which results in no loss of life. And until the proper assessment could be made to determine the authenticity of the firearm in this instance, then those are the paths the government should be allowed to take.

Government is limited, the power that it can use is restricted and controlled. it cannot just shoot its own citizens because it feels like it.
 
Ikari said:
Nope, that doesn't mean dead cop. Plenty of less-than-lethal responses that can be taken instead.

Is hyperbole and intellectual dishonesty the only methods through which you can argue? It's pathetic and sad.
Click to expand...

How many "non leathal" products should each officer carry? Also, pretty much everything that is deemed "non lethal" has done more harm from time to time up to and including death.
So really you are calling for police to be disarmed. And punished if they fight back.
 
Ikari said:
Nothing is a guarantee. You get no guarantees in life, and in situations where you risk life; there are no guarantees either. So what's the point? It's all about probabilities and understanding probabilities. There are plenty, not just Tazers, of less-than-lethal tools to be used in this situation which results in no loss of life. And until the proper assessment could be made to determine the authenticity of the firearm in this instance, then those are the paths the government should be allowed to take.

Government is limited, the power that it can use is restricted and controlled. it cannot just shoot its own citizens because it feels like it.
Click to expand...

There was no time to MAKE a proper assessment. When the cops told the kid to put his hands up, he grabbed the gun.

The cops didn't just "shoot first", they told the kid to raise his hands. When the kid refused to follow the police officer's orders and instead grabbed the gun, the kid put himself in that risk.

What you are wanting the cops to do is put their life even MORE at risk unnecessarily. If the kid would have followed the simple order, NONE of this would have happened. However, if the cop hesitated and the kid had a real gun, the cop would be dead or injured.
 
CRUE CAB said:
How many "non leathal" products should each officer carry?
Click to expand...

Well more than lethal options.

CRUE CAB said:
Also, pretty much everything that is deemed "non lethal" has done more harm from time to time up to and including death.
So really you are calling for police to be disarmed. And punished if they fight back.
Click to expand...

That's why it's less-than-lethal. And yes, they do have probabilities of causing damage and death, just remarkably reduced probabilities than that of a bullet. I'm asking for restraint in government force used against its own citizens. Government is limited.
 
TheNextEra said:
There was no time to MAKE a proper assessment. When the cops told the kid to put his hands up, he grabbed the gun.

The cops didn't just "shoot first", they told the kid to raise his hands. When the kid refused to follow the police officer's orders and instead grabbed the gun, the kid put himself in that risk.
Click to expand...

Kids are kids, they don't necessarily understand. Refusing an order shouldn't immediately deem execution.
 
Ikari said:
Kids are kids, they don't necessarily understand. Refusing an order shouldn't immediately deem execution.
Click to expand...

Ignoring the order didn't kill the kid, grabbing the gun did. Even at 6 years old I knew NEVER to do that.
 
Re: The next Ferguson ?

americanwoman said:
Another fail was that it seems the dispatcher was told multiples times it appeared to be a fake gun and that was not relayed to the police.
Click to expand...

Who is calling 911 about a kid with a fake gun? Seems like that's the first fail in the chain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom