• 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!

Cop Pulls Gun On Kids Building Tree Fort

CRUE CAB said:
Curious, where is dad in this? Hmmmm
Click to expand...

Maybe he doesn't live with a Dad. Maybe his father is dead. Ever think of that?

Besides what does this have to do with excessive force used against children?
 
Last edited:
TeleKat said:
So, he was held at gunpoint because he doesn't have a Dad? What does this have to do with the topic at hand?
Click to expand...

Oh, now we are going to move the goal posts. I guess you have run out of debate on the subject that you know nothing about. Yet wish all to hell to be oh so offended about.
 
CRUE CAB said:
Oh, now we are going to move the goal posts. I guess you have run out of debate on the subject that you know nothing about. Yet wish all to hell to be oh so offended about.
Click to expand...

Um, no. It is you who has "moved the goalposts." I am trying to figure out what the hell his father has to do with the topic at hand. You, for whatever reason, don't wish to tell me and are now attempting to flip the table on me to deflect.

So I'll ask for the third and final time, what does his father have to do with the topic at hand?
 
It's not standard procedure for police to unholster their weapon like this. Without knowing the other side of the story, there may have been something happening that prompted this cop to unholster his weapon that we don't know about. IF (big IF) there wasn't something to justify unholstering his gun, it seems this cop needs to be written up, re-trained and evaluated for competency to continue on the job.
 
TeleKat said:
Um, no. It is you who has "moved the goalposts." I am trying to figure out what the hell his father has to do with the topic at hand. You, for whatever reason, don't wish to tell me and are now attempting to flip the table on me to deflect.

So I'll ask for the third and final time, what does his father have to do with the topic at hand?
Click to expand...
Single mother homes produce more kids that get in trouble more than most.
 
CRUE CAB said:
Seems you just have an issue with cops. YOU were not there, but YOU are ready to draw conclusions. Done.
Click to expand...

YOU were not there. YOU seem ready to do the same. EVERYONE who has an opinion on this seems wasnt there. YOU are making no point. MY point is that it is wrong to draw guns and cuss and make 12 year old kids lie on the ground like criminals. Its not a problem with cops, its a problem with assholes.
 
Kreton said:
YOU were not there. YOU seem ready to do the same. EVERYONE who has an opinion on this seems wasnt there. YOU are making no point. MY point is that it is wrong to draw guns and cuss and make 12 year old kids lie on the ground like criminals. Its not a problem with cops, its a problem with assholes.
Click to expand...

No, I am just not ready to roll the cop under the bus is all. You seem to feel he is in the wrong. Period, no other way it went down.
 
CRUE CAB said:
No, I am just not ready to roll the cop under the bus is all. You seem to feel he is in the wrong. Period, no other way it went down.
Click to expand...

Yes. If an adult pulls a gun on or curses at or makes a child lie in dirt for building a treehouse he is wrong. Doing all 3 is certainly wrong.
 
If these kids hadn't been destroying someone else's property there wouldn't have even been an incident.
 
Kreton said:
Yes. If an adult pulls a gun on or curses at or makes a child lie in dirt for building a treehouse he is wrong. Doing all 3 is certainly wrong.
Click to expand...

So you find the boy and his mother totally believable. No way it has another side? No way a cop should proceed with caution while sizing up a situation.
 
CRUE CAB said:
So you find the boy and his mother totally believable. No way it has another side? No way a cop should proceed with caution while sizing up a situation.
Click to expand...

I can keep saying the same thing if you'd like. Or you can save me the effort and just actually read my posts.
 
I always personally felt that American police go for the gun way to quickly. I have seen them operate first hand and was always suprised by the automatic hand movements to their weapon at the slight hint of trouble (even if it wasn't directed at them). A good police officer should always be able to diffuse any situation using his words and body movements, the gun should be used only as a last resort or if the officer is in immediate danger.
 
CRUE CAB said:
Yea, and the little angel and his mother would never stretch the truth or over dramatize the situation in the wake of all the cop vs race baiter issues going on today.
Click to expand...

Right.

Nor would cops lie and cover their bad or illegal behavior.

The sword cuts both ways.
 
TurtleDude said:
no need to-under 42 US sec 1983, the cop can be sued in his INDIVIDUAL capacity for a constitutional tort of violating the child's rights under color of state law and the employing agency can also be sued for its "servant's" actions
Click to expand...

What right, privilege or immunity is the kid being deprived of?

I'm all for taking misbehaving public servants to task but I'm not sure what rights were actually violated. Or maybe I'm just not sufficiently creative :)
 
Gaius46 said:
What right, privilege or immunity is the kid being deprived of?

I'm all for taking misbehaving public servants to task but I'm not sure what rights were actually violated. Or maybe I'm just not sufficiently creative :)
Click to expand...

aggravated menacing, intentional infliction of emotional distress are the first two that come to mind.
 
CRUE CAB said:
No, I am just not ready to roll the cop under the bus is all. You seem to feel he is in the wrong. Period, no other way it went down.
Click to expand...

And you are immediately running to the cops defense.

That makes both of you wrong.
 
CRUE CAB said:
Hard to say, seems we are only getting one side of the story.
Was the gun "drawn and aimed" or just at his side in his hand?
Click to expand...

Yeah, that would make it OK. Every day you read about 11 year old kids shooting cops from tree forts.
 
MaggieD said:
Not enough information about this incident to call it. Here's a photo of the kid . . . could be the cop thought the kids were older:

images


He was responding to a vandalism complaint. Maybe that's where his head was. Did he point it at them and threaten them with it? I've had an officer unholster his weapon on me. Drew his gun and held it down at his side until he understood what was happening. I didn't think much about it. 'Course to a kid, I'd imagine it'd be scary, exciting and a good story to tell.

I'd also remind people that young kids have guns in some neighborhoods.

Long and short of it is that, without video evidence to see exactly what happened, it's hard to crucify the cop.
Click to expand...


That's the only explanation that is needed. Black kid, white cop. The kid is lucky he wasn't shot.
 
MaggieD said:
You tell me what kind of investigation should be done. It ought to take 30 minutes tops. Testimony from officer involved. Testimony from the kids. Testimony from any witnesses. I'd guess there were none. You can't destroy an officer's career simply on the testimony of a couple of (possibly) overly-dramatic kids.

"I unholstered my weapon and held it at my side until I knew what was going on." Sans any other independent witnesses or perhaps previously inappropriate conduct by the officer, if we don't take the word of the copper, we might as well close down the force.
Click to expand...

Because, as we know, cops never lie.
 
TeleKat said:
Um, no. It is you who has "moved the goalposts." I am trying to figure out what the hell his father has to do with the topic at hand. You, for whatever reason, don't wish to tell me and are now attempting to flip the table on me to deflect.

So I'll ask for the third and final time, what does his father have to do with the topic at hand?
Click to expand...

Good luck getting an answer from him. He doesn't answer questions that confuse him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom