TOTALLY GEEKED!

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

RE: Cleveland Cop Took Seconds To Decide To Kill 12-Year-Old Tamir Rice

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Some people take time to react. Esp a 12 yr old.

msrock · Guru

bye.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Run away

huskerbb · Guru

msrock wrote:
Being a threat. Waving a gun around and pointing it people. They asked him to put it down and he didn't. He got shot. He could have just put it down and he would be alive. That's on him.

No, they didn't do any of that. The gun was in his waistband. He would have HAD to try to get it out of that position if he was going to "put it down". He didn't even get the chance to do that.

At the time the police arrived, he was NOT "waving it around" or pointing it at anyone. It was already in his waistband.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

He was sitting in the pavilion. Not waving a gun around.

huskerbb · Guru

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
He was sitting in the pavilion. Not waving a gun around.

Of course not. The police don't even say that. By their own account, the gun was in his waistband and the reason they shot him was that he reached for it.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Everyone is always "reaching for a weapon" when they shoot some one.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Kind of like the guy when the cop said SHOW ME YOUR REGISTRATION and the man turned towards his car and the cop shot him for doing what he was told. If they told him Put the Gun down and it was in his waistband then yes he is going to reach for ut. Duh.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Gaga - the people who called 911 said they thought the gun was fake. Dispatch failed to pass on part of that message.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lawyerlady wrote:
Gaga - the people who called 911 said they thought the gun was fake. Dispatch failed to pass on part of that message.

Yes, FAIL here + a rookie cop = a dead kid.

flan

huskerbb · Guru

Lawyerlady wrote:
Gaga - the people who called 911 said they thought the gun was fake. Dispatch failed to pass on part of that message.

Which is a fault on the part of the police department, as well.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

msrock wrote:
I have to tell you that I live in a very nice community 30 miles north of Cleveland and 9 guns have been stolen by high school kids in my city. 7 of them have been recovered with the serial numbers sawed off. 2 are still missing. Many homes and cars have been broken into. Yeah, I take this seriously and so do the police. 2 guns are still out there in the hands of kids. This is close to home for me. My youngest son is currently sitting in the juvenile detention center and he needs to be there. It breaks my heart to say that but it is what it is. Happy Thanksgiving!

Thank you for sharing that with us. I hope it is the wakeup call your son needs.

flan

huskerbb · Guru

What is really disappointing to me is how so many people think these kids deserve to die for doing something stupid.

ALL kids are going to do something stupid in their lives. This kid was messing around with a BB gun in a manner he should not have been. Others will try alcohol--and some will drive. Some will try various forms of drugs. Some will get caught stealing. Others will get pregnant--or get someone pregnant.

Is that REALLY the standard here? A death sentence for a kid doing something stupid?

Death is FINAL. We can't take it back. Even if these kids are the "thugs" they are made out to be, is there no room for redemption? We should just kill them out of hand?

I can't believe how many people--some of which I would regard as very peaceful--are advocating exactly that. They won't even consider different procedures or policies that may prevent a few of these.

I want our police to be safe, too--but in this case, there wasn't even any real danger and a kid still died.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

huskerbb wrote:
What is really disappointing to me is how so many people think these kids deserve to die for doing something stupid.

ALL kids are going to do something stupid in their lives. This kid was messing around with a BB gun in a manner he should not have been. Others will try alcohol--and some will drive. Some will try various forms of drugs. Some will get caught stealing. Others will get pregnant--or get someone pregnant.

Is that REALLY the standard here? A death sentence for a kid doing something stupid?

Death is FINAL. We can't take it back. Even if these kids are the "thugs" they are made out to be, is there no room for redemption? We should just kill them out of hand?

I can't believe how many people--some of which I would regard as very peaceful--are advocating exactly that. They won't even consider different procedures or policies that may prevent a few of these.

I want our police to be safe, too--but in this case, there wasn't even any real danger and a kid still died.

When my boys were younger, they were shooting a BB gun in an empty field, with my permission. Cops were called & DS1 (who did not have the gun at the time) was handcuffed, so this story hits close to home for him.

This story has several mistakes, that ultimately led to the death of a CHILD.

IF the dispatcher had relayed the complete message...

IF the cop had had more experience...

flan

ed11563 · Guru

huskerbb wrote:
What is really disappointing to me is how so many people think these kids deserve to die for doing something stupid.

I don't think anyone is saying these kids deserve to die for doing something stupid.

Whether they "deserve" it or not, reality is that the natural consequence of their decisions put them at high risk of death.

Did I "deserve" to be injured and need months of physical therapy because I drove through an intersection where I had a green light?

Did my son's friend Mike deserve to die because he was making out with his girlfriend in a really, really bad place?

One of the most dangerous things people can do is to MOVE when an officer says "FREEZE".

Another is to punch a cop and reach for his gun.

Another is to punch a person who might have a gun, then beat his head against the ground.

Did they "deserve" to die? It doesn't matter. They did something stupid and they got killed because of it.

The Principle of Natural Consequences meets "Acute Terminal Stupidity".

huskerbb · Guru

ed11563 wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
What is really disappointing to me is how so many people think these kids deserve to die for doing something stupid.

I don't think anyone is saying these kids deserve to die for doing something stupid.
Whether they "deserve" it or not, reality is that the natural consequence of their decisions put them at high risk of death.
Did I "deserve" to be injured and need months of physical therapy because I drove through an intersection where I had a green light?
Did my son's friend Mike deserve to die because he was making out with his girlfriend in a really, really bad place?

One of the most dangerous things people can do is to MOVE when an officer says "FREEZE".
Another is to punch a cop and reach for his gun.
Another is to punch a person who might have a gun, then beat his head against the ground.
Did they "deserve" to die? It doesn't matter. They did something stupid and they got killed because of it.
The Principle of Natural Consequences meets "Acute Terminal Stupidity".

This kid didn't even have time to react.

Beyond that, yes, you are saying that. You won't even consider alternatives to deadly force.

ed11563 · Guru

huskerbb wrote:
ed11563 wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
What is really disappointing to me is how so many people think these kids deserve to die for doing something stupid.

I don't think anyone is saying these kids deserve to die for doing something stupid.
Whether they "deserve" it or not, reality is that the natural consequence of their decisions put them at high risk of death.
Did I "deserve" to be injured and need months of physical therapy because I drove through an intersection where I had a green light?
Did my son's friend Mike deserve to die because he was making out with his girlfriend in a really, really bad place?

One of the most dangerous things people can do is to MOVE when an officer says "FREEZE".
Another is to punch a cop and reach for his gun.
Another is to punch a person who might have a gun, then beat his head against the ground.
Did they "deserve" to die? It doesn't matter. They did something stupid and they got killed because of it.
The Principle of Natural Consequences meets "Acute Terminal Stupidity".

This kid didn't even have time to react.
Beyond that, yes, you are saying that. You won't even consider alternatives to deadly force.

Okay, other than the 12-year-old, the others were thugs who had to be shot, since that was the only way to stop them.

The 12-year-old did a series of things that lead to his getting shot, but I'd need to see a much clearer video to figure out why the officer fired.

"Less Lethal" options would certainly be nice to have. GUNS are what all officers actually have. Zimmerman had a gun. If he'd had a tazer instead that might have worked ... but he didn't.

huskerbb · Guru

ed11563 wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
ed11563 wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
What is really disappointing to me is how so many people think these kids deserve to die for doing something stupid.

I don't think anyone is saying these kids deserve to die for doing something stupid.
Whether they "deserve" it or not, reality is that the natural consequence of their decisions put them at high risk of death.
Did I "deserve" to be injured and need months of physical therapy because I drove through an intersection where I had a green light?
Did my son's friend Mike deserve to die because he was making out with his girlfriend in a really, really bad place?

One of the most dangerous things people can do is to MOVE when an officer says "FREEZE".
Another is to punch a cop and reach for his gun.
Another is to punch a person who might have a gun, then beat his head against the ground.
Did they "deserve" to die? It doesn't matter. They did something stupid and they got killed because of it.
The Principle of Natural Consequences meets "Acute Terminal Stupidity".

This kid didn't even have time to react.
Beyond that, yes, you are saying that. You won't even consider alternatives to deadly force.
Okay, other than the 12-year-old, the others were thugs who had to be shot, since that was the only way to stop them.
The 12-year-old did a series of things that lead to his getting shot, but I'd need to see a much clearer video to figure out why the officer fired.
"Less Lethal" options would certainly be nice to have. GUNS are what all officers actually have. Zimmerman had a gun. If he'd had a tazer instead that might have worked ... but he didn't.

No. Deadly force was not necessary in any of the cases.

It's sad that you advocate the death penalty for NOTHING. It's EXACTLY as how I said.

huskerbb · Guru

Plus, non-lethal force includes a LOT more than just different weapons.

It could include waiting to assess before a confrontation, or not having a confrontation, at all. It would certainly include getting all information passed on to the people at the scene. It could include calling for backup. It might include listening to the dispatchers when they tell you to back off.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

I ask again.

The police get there and just sit in the car and watch. And the kid actually shoots and kills someone.

Are you then going to be wanting to know why they were sitting and waiting instead of doing something?

huskerbb · Guru

lilyofcourse wrote:
I ask again.

The police get there and just sit in the car and watch. And the kid actually shoots and kills someone.

Are you then going to be wanting to know why they were sitting and waiting instead of doing something?

A BB gun won't kill someone.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Not what I asked.

Remember, this toy had been altered. it didn't look like a toy.

And I didn't specify this particular time.

Say it was real. And the police sat and waited long enough for him the actually shoot and kill someone. Would you have then said "glad they waited to make sure"?

huskerbb · Guru

lilyofcourse wrote:
Not what I asked.

Remember, this toy had been altered. it didn't look like a toy.

And I didn't specify this particular time.

Say it was real. And the police sat and waited long enough for him the actually shoot and kill someone. Would you have then said "glad they waited to make sure"?

But it wasn't real. You want to deal in hypotheticals, I want to stay with reality.

There was also ZERO indication that anyone was in immediate danger.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

I am making a very valid point and you are refusing to see it.

If this had been a real gun and if he the officers had waited to "assess" and if he had shot and killed someone. You would be one of the first ones wanting to know why they did nothing and let it happen.

Of course you wouldn't admit that.

Whatever.

Live in your world of everyone is wrong all the time and every time.

huskerbb · Guru

lilyofcourse wrote:
I am making a very valid point and you are refusing to see it.

If this had been a real gun and if he the officers had waited to "assess" and if he had shot and killed someone. You would be one of the first ones wanting to know why they did nothing and let it happen.

Of course you wouldn't admit that.

Whatever.

Live in your world of everyone is wrong all the time and every time.

You want to COMPLETELY change the situation.

Sure, if it had been a real gun AND there was an indication that he was going to shoot someone, then yes, they were justified.

NEITHER of those things were the reality of that situation.

You want to discuss things that are not remotely relevant to what the situation was.

Heck, if you want to discuss fiction, might as well throw in that he was a 23 year old serial robber holding up a 7/11.

-- Edited by huskerbb on Friday 28th of November 2014 01:58:00 PM

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

I am pointing out that the police are going to act the same no matter the situation.

They don't have the luxury of waiting and watching cause it could always be something more serious than it turns out to be.

You get the luxury of day after information to base your thoughts and possible actions on. They don't.

I would actually like to see you in any one of this situations you have deemed excessive and have criticized. At the time they were happening. In those officers shoes. Then you can tell me what should or should not happen.

Arm chair quarterbacks never actually play the game.

huskerbb · Guru

lilyofcourse wrote:
I am pointing out that the police are going to act the same no matter the situation.

They don't have the luxury of waiting and watching cause it could always be something more serious than it turns out to be.

You get the luxury of day after information to base your thoughts and possible actions on. They don't.

I would actually like to see you in any one of this situations you have deemed excessive and have criticized. At the time they were happening. In those officers shoes. Then you can tell me what should or should not happen.

Arm chair quarterbacks never actually play the game.

Then that needs to change. That's exactly what I'm talking about. Procedures need to be CHANGED.

NOTHING is more serious than someone getting killed. It may end that cop's career, too, even if he isn't found responsible for any crime.

huskerbb · Guru

Also, to say that the police are going to act "the same" no matter what the situation is RIDICULOUS. There is a HUGE difference between say, an active school shooter, and someone vandalizing cars or a domestic violence situation, or a bar fight.

Not all situations are the same.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Lilly, should all the hunters walking thru town with guns be gunned down by cops? Yes or no? They COULD open fire on someone right? That is what you are saying. Anyone anywhere in possession of a gun should be gunned down by cops.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

lilyofcourse wrote:
Not what I asked.

Remember, this toy had been altered. it didn't look like a toy.

And I didn't specify this particular time.

Say it was real. And the police sat and waited long enough for him the actually shoot and kill someone. Would you have then said "glad they waited to make sure"?

You can't "say it was real", because it WASN'T real. Sorry, the Police need to be RIGHT when they use lethal force.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

They shot an innocent 12 yr old and executed him for NO REASON. They need to be held accountable for that. They did nothing to verify the situation prior to zooming in and merely opening fire.

ed11563 · Guru

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
Not what I asked.

Remember, this toy had been altered. it didn't look like a toy.

And I didn't specify this particular time.

Say it was real. And the police sat and waited long enough for him the actually shoot and kill someone. Would you have then said "glad they waited to make sure"?
You can't "say it was real", because it WASN'T real. Sorry, the Police need to be RIGHT when they use lethal force.

You can say that the officers had reason to believe it WAS a real gun, because it LOOKED EXACTLY LIKE a real gun.

It had been altered to look like a real gun, which is a terribly stupid thing to do.

I'm not saying they should have shot this young man, because I wasn't there, and I wasn't inside the officer's head. Neither were you.

I AM saying that waving around what looks like a real gun on a playground or in a park is a STUPID STUPID STUPID thing to do.

And if his parents knew he had this gun, and it had been altered, then THEY SHARE THE BLAME.

huskerbb · Guru

ed11563 wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
Not what I asked.

Remember, this toy had been altered. it didn't look like a toy.

And I didn't specify this particular time.

Say it was real. And the police sat and waited long enough for him the actually shoot and kill someone. Would you have then said "glad they waited to make sure"?
You can't "say it was real", because it WASN'T real. Sorry, the Police need to be RIGHT when they use lethal force.
You can say that the officers had reason to believe it WAS a real gun, because it LOOKED EXACTLY LIKE a real gun.
It had been altered to look like a real gun, which is a terribly stupid thing to do.
I'm not saying they should have shot this young man, because I wasn't there, and I wasn't inside the officer's head. Neither were you.
I AM saying that waving around what looks like a real gun on a playground or in a park is a STUPID STUPID STUPID thing to do.
And if his parents knew he had this gun, and it had been altered, then THEY SHARE THE BLAME.

Again--you advocate the death penalty for a kid doing a stupid thing.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Ok let's say it was a REAL gun. Should he have been immediately gunned down when he wad sitting in a pavilion with the gun in his pocket?

huskerbb · Guru

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Ok let's say it was a REAL gun. Should he have been immediately gunned down when he wad sitting in a pavilion with the gun in his pocket?

Yeah. Why is it all of a sudden a "thing" that anyone carrying a gun under any situation should be shot?

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Again being in possession of a REAL gun is not executionable by death penalty enacted by the Police. WHO was in danger? WHO was at the park?

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

I know lots of people who carry guns. That isnt against the law.

NAOW · Vette's SS

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
I know lots of people who carry guns. That isnt against the law.

Same here, and now after reading this thread I'm a little scared for them.

huskerbb · Guru

Pulled up at a quick stop the other day. Two men were in the parking lot. One of them had a gun and was showing it to the other.

No one freaked the fvck out. The police were not called.

According to the illogic on here, they should have been automatically shot since they had a gun in the proximity of other people.

ed11563 · Guru

huskerbb wrote:

Again--you advocate the death penalty for a kid doing a stupid thing.

NO! Don't you LISTEN? I'm saying that doing something that stupid can get yourself killed. That's reality.

I'm not saying it's a good thing, I'm saying that as a parent we are responsible for making sure our kids understand the likely consequences of their actions.

Sit on the wooden cover over the 3rd rail of a commuter line at night, the natural consequence is, you can get hit by a train.

Wave around what looks like a real 9mm handgun where little kids play, one natural consequence is that cops can think you're a reckless, dangerous person.

Try to take an officer's gun, the natural consequence is, your life is over.

So I taught my kids NOT TO do those things. You probably did too.

I'm not advocating for the death penalty, I'm saying any intelligent person should know that it's a possibility.

huskerbb · Guru

ed11563 wrote:
huskerbb wrote:

Again--you advocate the death penalty for a kid doing a stupid thing.
NO! Don't you LISTEN? I'm saying that doing something that stupid can get yourself killed. That's reality.
I'm not saying it's a good thing, I'm saying that as a parent we are responsible for making sure our kids understand the likely consequences of their actions.
Sit on the wooden cover over the 3rd rail of a commuter line at night, the natural consequence is, you can get hit by a train.
Wave around what looks like a real 9mm handgun where little kids play, one natural consequence is that cops can think you're a reckless, dangerous person.
Try to take an officer's gun, the natural consequence is, your life is over.
So I taught my kids NOT TO do those things. You probably did too.

I'm not advocating for the death penalty, I'm saying any intelligent person should know that it's a possibility.

This was a KID. Kids do stupid things--and playing with a BB gun, even irresponsibly, should not result in death. According to you, your kid still does stupid things.

ed11563 · Guru

huskerbb wrote:
Pulled up at a quick stop the other day. Two men were in the parking lot. One of them had a gun and was showing it to the other.

No one freaked the fvck out. The police were not called.

According to the illogic on here, they should have been automatically shot since they had a gun in the proximity of other people.

It would have been different if they'd done it here, or if they'd looked like gang-bangers, or if one had pointed the gun at another's head.

If they look like YOU then no one thinks of them as armed criminals. Is that your point?

huskerbb · Guru

ed11563 wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Pulled up at a quick stop the other day. Two men were in the parking lot. One of them had a gun and was showing it to the other.

No one freaked the fvck out. The police were not called.

According to the illogic on here, they should have been automatically shot since they had a gun in the proximity of other people.
It would have been different if they'd done it here, or if they'd looked like gang-bangers, or if one had pointed the gun at another's head.
If they look like YOU then no one thinks of them as armed criminals. Is that your point?

So...people should be shot because of what they look like?

Boy are you proving the rioters right. That's exactly their issue--people getting shot because of what they look like, and that's exactly what you are advocating.

ed11563 · Guru

huskerbb wrote:
ed11563 wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Pulled up at a quick stop the other day. Two men were in the parking lot. One of them had a gun and was showing it to the other.

No one freaked the fvck out. The police were not called.

According to the illogic on here, they should have been automatically shot since they had a gun in the proximity of other people.
It would have been different if they'd done it here, or if they'd looked like gang-bangers, or if one had pointed the gun at another's head.
If they look like YOU then no one thinks of them as armed criminals. Is that your point?
So...people should be shot because of what they look like?
Boy are you proving the rioters right. That's exactly their issue--people getting shot because of what they look like, and that's exactly what you are advocating.

Can you understand that there's a difference between "advocating" something, vs. recognizing reality?

huskerbb · Guru

ed11563 wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
ed11563 wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Pulled up at a quick stop the other day. Two men were in the parking lot. One of them had a gun and was showing it to the other.

No one freaked the fvck out. The police were not called.

According to the illogic on here, they should have been automatically shot since they had a gun in the proximity of other people.
It would have been different if they'd done it here, or if they'd looked like gang-bangers, or if one had pointed the gun at another's head.
If they look like YOU then no one thinks of them as armed criminals. Is that your point?
So...people should be shot because of what they look like?
Boy are you proving the rioters right. That's exactly their issue--people getting shot because of what they look like, and that's exactly what you are advocating.

Can you understand that there's a difference between "advocating" something, vs. recognizing reality?

Only if you aren't willing to change attitudes.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Actions have consequences. The consequences far outweigh this kid's action, but he did have what appeared to be a gun at a playground.

flan

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Consequences should be in accordance with actions. Oh you set the table improperly? Well then death by hanging. And whendid it become the job of the police to enact capital punishment. Funny how insensitive you are to a 12 yr old boy being gunned down.

-- Edited by Lady Gaga Snerd on Friday 28th of November 2014 04:32:59 PM

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Consequences should be in accordance with actions. Oh you set the table improperly? Well then death by hanging. And whendid it become the job of the police to enact capital punishment. Funny how insensitive you are to a 12 yr old boy being gunned down.

-- Edited by Lady Gaga Snerd on Friday 28th of November 2014 04:32:59 PM

I said that in my post.

It was a tragedy, nothing more, nothing less.

flan

ed11563 · Guru

huskerbb wrote:
ed11563 wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
ed11563 wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Pulled up at a quick stop the other day. Two men were in the parking lot. One of them had a gun and was showing it to the other.

No one freaked the fvck out. The police were not called.

According to the illogic on here, they should have been automatically shot since they had a gun in the proximity of other people.
It would have been different if they'd done it here, or if they'd looked like gang-bangers, or if one had pointed the gun at another's head.
If they look like YOU then no one thinks of them as armed criminals. Is that your point?
So...people should be shot because of what they look like?
Boy are you proving the rioters right. That's exactly their issue--people getting shot because of what they look like, and that's exactly what you are advocating.

Can you understand that there's a difference between "advocating" something, vs. recognizing reality?

Only if you aren't willing to change attitudes.

What are you talking about?