Cleaveland Officer Shoots A 12 YEAR OLD

[Galloism]

And they should, because indiscriminate murder of civilians is never acceptable, no matter what society you're in. From a moral standpoint, murdering civilians is bad everywhere.

Except if you're in China.

No, that's still bad - which is why they try so desperately to hide it.

That's hard in the digital age and all, but they don't go around advertising that they indiscriminately murder civilians. Even in their society, that's considered... well, bad.

[Infected Mushroom]

Like I said.

It depends on the jurisdiction (the legality of specific weapon use etc), the behavior of the crowd as reasonably inferred by the officer and other factors...

this isn't an unconditionally illegal or unethical situation.

There are jurisdictions where the police have few restrictions on what weapons they are allowed to carry or use.

Peaceful protesters don't deserve grenades. Stick to his example.

He said they were peaceful protestors.

Not that they appeared as peaceful protestors to the reasonable police officer at the time of the incident. This group can still be found to be ''peaceful'' objectively as a matter of fact AFTER the incident.

There's a fine and important distinction.

[Senkaku]

And they should, because indiscriminate murder of civilians is never acceptable, no matter what society you're in. From a moral standpoint, murdering civilians is bad everywhere.

Except if you're in China.

Or North Korea, or Russia, or Thailand, or Egypt, or Libya, or Syria...

[Galloism]

And they should, because indiscriminate murder of civilians is never acceptable, no matter what society you're in. From a moral standpoint, murdering civilians is bad everywhere.

Except as I've tried to explain to you many times, its not necessarily indiscriminate.

Maybe the whole crowd was threatening him with convincing-looking fake weapons. Maybe the entire crowd without exception, was calling out for his death and holding what looked like knives (but were found to be fake AFTER the incident and hence the crowd was ruled as ''peaceful'' in the technical sense).

You have to take into account ALL factors.

There isn't anything obvious here.

And all of those situations would require a police officer to back off and call for people better equipped instead of hurling grenades into a crowd.

[Senkaku]

Except as I've tried to explain to you many times, its not necessarily indiscriminate.

Maybe the whole crowd was threatening him with convincing-looking fake weapons. Maybe the entire crowd without exception, was calling out for his death and holding what looked like knives (but were found to be fake AFTER the incident and hence the crowd was ruled as ''peaceful'' in the technical sense).

You have to take into account ALL factors.

There isn't anything obvious here.

And all of those situations would require a police officer to back off and call for people better equipped instead of hurling grenades into a crowd.

Guys, you're getting a little off topic. Grenading crowds is not this thread's topic (and I don't think to grenade is a verb, but whatever).

[Infected Mushroom]

Except as I've tried to explain to you many times, its not necessarily indiscriminate.

Maybe the whole crowd was threatening him with convincing-looking fake weapons. Maybe the entire crowd without exception, was calling out for his death and holding what looked like knives (but were found to be fake AFTER the incident and hence the crowd was ruled as ''peaceful'' in the technical sense).

You have to take into account ALL factors.

There isn't anything obvious here.

And all of those situations would require a police officer to back off and call for people better equipped instead of hurling grenades into a crowd.

it depends on what is in the police manual.

it also depends on whether or not this is something covered by the manual. If the regular patrol police were allowed to carry hand grenades in the ordinary course of duty, then clearly Parliament/Congress/the King/the Eternal President/whatever INTENDED for the grenades to be used where reasonable.

Self-defense from a credible threat could provide such a ground.

It doesn't matter what the investigators conclude about the nature of the protestors AFTER the fact, the key is how they appeared to the reasonable police officer at the time of the incident. Clearly, he wouldn't just throw a grenade for NO REASON. They could have been perceived (reasonably) as a threat if they were brandishing convincing-looking fake weapons etc

[Infected Mushroom]

And all of those situations would require a police officer to back off and call for people better equipped instead of hurling grenades into a crowd.

Guys, you're getting a little off topic. Grenading crowds is not this thread's topic (and I don't think to grenade is a verb, but whatever).

Indeed.

[Galloism]

And all of those situations would require a police officer to back off and call for people better equipped instead of hurling grenades into a crowd.

Guys, you're getting a little off topic. Grenading crowds is not this thread's topic (and I don't think to grenade is a verb, but whatever).

I was merely pointing out that getting Mushroom's opinions on what the police are justified in doing is about as logical as asking a serial killer for his opinions on the value of human life.

Once again: I nailed it.

[The Cobalt Sky]

It wasn't a distance. They were quite close. Watch the video again. I'm sick of this thing.

Even if they were standing quite close (idk really, the video I watched it looked like there was plenty of space between them), and the officer realized "oh, it's a kid, I can relax a little once he puts his hands up", Rice then proceeded to try and take out his gun.

Big no-no.

We have no idea if he knew better. And since there's no audio, we have no idea what the police said. But how close they got to him, they seem pretty unprofessional. There wasn't a big window of time between when he was shot and when they showed up, so probably they didn't say enough. Rookie or not, no one should make mistakes like that and still possibly keep a job.

[Furry Alairia and Algeria]

Guys, you're getting a little off topic. Grenading crowds is not this thread's topic (and I don't think to grenade is a verb, but whatever).

I was merely pointing out that getting Mushroom's opinions on what the police are justified in doing is about as logical as asking a serial killer for his opinions on the value of human life.

Once again: I nailed it.

Yes, Galloism. You did so.

And all of those situations would require a police officer to back off and call for people better equipped instead of hurling grenades into a crowd.

Guys, you're getting a little off topic. Grenading crowds is not this thread's topic (and I don't think to grenade is a verb, but whatever).

Indeed.

[Vassenor]

Let's put this into a bit of perspective.

You're sat in your patrol car. As you drive round the district, dispatch sends you a description of a person and tells you that someone fitting that description has been seen in a certain area brandishing a firearm. You drive over there, and see someone fitting the description. You pull up, get out of your patrol car and with your sidearm drawn order them to get down on the ground with their hands behind their head. However, instead of doing that, they reach into their waistband and pull what as far as you know is a real handgun and proceed to aim it at you. You don't have time to consider that it might be fake, or anything about who's holding the gun. At this point you go into caveman fight or flight mode, backed up by your training.

[Oil exporting People]

Rather, that this situation could have been solved in a different manner OTHER than killing the kid.

It's completely ridiculous to suggest this officer had any other options than to shoot in this situation. I'm not sure how the key fact that this kid reached for an unmarked airsoft gun when approached by an officer is not being absorbed. What did you expect the officer to do when the kid reached for the airsoft pistol? Yell at him? Attempt to charge him? Of course then, the "All Cops are EVILZ!!!!" crowd would be complaining about excessive force in subduing the kid.

Quite frankly, everyone that thinks this officer acted wrong need to take a step back and actually objectively look at what happened. The facts are that this kid made a BIG mistake, and the officer was forced to react in a way that would insure he got to go home at night. When you're in the profession of law enforcement, which sees around a 100 cops killed per year IIRC, you're going to play it safe rather take a chance of not seeing your family again.

[Fanosolia]

All I have to say is that it once again proves that you need the police to have cameras one them to prove their innocence (kid or the cop) and i'm always curious about this one fact about all these things. Why don't they go for a shot that immobilizes, distracts, or is just not fatal to the other party? Like know that there's tension in those situations, and you need to act fast, but it's always bothered me when I see these threads.

[Vassenor]

Why don't they go for a shot that immobilizes, distracts, or is just not fatal to the other party?

Because as has been pointed out in this thread at least five times there is no such thing. You pull your sidearm on someone and you are committed to potentially using lethal force on them.

[Oil exporting People]

All I have to say is that it once again proves that you need the police to have cameras one them to prove their innocence (kid or the cop) and i'm always curious about this one fact about all these things. Why don't they go for a shot that immobilizes, distracts, or is just not fatal to the other party? Like know that there's tension in those situations, and you need to act fast, but it's always bothered me when I see these threads.

If you're in a situation as Cop where someone is/appears to be pulling a gun on you, you're the one who gets shot if you take time to aim for an immobilization shot.

EDIT: See above poster

[Kaztropol]

Nobody seems to have commented on why the police car was on the grass, and not on the road. I was curious myself, so read the reports again.

Turns out, that the camera there, is mounted on a recreation centre for young people, and that playpark was across the street from the recreation centre.

So, to me, it looks like the car is on the grass, because the officer driving made the decision to put it onto the grass, so that it would shield the recreation centre and the young people in it, from what dispatch has told them is a person pointing a pistol at people. Minimises the risk to those young people in the recreation centre.

Which means the officers believe there is a real risk to bystanders.

[Fanosolia]

Why don't they go for a shot that immobilizes, distracts, or is just not fatal to the other party?

Because as has been pointed out in this thread at least five times there is no such thing. You pull your sidearm on someone and you are committed to potentially using lethal force on them.

I figured it was something like that but meh i'm an idealist. I just don't think even criminals need to die. But that's a different rant, and self defence in justifiable in situations as such. I don't deny that to anyone.

On a side note, you'd think the airsoft gun people would be having a tougher time selling their products at this point. I mean I know this isn't the first time something like this has happened. You think some people would wise up.

[Oil exporting People]

On a side note, you'd think the airsoft gun people would be having a tougher time selling their products at this point. I mean I know this isn't the first time something like this has happened. You think some people would wise up.

It's not the fault of the companies or regular airsoft users like myself. It's the fact that this kid wasn't taught how to behave with it by his parents. They should've made it clear to him that you don't go brandishing it in public, remove the identifying safety tip (That's actually illegal in several places IIRC), and most importantly YOU DON'T REACH FOR IT WHEN AN OFFICER APPROACHES. The failure in this case is with this child's parents for failing to actually teach him about basic safety tips.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

On a side note, you'd think the airsoft gun people would be having a tougher time selling their products at this point. I mean I know this isn't the first time something like this has happened. You think some people would wise up.

It's not the fault of the companies or regular airsoft users like myself. It's the fact that this kid wasn't taught how to behave with it by his parents. They should've made it clear to him that you don't go brandishing it in public, remove the identifying safety tip (That's actually illegal in several places IIRC), and most importantly YOU DON'T REACH FOR IT WHEN AN OFFICER APPROACHES. The failure in this case is with this child's parents for failing to actually teach him about basic safety tips.

The fault falls into a lot of people, really.

[Oil exporting People]

The fault falls into a lot of people, really.

No it does not as has been repeatedly pointed out.

[Fanosolia]

On a side note, you'd think the airsoft gun people would be having a tougher time selling their products at this point. I mean I know this isn't the first time something like this has happened. You think some people would wise up.

It's not the fault of the companies or regular airsoft users like myself. It's the fact that this kid wasn't taught how to behave with it by his parents. They should've made it clear to him that you don't go brandishing it in public, remove the identifying safety tip (That's actually illegal in several places IIRC), and most importantly YOU DON'T REACH FOR IT WHEN AN OFFICER APPROACHES. The failure in this case is with this child's parents for failing to actually teach him about basic safety tips.

Whoa whoa whoa! When did I say that?

I was just referring to the parents not buying the damn thing in the first place because this was a thing that happens. Not once did I blame a single person in my post. It was just an observation!

[Oil exporting People]

I was just referring to the parents not buying the damn thing in the first place because this was a thing that happens. Not once did I blame a single person in my post. It was just an observation!

My apologies then, I misread your post! Truly sorry there!

Although I guess that will make a good response to the inevitable person who does blame the companies/users like myself later on in the thread.

[Fanosolia]

I was just referring to the parents not buying the damn thing in the first place because this was a thing that happens. Not once did I blame a single person in my post. It was just an observation!

My apologies then, I misread your post! Truly sorry there!

Although I guess that will make a good response to the inevitable person who does blame the companies/users like myself later on in the thread.

No problem, I was just kind of shocked that I got that reaction is all.

Nah, I just don't see a reason to get an airsoft or other replica like things except of a movie or some other permission related thing. I mean I guess you can modify a toy gun (nerf) to be an actual one, but I have no idea how you go about it. Not that I wish to put fear in anyone, I'm just thinking about the variables of the situation.

[The Cobalt Sky]

Let's put this into a bit of perspective.

You're sat in your patrol car. As you drive round the district, dispatch sends you a description of a person and tells you that someone fitting that description has been seen in a certain area brandishing a firearm. You drive over there, and see someone fitting the description. You pull up, get out of your patrol car and with your sidearm drawn order them to get down on the ground with their hands behind their head. However, instead of doing that, they reach into their waistband and pull what as far as you know is a real handgun and proceed to aim it at you. You don't have time to consider that it might be fake, or anything about who's holding the gun. At this point you go into caveman fight or flight mode, backed up by your training.

Your description suggests an awful police officer. If you watched the video, you'd see they got unusually close. There wasn't a whole lot of time between when they CLAIMED to have said something (there's no audio, so we can't even be sure they did) and when he was shot, and you shouldn't go into fight or flight. You should remain calm and collected. There shouldn't be a panicked fight or flight. You should remain in control of your actions the whole time. They should also be able to see how young he is.

[Infected Mushroom]

Guys, you're getting a little off topic. Grenading crowds is not this thread's topic (and I don't think to grenade is a verb, but whatever).

I was merely pointing out that getting Mushroom's opinions on what the police are justified in doing is about as logical as asking a serial killer for his opinions on the value of human life.

Once again: I nailed it.

you are incorrect.

Once again.