Posted on 11/24/2014 3:11:38 AM PST by Biggirl
Sunday on ABC's "This Week With George Stephanopoulos," the attorney for the family of the late Michael Brown said,"Ninety-nine percent of the time police officers aren't charged when they kill young people of color." Host George Stephanopoulos asked if Crump has already prejudged what the grand jury is going to say and decided the process is unfair.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Nobody reported that the boy made any threats, verbal or physical, towards the police officer. Nobody reported that the boy aimed the gun at anyone. Nobody is saying that the officer's life and safety were in danger. But he still saw the need to blow away a 12 year old boy. Ohio is a concealed carry state. If you're packing your pistol and you have an itch near where the holster is then you had better check to see if there are any police around before you scratch. That may be enough to justify their putting a couple of rounds in you.
You forgot the "why don't they just shoot the gun out of their hand like the Lone Ranger!?" I've heard that more than once in my life. Mostly from idiotic lib women and "people of colours", don't ya know.
He brought this into a public place. The kid removed (or painted over the orange indication piece) the end of the barrel. He pulled it out of his pants brandishing it. He didn’t put it down when ordered by police to do so. Three strikes and you’re out.
99% ???
What a coincidence.
Did you know that 99% of the facts stated by racist blacks on liberal talk shows are made up on the spot?
It can be. Even a toy gun can get you killed. I am not defending cops, but they, or anyone else can’t always wait to see if a gun is real unless they want to see what comes out of it. It is too late at that point. Stick a toy gun in your belt or a BB gun that looks like a real firearm, cause a disturbance that brings police attention to you, and when they get there, pull your shirt back and start pulling it out. You will see what they are justified doing...Here in Texas, we have what is known as the “night time law” which allows deadly force to be used to stop theft at night, and my understanding of the law is that it was worded to allow people to act when a weapon couldn’t be seen at all.
I have less problem with an officer having to shoot an unarmed person attacking him or a person pulling a fake gun or a BB gun than I do with those that shoot peoples dogs for barking at them. And, of course every circumstance is different. One of the reasons I wouldn’t want to be a cop. Someone reaches for what you believe is a weapon, and you wait to see for sure, it can cost you your life. And if you don’t wait, it can still cost you....IMO
Ohio is an open carry state.
The kid removed (or painted over the orange indication piece) the end of the barrel.
So?
He pulled it out of his pants brandishing it
The person calling the report in told the dispatcher twice that he was pretty sure that it was a toy gun. And nobody has said he was brandishing it in the direction of the cop.
He didn’t put it down when ordered by police to do so.
Failure to comply with a police order is a capital offense?
Three strikes and you’re out.
What you are saying then is that there is no standard of imminent threat that police have to comply with before using deadly force? Shoot on sight? Carry a toy gun? Bang, you're dead. Answer the door with a game controller in your hand? Bang, you're dead. Carry a BB gun through a Walmart? Bang, you're dead. Enter a stairwell with your girlfriend? Bang, you're dead. It's open season on civilians and dogs and a whole lot of people are cheering the police on.
I wonder where the kid learned this behavior. Not from Eddie the Eagle. Not from a firearms instructor. Probably from all the thousand of times this behavior was modeled and reinforced by Hollywood and the video game industry AND no parent "wupping his arse" for this and similar behavior at home, let alone in public.
"Isn't it cute?" Yeah, dead cute.
Yeah, you are. We hire police officers to protect us. We arm them, train them, give them great authority and expect them to uphold the law. With that power comes responsibility, the understanding that the job has its risks, and the expectation that using deadly force is the last resort and not the first one. Nobody, not a single witness, has suggested that the officer's life or the life of anyone else was in imminent danger. But the officer still saw the need to shoot a 12 year old boy.
DD, you’re either an idiot or you haven’t seen the BB gun the kid was pulling from his waistband when told to put his hands up.
Which is it?
"The officers ordered him to stop and to show his hands and he went into his waistband and pulled out the weapon," he said.
That's because 98.9999% of the time those urban utes were criminals posing a threat to the officer or another.
Well I don't think I'm an idiot. And unlike you I don't think it's open season on 12 year olds in particular or the population in general either.
Was anyone's life in imminent danger? That's the question and the deciding factor in using deadly force. For all we know the kid was trying to show the cop it was a BB gun or he was going to drop it to the floor. But we'll never know because the cop blew him away.
I am sure you will believe what you want to, but, as you say, police do have great responsibility, but soaking up a couple of bullets while waiting to see if a gun is real, shouldn’t be one of the requirements. And, there are bad cops, but to give credit to the testimony of a witness or witnesses who may be friends of the violator, or even maybe encouraged the violator to act, over the testimony of the officer isn’t right, either, IMO. Can you tell by looking at someone if they are 12 years old, and if they are going to try to kill you or not? It could be that the officer acted beyond his authority, but that is why we have grand juries. ALL homicides are reviewed by grand juries, at least here in Texas, and we have to accept their findings. The system may not be perfect every time, but if we give great responsibility to police, as you say, then we are responsible to see that they are treated fairly as well.
I guess when a cop shouts “Freeze. Don’t Move!”, I’ll bet the majority of people who follow the officers command survive regardless of colour.
I’ll also bet it’s not the right time to attempt to disarm the officer, run away from the scene, throw up your hands, or charge the officer. Neither is it advisable to make any quick moves like pull out a black cell phone to call home, pull or wave a toy pistol, rifle, or baseball bat you are carrying home for your son, pull out a ham sandwich, or to switch or juggle something from one hand to the other. I could proceed to elaborate the many reasons people get shot, but you get my drift. Freeze, just don’t move until told!
A certain percent of the minority that do get shot are innocent because they no comprende Ingles, are suicidal, are certified mentally disabled, deaf or hard of hearing, or under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Usually these people are in the wrong place at the wrong time.
The rest fall in the crack, They are either stupid, will not bend to authority, are very bad gamblers (can’t figure the odds are against them), or don’t have common sense. Still, some beat the odds and survive and some don’t.
Know there are good and bad officers out there. Hope you aren’t confronted by Dirty Harry. Good Luck!
That is a joke.....”freeze, don’t move”
Every black kid from age 7 knows that if he runs away he won’t be shot.
The kids that run away and don’t get shot number in the millions. Those that get shot number less than 10
Nice straw man on all that. It was a very straightforward question.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.