Cleveland 12 yr old with toy gun shot in park

[chipbennett]

The cops placed themselves in a poor tactical position and made a poor tactical decision. Innocent kid dead, internet juries all agog, two idiot trigger pullers (based on their previous transgressions) back on the street. Another victim in a stupid battle.

Nope, Tamir Rice didn't do anything wrong at all. Didn't commit any crimes at all. Didn't cause a police response by his own actions. Nope, not at all.

 

[Doublehelix]

The cops placed themselves in a poor tactical position and made a poor tactical decision. Innocent kid dead, internet juries all agog, two idiot trigger pullers (based on their previous transgressions) back on the street. Another victim in a stupid battle.

Where did you hear that these two cops were "idiot trigger pullers" based on their previous transgressions? One got sued for blocking a driveway, which may or may not have been justified. People sue for anything nowadays. We don't have enough information to call him an "idiot trigger puller", and the other guy definitely had issues, I am not denying that, but nowhere did I see that he was an "idiot trigger puller" based on his "previous transgressions".

I am not justifying their actions, what I am saying is that we need to watch the hyperbole to prove a point.
".

 

[Alpo]

I still haven't heard anything that justified the rollup on this kid.

 

[injb]

Where did you hear that these two cops were "idiot trigger pullers" based on their previous transgressions? One got sued for blocking a driveway, which may or may not have been justified. People sue for anything nowadays. We don't have enough information to call him an "idiot trigger puller", and the other guy definitely had issues, I am not denying that, but nowhere did I see that he was an "idiot trigger puller" based on his "previous transgressions".

I am not justifying their actions, what I am saying is that we need to watch the hyperbole to prove a point.
".

Sued for blocking a driveway? Or for attacking a woman?

The suit said Garmback initially argued with Eaton. It said Garmback then "rushed (Eaton) and placed her in a chokehold, tackled her to the ground, twisted her wrist and began hitting her body. Officer Guerra rushed over and proceeded to punch Tamela Eaton in the face multiple times.''

 

[Kutnupe14]

I based my thug comment on a one time viewing of his actions prior to the police arrival in the grainy surveillance video. It's not about race but about actions. The photos of him at home flashing gang signs looks less threatening than some Facebook post I have seen in family photos of the local preacher's kids.



Based on the information immediately available to the officers from the radio transcripts they thought they were facing an adult with a real gun.

"a black male sitting on the swings, keeps pulling a gun out of his pants and pointing it at people".

"Shots fired, male down, black male, maybe 20."

Gang signs, really? Which gang? You may not admit/recognize it, but your bias IS based on an assumption based mainly, IMO, on Tamir's skin color.

 

[A 7.62 Exodus]

Yeah, I played with toy guns. I played with my friends. This kid was a thug in training practicing his intimidation skills in the park. Watch the video as he uses an authentic looking weapon pointing it at strangers. Tamir was killed because he was stupid.

So, let me get this straight, because he was "a thug and training" and being stupid, he deserved to die? You can't sit there and tell me, that at 12 years old, you didn't do something stupid. Yeah, that's flawless logic. Lets kill people and justify it because of something they MIGHT do.

 

[A 7.62 Exodus]

We've been getting a lot of armed robberies of pharmacies by 11 and 12 year olds. Or as you refer to them...children.

So let's drive up RIGHT NEXT TO HIM!!!!! These officers clearly knew something, or they wouldn't have almost hit him with their car

 

[chipbennett]

So, let me get this straight, because he was "a thug and training" and being stupid, he deserved to die? You can't sit there and tell me, that at 12 years old, you didn't do something stupid. Yeah, that's flawless logic. Lets kill people and justify it because of something they MIGHT do.

I get so sick of this tripe.

He didn't "deserve to die" because he was "being stupid". His actions warranted the use of deadly force in self-defense in response, because, through those actions, he caused people reasonably to believe that he represented a mortal threat.

 

[Alpo]

And had they not rolled up on him, they would have been in no danger. If the threat was so egregious, where was SWAT?

 

[A 7.62 Exodus]

It was an AirSoft pistol that was virtually indistinguishable from a real 1911-style pistol. Calling it a "toy gun" is nothing more than an emotional appeal to further a specious, race-based motive for what happened. Further: calling what he was doing "playing with toy guns" is an obvious attempt to conflate his actions with the obviously innocent actions of kids obviously innocently playing with obviously innocent toy guns. Rice was brandishing the AirSoft pistol and threatening passersby in a manner that would cause reasonable fear that it was a real gun, and that it represented a real (i.e. deadly) threat.



Another emotional appeal. You make it sound like he was a kindergartener. He was 12 years old. He was old enough to be in the park alone and unsupervised. He was old enough to be carrying around an AirSoft pistol. He was old enough to know that when police officers roll up on you, shouting commands and reaching for their firearms, you comply - you don't lift up your sweatshirt and reach for the AirSoft pistol you have tucked into your waistband.

Did the police make mistakes? Sure. But I'm not a police officer, and I'm not going to armchair-quarterback their tactics. Even if they were tactically wrong, they were legally in the right.



No. The real issue is: why was this 12-year-old allowed to roam a public park, alone and unsupervised, with a realistic-looking 1911-style AirSoft pistol, pointing it at people and threatening them with it?

The police did not shoot Rice for "playing". Under no circumstances can what he was doing be accurately described as "playing".

1) There is no emotional appeal here, just facts. If you have reports of a possible armed suspect, then why in the **** would you drive up so close to the individual that you could almost run them over with your car? Why?


2) You're right, they shot Rice because he was black, and had something that resembled a "weapon".

 

[A 7.62 Exodus]

I get so sick of this tripe.

He didn't "deserve to die" because he was "being stupid". His actions warranted the use of deadly force in self-defense in response, because, through those actions, he caused people reasonably to believe that he represented a mortal threat.

Oh my lord, have you seen the video? The police were in his face and shooting him before he could sneeze. This was NOT self-defense. The police officers put themselves in that situation by driving up right next to him.

Oh, but I forgot, it looks like they had just enough time to yell "GET ON THE GROUND!" So that makes it justified right?

 

[A 7.62 Exodus]

And had they not rolled up on him, they would have been in no danger. If the threat was so egregious, where was SWAT?

/endthread

 

[chipbennett]

1) There is no emotional appeal here, just facts. If you have reports of a possible armed suspect, then why in the **** would you drive up so close to the individual that you could almost run them over with your car? Why?

The police tactics can certainly be called into question. But they neither negate nor excuse Tamir Rice's actions.

2) You're right, they shot Rice because he was black, and had something that resembled a "weapon".

The race card. How lame.

And the AirSoft pistol in question didn't "resemble" a weapon. It was visually indistinguishable from a 1911-style pistol.

Oh my lord, have you seen the video? The police were in his face and shooting him before he could sneeze. This was NOT self-defense. The police officers put themselves in that situation by driving up right next to him.

Oh, but I forgot, it looks like they had just enough time to yell "GET ON THE GROUND!" So that makes it justified right?

Rice should have considered that before he started threatening people with something that was visually indistinguishable from a 1911-style pistol, and before he yanked up his sweatshirt and reached for that pistol, when the police told him to put his hands up.

 

[Dead Duck]

#ThugLivesMatter

 

[Alpo]

Some of you must have led sheltered lives. I remember as a kid playing with cap guns and pointing at vehicles and pedestrians and shooting them like they were the bad guys or Nazis. We played war and cowboys and indians and whatnot.

And while that might sound like ancient history, my kids did the same thing.

What is LAME is defending the indefensible. These cops made a series of bad decisions that resulted in this kid's death. Perhaps there will be a civil rights case. I'd sure argue for one.

 

[Dead Duck]

Some of you must have led sheltered lives. I remember as a kid playing with cap guns and pointing at vehicles and pedestrians and shooting them like they were the bad guys or Nazis. We played war and cowboys and indians and whatnot.

And while that might sound like ancient history, my kids did the same thing.

You're Right!
It's exactly the same thing -





One is inspired by a movie star and wants to be the hero and the other is inspired by his older brother and wants to be a gangbanger.
Totally the same.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Rice should have considered that before he started threatening people with something that was visually indistinguishable from a 1911-style pistol, and before he yanked up his sweatshirt and reached for that pistol, when the police told him to put his hands up.

Yeah, because a 12 year old has great decision making skills. I'll also point out that apparently the people he "threatened," didn't feel threatened at all, as they did not report the kid, an observer with no interaction with the kid did. And it is completely unknown if Rice was reaching for the airsoft gun or not. He grabbed his sweatshirt (with both hands, as that is IMO, telling), and exposed the weapon to officers.

And btw, officers have just shot someone, scene is secure, and threat ended. What's the next action to be taken? ....yeah, that wasn't done either.

 

[Kutnupe14]

You're Right!
It's exactly the same thing -





One is inspired by a movie star and wants to be the hero and the other is inspired by his older brother and wants to be a gangbanger.
Totally the same.

I think you mean one has tanned a little more than the other, giving him that criminal "look."

 

[Denny347]

So let's drive up RIGHT NEXT TO HIM!!!!! These officers clearly knew something, or they wouldn't have almost hit him with their car

I will not pretend I know what they knew or what they didn't know "CLEARLY" at the time of the shooting. Doing so would only be adding personal bias to the equation.

 

[A 7.62 Exodus]

I will not pretend I know what they knew or what they didn't know "CLEARLY" at the time of the shooting. Doing so would only be adding personal bias to the equation.

Denny, I really do respect your opinion on this forum. I guess clearly wasn't the best word to use, but you do have to admit... If a call is made regarding a possible suspect with a gun, do you really get as close as they did if they feared for their safety?