Rewarding bad behavior

[Ray From Cleveland]

Nope, not when somebody is drawing a gun on you. Your second guess could be your life and these cops want to go home after work like everybody else.

"DON'T MOVE" is a warning. When the cops tell you to freeze, you do just that.

We agree to disagree. These cops should have not just drove up next a perp, shout out, then a fraction of a second later, use deadly force. He isn't threatening anyone , and in fact, had a toy gun, the police officer over reacted, misunderstood the situation and took it for granted he could shoot first and ask questions later. In a war, that hyper situational awareness might be apropos, but with civilian law enforcement? Don't think so.

Obviously you didn't read all the posts in this thread, so let me catch you up on some things.

Here is a picture of the toy gun the kid had, and a real gun that the toy was a replica of. Can you tell us which one is the real gun and which one was the toy?


View attachment 73276

And as I explained a page or so ago. On that day it was raining outside. The police car slid on the wet pavement and they got a little too close to the suspect. However, I don't know how any more distance would have changed anything. Now if you can stomach watching the video again, you will see him pulling out that gun when the officer got out of his car. Yes, that is a threat to a police officer.

There was nothing to be misunderstood about the situation. The police received a call about a male pointing his gun at cars passing by in a park well renown for it's drug activity and yes, prior shootings. In fact, in that neighborhood, evening gunfire is a nightly thing there. The picture the media put out is a picture of him when he was younger; the same that they did to Trayvon Martin. When the paramedics arrived, they called in the patient as a 22 year old black male. He was nearly 6' tall and had a few pounds on him.

Yes there was, First of all, police just shouldn't drive up to anyone like they did, , especially if they are armed. Tactically, that is beyond stupid. You give the perp a chance, give due warning. These cops just drove up there, and presumed they KNEW the situation, and took the life of an innocent kid. You tell me that isn't what happened. I support cops all day long, but this? Incompetence, plain pure and simple.

The grand jury and investigators, who actually looked at the evidence, thought otherwise.

Still a sad situation where a child has a toy that looks everything like a gun. Matter of fact it IS a gun. the way you play the scenario the cops had a death wish. Or worse that perpetrators with guns need to be coddled.

I

Nope, not when somebody is drawing a gun on you. Your second guess could be your life and these cops want to go home after work like everybody else.

"DON'T MOVE" is a warning. When the cops tell you to freeze, you do just that.

We agree to disagree. These cops should have not just drove up next a perp, shout out, then a fraction of a second later, use deadly force. He isn't threatening anyone , and in fact, had a toy gun, the police officer over reacted, misunderstood the situation and took it for granted he could shoot first and ask questions later. In a war, that hyper situational awareness might be apropos, but with civilian law enforcement? Don't think so.

Obviously you didn't read all the posts in this thread, so let me catch you up on some things.

Here is a picture of the toy gun the kid had, and a real gun that the toy was a replica of. Can you tell us which one is the real gun and which one was the toy?


View attachment 73276

And as I explained a page or so ago. On that day it was raining outside. The police car slid on the wet pavement and they got a little too close to the suspect. However, I don't know how any more distance would have changed anything. Now if you can stomach watching the video again, you will see him pulling out that gun when the officer got out of his car. Yes, that is a threat to a police officer.

There was nothing to be misunderstood about the situation. The police received a call about a male pointing his gun at cars passing by in a park well renown for it's drug activity and yes, prior shootings. In fact, in that neighborhood, evening gunfire is a nightly thing there. The picture the media put out is a picture of him when he was younger; the same that they did to Trayvon Martin. When the paramedics arrived, they called in the patient as a 22 year old black male. He was nearly 6' tall and had a few pounds on him.

Yes there was, First of all, police just shouldn't drive up to anyone like they did, , especially if they are armed. Tactically, that is beyond stupid. You give the perp a chance, give due warning. These cops just drove up there, and presumed they KNEW the situation, and took the life of an innocent kid. You tell me that isn't what happened. I support cops all day long, but this? Incompetence, plain pure and simple.

The grand jury and investigators, who actually looked at the evidence, thought otherwise.

Still a sad situation where a child has a toy that looks everything like a gun. Matter of fact it IS a gun. the way you play the scenario the cops had a death wish. Or worse that perpetrators with guns need to be coddled.

I won't argue, but I know what happened and so do you. Hindsight is 20/20. I would never have drove up to a criminal with a gun, and I would have given them a chance to put it down , and that's what a good cop/person does. Agree?

Okay, then put yourself in a similar situation that I created earlier in this thread:

You come home one day and find your house broken into. You have a firearm in your garage and you go to investigate. You find that the suspect is still in your house and turned away from you. He reaches into his waistband and starts turning towards you.

Question: do you wait to see what he is going to pull out before you shoot? Do you ask real nice like that he would not reach into his waistband? Do you wait until you see the weapon, evaluate if it's a toy or not before you shoot?

 

[Freewill]

Nope, not when somebody is drawing a gun on you. Your second guess could be your life and these cops want to go home after work like everybody else.

"DON'T MOVE" is a warning. When the cops tell you to freeze, you do just that.

We agree to disagree. These cops should have not just drove up next a perp, shout out, then a fraction of a second later, use deadly force. He isn't threatening anyone , and in fact, had a toy gun, the police officer over reacted, misunderstood the situation and took it for granted he could shoot first and ask questions later. In a war, that hyper situational awareness might be apropos, but with civilian law enforcement? Don't think so.

Obviously you didn't read all the posts in this thread, so let me catch you up on some things.

Here is a picture of the toy gun the kid had, and a real gun that the toy was a replica of. Can you tell us which one is the real gun and which one was the toy?


View attachment 73276

And as I explained a page or so ago. On that day it was raining outside. The police car slid on the wet pavement and they got a little too close to the suspect. However, I don't know how any more distance would have changed anything. Now if you can stomach watching the video again, you will see him pulling out that gun when the officer got out of his car. Yes, that is a threat to a police officer.

There was nothing to be misunderstood about the situation. The police received a call about a male pointing his gun at cars passing by in a park well renown for it's drug activity and yes, prior shootings. In fact, in that neighborhood, evening gunfire is a nightly thing there. The picture the media put out is a picture of him when he was younger; the same that they did to Trayvon Martin. When the paramedics arrived, they called in the patient as a 22 year old black male. He was nearly 6' tall and had a few pounds on him.

Yes there was, First of all, police just shouldn't drive up to anyone like they did, , especially if they are armed. Tactically, that is beyond stupid. You give the perp a chance, give due warning. These cops just drove up there, and presumed they KNEW the situation, and took the life of an innocent kid. You tell me that isn't what happened. I support cops all day long, but this? Incompetence, plain pure and simple.

The grand jury and investigators, who actually looked at the evidence, thought otherwise.

Still a sad situation where a child has a toy that looks everything like a gun. Matter of fact it IS a gun. the way you play the scenario the cops had a death wish. Or worse that perpetrators with guns need to be coddled.

I

Nope, not when somebody is drawing a gun on you. Your second guess could be your life and these cops want to go home after work like everybody else.

"DON'T MOVE" is a warning. When the cops tell you to freeze, you do just that.

We agree to disagree. These cops should have not just drove up next a perp, shout out, then a fraction of a second later, use deadly force. He isn't threatening anyone , and in fact, had a toy gun, the police officer over reacted, misunderstood the situation and took it for granted he could shoot first and ask questions later. In a war, that hyper situational awareness might be apropos, but with civilian law enforcement? Don't think so.

Obviously you didn't read all the posts in this thread, so let me catch you up on some things.

Here is a picture of the toy gun the kid had, and a real gun that the toy was a replica of. Can you tell us which one is the real gun and which one was the toy?


View attachment 73276

And as I explained a page or so ago. On that day it was raining outside. The police car slid on the wet pavement and they got a little too close to the suspect. However, I don't know how any more distance would have changed anything. Now if you can stomach watching the video again, you will see him pulling out that gun when the officer got out of his car. Yes, that is a threat to a police officer.

There was nothing to be misunderstood about the situation. The police received a call about a male pointing his gun at cars passing by in a park well renown for it's drug activity and yes, prior shootings. In fact, in that neighborhood, evening gunfire is a nightly thing there. The picture the media put out is a picture of him when he was younger; the same that they did to Trayvon Martin. When the paramedics arrived, they called in the patient as a 22 year old black male. He was nearly 6' tall and had a few pounds on him.

Yes there was, First of all, police just shouldn't drive up to anyone like they did, , especially if they are armed. Tactically, that is beyond stupid. You give the perp a chance, give due warning. These cops just drove up there, and presumed they KNEW the situation, and took the life of an innocent kid. You tell me that isn't what happened. I support cops all day long, but this? Incompetence, plain pure and simple.

The grand jury and investigators, who actually looked at the evidence, thought otherwise.

Still a sad situation where a child has a toy that looks everything like a gun. Matter of fact it IS a gun. the way you play the scenario the cops had a death wish. Or worse that perpetrators with guns need to be coddled.

I won't argue, but I know what happened and so do you. Hindsight is 20/20. I would never have drove up to a criminal with a gun, and I would have given them a chance to put it down , and that's what a good cop/person does. Agree?

In Cleveland or any of the other democrat controlled cities I know one thing I would do, not give the criminal with a gun a chance to shoot me. If I drove up on him thinking nothing was wrong and he ended up with his gun in his hand, I am going home to the wife, he might not. Agreed?

That said, I never wanted to be a cop because I wouldn't want to have to make those decisions. When I had to do Shore Patrol in the Navy I always asked not to take a billy club. First of all I doubt I would use it and more than likely someone would take it off me and give me a prostate exam. Nothing thankfully ever happened.

Another time when I was in A school it was during the May Day riots. They thought that the base might come under attack. So they stopped our class and trained us in riot control. We would form up and walk in unison with pick axe handles. We would practice simulated attacks on each other. Me and a guy my size took it easy on each other. One day he wasn't there and I was paired with what I will call a farm boy. He didn't hold back. I thought he was going to break my hands as I blocked his swings.

So I learned. I didn't wait I went on the offensive. As soon as he started to wind up to hit me I was all over him and would knock him back. If not he would have beaten the crap out of me. The instructor did the same thing as we simulated marching. He attacked me and I sprung all of my 160 fully dressed pounds at him and knocked him down.

My point being if you are going to win you can't wait to see what the other guy is going to do. You have to react before he pulls the trigger or swings the bat.

 

[MaryL]

Did you see the video of this event. This KID wasn't hurting anyone, nor could he with a toy gun. A cop rolls up, and shoots him down. I cried when I saw that, I never want to see that video again. The officers should have left space between himself and the perpetrator, secondly, gave warning, at the same time observing and evaluating the situation. Those particular cops didn't do ANY of that. They just drove up and shot the kid. Damn. That was just plain out and out wrong.

Nope, not when somebody is drawing a gun on you. Your second guess could be your life and these cops want to go home after work like everybody else.

"DON'T MOVE" is a warning. When the cops tell you to freeze, you do just that.

We agree to disagree. These cops should have not just drove up next a perp, shout out, then a fraction of a second later, use deadly force. He isn't threatening anyone , and in fact, had a toy gun, the police officer over reacted, misunderstood the situation and took it for granted he could shoot first and ask questions later. In a war, that hyper situational awareness might be apropos, but with civilian law enforcement? Don't think so.

Obviously you didn't read all the posts in this thread, so let me catch you up on some things.

Here is a picture of the toy gun the kid had, and a real gun that the toy was a replica of. Can you tell us which one is the real gun and which one was the toy?


View attachment 73276

And as I explained a page or so ago. On that day it was raining outside. The police car slid on the wet pavement and they got a little too close to the suspect. However, I don't know how any more distance would have changed anything. Now if you can stomach watching the video again, you will see him pulling out that gun when the officer got out of his car. Yes, that is a threat to a police officer.

There was nothing to be misunderstood about the situation. The police received a call about a male pointing his gun at cars passing by in a park well renown for it's drug activity and yes, prior shootings. In fact, in that neighborhood, evening gunfire is a nightly thing there. The picture the media put out is a picture of him when he was younger; the same that they did to Trayvon Martin. When the paramedics arrived, they called in the patient as a 22 year old black male. He was nearly 6' tall and had a few pounds on him.

Yes there was, First of all, police just shouldn't drive up to anyone like they did, , especially if they are armed. Tactically, that is beyond stupid. You give the perp a chance, give due warning. These cops just drove up there, and presumed they KNEW the situation, and took the life of an innocent kid. You tell me that isn't what happened. I support cops all day long, but this? Incompetence, plain pure and simple.

What I would suggest is that you learn some police procedure. You don't have to take a class in it, just turn on the show C.O.P.S. sometime. What you will find (in instances of a person with a firearm) is they do nearly the same thing.

In a potential violent situation, police are trained to promote authority. If you ever watch the show COPS (available on the Spike Network) they scream their commands at their subject. They are not doing so because they assume the suspect has a hearing problem, they do so to show the suspect that they are in charge.

It's not just training either, it's experience as well. The Cleveland police department has plenty of that with people that have firearms. They know what works and what doesn't work. They learned by the lives of fallen police officers what not to do, and what you don't do is wait until the suspect aims at you and ready to fire before you take defensive action.

I read your post. I saw the video, I have seen police use a little more discretion in far worse situations. These boys were rooks and they over reacted. Plain pure and simple. Please, they almost ran over the kid, then they shoot him from their car? Tactically, that is so stupid and there is no defense for that. No warning, they don't give themselves cover? Just drive up and shoot. Inexplicable.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Nope, not when somebody is drawing a gun on you. Your second guess could be your life and these cops want to go home after work like everybody else.

"DON'T MOVE" is a warning. When the cops tell you to freeze, you do just that.

We agree to disagree. These cops should have not just drove up next a perp, shout out, then a fraction of a second later, use deadly force. He isn't threatening anyone , and in fact, had a toy gun, the police officer over reacted, misunderstood the situation and took it for granted he could shoot first and ask questions later. In a war, that hyper situational awareness might be apropos, but with civilian law enforcement? Don't think so.

Obviously you didn't read all the posts in this thread, so let me catch you up on some things.

Here is a picture of the toy gun the kid had, and a real gun that the toy was a replica of. Can you tell us which one is the real gun and which one was the toy?


View attachment 73276

And as I explained a page or so ago. On that day it was raining outside. The police car slid on the wet pavement and they got a little too close to the suspect. However, I don't know how any more distance would have changed anything. Now if you can stomach watching the video again, you will see him pulling out that gun when the officer got out of his car. Yes, that is a threat to a police officer.

There was nothing to be misunderstood about the situation. The police received a call about a male pointing his gun at cars passing by in a park well renown for it's drug activity and yes, prior shootings. In fact, in that neighborhood, evening gunfire is a nightly thing there. The picture the media put out is a picture of him when he was younger; the same that they did to Trayvon Martin. When the paramedics arrived, they called in the patient as a 22 year old black male. He was nearly 6' tall and had a few pounds on him.

Yes there was, First of all, police just shouldn't drive up to anyone like they did, , especially if they are armed. Tactically, that is beyond stupid. You give the perp a chance, give due warning. These cops just drove up there, and presumed they KNEW the situation, and took the life of an innocent kid. You tell me that isn't what happened. I support cops all day long, but this? Incompetence, plain pure and simple.

What I would suggest is that you learn some police procedure. You don't have to take a class in it, just turn on the show C.O.P.S. sometime. What you will find (in instances of a person with a firearm) is they do nearly the same thing.

In a potential violent situation, police are trained to promote authority. If you ever watch the show COPS (available on the Spike Network) they scream their commands at their subject. They are not doing so because they assume the suspect has a hearing problem, they do so to show the suspect that they are in charge.

It's not just training either, it's experience as well. The Cleveland police department has plenty of that with people that have firearms. They know what works and what doesn't work. They learned by the lives of fallen police officers what not to do, and what you don't do is wait until the suspect aims at you and ready to fire before you take defensive action.

I read your post. I saw the video, I have seen police use a little more discretion in far worse situations. These boys were rooks and they over reacted. Plain pure and simple. Please, they almost ran over the kid, then they shoot him from their car? Tactically, that is so stupid and there is no defense for that. No warning, they don't give themselves cover? Just drive up and shoot. Inexplicable.

Well perhaps you didn't read all of my posts, so I reiterate here:

The driving officer was well experienced. Because armed suspects usually run from the police, he strategically placed his police car to block the path of the suspect from running to the rec center where children and families were at. He wanted him to run the other way.

Unfortunately on that day, it was raining and the car slid closer to the suspect than he wanted to. Nevertheless, the police had to play the cards they were dealt.

If police approach a suspect with gun in hand, yes, they do things differently. But if police approach a suspect that doesn't have the weapon in his hands yet, they rush him to stop him from reaching for the weapon. Again, this is how they are trained at the police academy.

 

[leftwinger]

Is the $6mil taxable? Fed & state? If so, I suggest they take it out up front.......as they do for workers ESPP or profit sharings etc.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Is the $6mil taxable? Fed & state? If so, I suggest they take it out up front.......as they do for workers ESPP or profit sharings etc.

From what I heard on the radio, the settlement will be paid 3 million this year and 3 million next. Punitive settlements are usually taxed, but by how much and by whom, I really don't know. But I would love to know what the lawyers cut was.

 

[leftwinger]

30-50% lawyer cut before or after ~50% tax. She gonna riot if only net $300K

 

[leftwinger]

I suppose lawyer cut before tax? Then lawyer deal w/IRS on own?

 

[leftwinger]

Maybe she net $750K year one? Then all the welfare, ACA payback, past tax lien, collections......maybe she end up enuff to move to Dayton? She better run or may not live to next yr check?

 

[ClosedCaption]

The police found themselves not guilty? Well, damn...im so surprised.

What about the fired mental cop? Any culpability there?

If there was no wrong doing again, why did they pay?

For votes? Votes aren't money tho. And if they wanted voted like you claim, I guess finding the officer wrong wasn't a vote getter. No! Paying one family will get more votes lol.

You keep asserting he pulled out his gun. He did not. The officer shot within 2 seconds which means he was already going to shoot when he rolled up. No commands were given, no investigation, no questions just

1...

Blam!

Like I said, everybody is wrong but you. The kid never pulled his gun and only the cops found the officer not guilty of any wrong doing. From the Clinton News Network:

A recent FBI video analysis, the prosecutor said, showed Tamir "was drawing his gun from his waist as the police slid toward him and Officer Loehmann exited the car." After the shooting, officers discovered it was a toy gun.

No indictment in Tamir Rice case - CNN.com

Lol...thanks man, I forgot the prosecutor acted as their defense and didn't allow them to testify under oath and only written statements. Awesome. That's normal /sarcasm


Also, they found no criminal wrongdoing. Key word CRIMINAL. From the same article:Given this perfect storm of human error, mistakes and communications by all involved that day, the evidence did not indicate criminal conduct by police," McGinty said.

Ahhh, so will you finally admit they fucked up since the prosecutor said so now? Or will yiu deny that too? It's cool, your tax bill is going up and yiu defend a mentally ill cop now on desk duty. Key word: mentally ill.

Amazing.

Can you find me a police shooting where nobody found the least thing out of place?

While it wasn't specified what the error was, what we do know is that the dispatcher (now off the job) didn't tell the responding police exactly what the caller said; not that would have changed anything, but she just told the officers of a man with a gun in the park. We also know that the police car slid on the wet grass which could be considered an error.

But would either of these two things justify giving a family 6 million dollars?

Before you start playing the violins again, let me tell you that when a city has to pay a person that kind of loot, it has to come from somewhere, and that somewhere is a cut in services to the entire city: less repaired streets, less police officers or fire personnel perhaps, even a decrease in snow removal which in Cleveland, would be a disaster.

If the police officer broke no laws, then he didn't do anything wrong. Perfect? Again, no. No police shooting is perfect.

You're using the old nothing is perfect defense to avoid addressing they fucked up as the prosecutor said. Why did they pay?

They fucked up like the prosecutor said! So your roads will be fucked, your taxes will go up and you continue to defend the fucked up procedures of the police JUST LIKE THE PROSECUTOR SAID!

 

[ClosedCaption]

Did you see the video of this event. This KID wasn't hurting anyone, nor could he with a toy gun. A cop rolls up, and shoots him down. I cried when I saw that, I never want to see that video again. The officers should have left space between himself and the perpetrator, secondly, gave warning, at the same time observing and evaluating the situation. Those particular cops didn't do ANY of that. They just drove up and shot the kid. Damn. That was just plain out and out wrong.

Nope, not when somebody is drawing a gun on you. Your second guess could be your life and these cops want to go home after work like everybody else.

"DON'T MOVE" is a warning. When the cops tell you to freeze, you do just that.

We agree to disagree. These cops should have not just drove up next a perp, shout out, then a fraction of a second later, use deadly force. He isn't threatening anyone , and in fact, had a toy gun, the police officer over reacted, misunderstood the situation and took it for granted he could shoot first and ask questions later. In a war, that hyper situational awareness might be apropos, but with civilian law enforcement? Don't think so.

Obviously you didn't read all the posts in this thread, so let me catch you up on some things.

Here is a picture of the toy gun the kid had, and a real gun that the toy was a replica of. Can you tell us which one is the real gun and which one was the toy?


View attachment 73276

And as I explained a page or so ago. On that day it was raining outside. The police car slid on the wet pavement and they got a little too close to the suspect. However, I don't know how any more distance would have changed anything. Now if you can stomach watching the video again, you will see him pulling out that gun when the officer got out of his car. Yes, that is a threat to a police officer.

There was nothing to be misunderstood about the situation. The police received a call about a male pointing his gun at cars passing by in a park well renown for it's drug activity and yes, prior shootings. In fact, in that neighborhood, evening gunfire is a nightly thing there. The picture the media put out is a picture of him when he was younger; the same that they did to Trayvon Martin. When the paramedics arrived, they called in the patient as a 22 year old black male. He was nearly 6' tall and had a few pounds on him.

Yes there was, First of all, police just shouldn't drive up to anyone like they did, , especially if they are armed. Tactically, that is beyond stupid. You give the perp a chance, give due warning. These cops just drove up there, and presumed they KNEW the situation, and took the life of an innocent kid. You tell me that isn't what happened. I support cops all day long, but this? Incompetence, plain pure and simple.

What I would suggest is that you learn some police procedure. You don't have to take a class in it, just turn on the show C.O.P.S. sometime. What you will find (in instances of a person with a firearm) is they do nearly the same thing.

In a potential violent situation, police are trained to promote authority. If you ever watch the show COPS (available on the Spike Network) they scream their commands at their subject. They are not doing so because they assume the suspect has a hearing problem, they do so to show the suspect that they are in charge.

It's not just training either, it's experience as well. The Cleveland police department has plenty of that with people that have firearms. They know what works and what doesn't work. They learned by the lives of fallen police officers what not to do, and what you don't do is wait until the suspect aims at you and ready to fire before you take defensive action.

You didn't address one thing she said. She said if they thought he was armed they normally don't roll within feet of them, never give an order and shoots within 2 seconds.

Your response is all about promoting COPS the TV show and top it off with some bullshit about cops dying which is a sad sympathy play.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Nope, not when somebody is drawing a gun on you. Your second guess could be your life and these cops want to go home after work like everybody else.

"DON'T MOVE" is a warning. When the cops tell you to freeze, you do just that.

We agree to disagree. These cops should have not just drove up next a perp, shout out, then a fraction of a second later, use deadly force. He isn't threatening anyone , and in fact, had a toy gun, the police officer over reacted, misunderstood the situation and took it for granted he could shoot first and ask questions later. In a war, that hyper situational awareness might be apropos, but with civilian law enforcement? Don't think so.

Obviously you didn't read all the posts in this thread, so let me catch you up on some things.

Here is a picture of the toy gun the kid had, and a real gun that the toy was a replica of. Can you tell us which one is the real gun and which one was the toy?


View attachment 73276

And as I explained a page or so ago. On that day it was raining outside. The police car slid on the wet pavement and they got a little too close to the suspect. However, I don't know how any more distance would have changed anything. Now if you can stomach watching the video again, you will see him pulling out that gun when the officer got out of his car. Yes, that is a threat to a police officer.

There was nothing to be misunderstood about the situation. The police received a call about a male pointing his gun at cars passing by in a park well renown for it's drug activity and yes, prior shootings. In fact, in that neighborhood, evening gunfire is a nightly thing there. The picture the media put out is a picture of him when he was younger; the same that they did to Trayvon Martin. When the paramedics arrived, they called in the patient as a 22 year old black male. He was nearly 6' tall and had a few pounds on him.

Yes there was, First of all, police just shouldn't drive up to anyone like they did, , especially if they are armed. Tactically, that is beyond stupid. You give the perp a chance, give due warning. These cops just drove up there, and presumed they KNEW the situation, and took the life of an innocent kid. You tell me that isn't what happened. I support cops all day long, but this? Incompetence, plain pure and simple.

What I would suggest is that you learn some police procedure. You don't have to take a class in it, just turn on the show C.O.P.S. sometime. What you will find (in instances of a person with a firearm) is they do nearly the same thing.

In a potential violent situation, police are trained to promote authority. If you ever watch the show COPS (available on the Spike Network) they scream their commands at their subject. They are not doing so because they assume the suspect has a hearing problem, they do so to show the suspect that they are in charge.

It's not just training either, it's experience as well. The Cleveland police department has plenty of that with people that have firearms. They know what works and what doesn't work. They learned by the lives of fallen police officers what not to do, and what you don't do is wait until the suspect aims at you and ready to fire before you take defensive action.

You didn't address one thing she said. She said if they thought he was armed they normally don't roll within feet of them, never give an order and shoots within 2 seconds.

Your response is all about promoting COPS the TV show and top it off with some bullshit about cops dying which is a sad sympathy play.

Sorry about your comprehension problems.

There is no sympathy play in what I wrote. Police do use the situations of fallen officers to develop better strategies to address different situations. When a police officer gets shot, something went wrong, and while it may just be an unfortunate incident, it may also be the way the situation was handled.

I'll ignore your lie about the police never giving Tamir an order as if you know, but I did address her comment about how police approach a suspect with a gun. Suggesting that she watch the show COPS was not meant as some kind of promotion (as if it would benefit me somehow) but to see for herself how police handle suspects with a gun.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Maybe she net $750K year one? Then all the welfare, ACA payback, past tax lien, collections......maybe she end up enuff to move to Dayton? She better run or may not live to next yr check?

I'm sure Dayton would be thrilled about that move. LOL!

 

[ClosedCaption]

We agree to disagree. These cops should have not just drove up next a perp, shout out, then a fraction of a second later, use deadly force. He isn't threatening anyone , and in fact, had a toy gun, the police officer over reacted, misunderstood the situation and took it for granted he could shoot first and ask questions later. In a war, that hyper situational awareness might be apropos, but with civilian law enforcement? Don't think so.

Obviously you didn't read all the posts in this thread, so let me catch you up on some things.

Here is a picture of the toy gun the kid had, and a real gun that the toy was a replica of. Can you tell us which one is the real gun and which one was the toy?


View attachment 73276

And as I explained a page or so ago. On that day it was raining outside. The police car slid on the wet pavement and they got a little too close to the suspect. However, I don't know how any more distance would have changed anything. Now if you can stomach watching the video again, you will see him pulling out that gun when the officer got out of his car. Yes, that is a threat to a police officer.

There was nothing to be misunderstood about the situation. The police received a call about a male pointing his gun at cars passing by in a park well renown for it's drug activity and yes, prior shootings. In fact, in that neighborhood, evening gunfire is a nightly thing there. The picture the media put out is a picture of him when he was younger; the same that they did to Trayvon Martin. When the paramedics arrived, they called in the patient as a 22 year old black male. He was nearly 6' tall and had a few pounds on him.

Yes there was, First of all, police just shouldn't drive up to anyone like they did, , especially if they are armed. Tactically, that is beyond stupid. You give the perp a chance, give due warning. These cops just drove up there, and presumed they KNEW the situation, and took the life of an innocent kid. You tell me that isn't what happened. I support cops all day long, but this? Incompetence, plain pure and simple.

What I would suggest is that you learn some police procedure. You don't have to take a class in it, just turn on the show C.O.P.S. sometime. What you will find (in instances of a person with a firearm) is they do nearly the same thing.

In a potential violent situation, police are trained to promote authority. If you ever watch the show COPS (available on the Spike Network) they scream their commands at their subject. They are not doing so because they assume the suspect has a hearing problem, they do so to show the suspect that they are in charge.

It's not just training either, it's experience as well. The Cleveland police department has plenty of that with people that have firearms. They know what works and what doesn't work. They learned by the lives of fallen police officers what not to do, and what you don't do is wait until the suspect aims at you and ready to fire before you take defensive action.

You didn't address one thing she said. She said if they thought he was armed they normally don't roll within feet of them, never give an order and shoots within 2 seconds.

Your response is all about promoting COPS the TV show and top it off with some bullshit about cops dying which is a sad sympathy play.

Sorry about your comprehension problems.

There is no sympathy play in what I wrote. Police do use the situations of fallen officers to develop better strategies to address different situations. When a police officer gets shot, something went wrong, and while it may just be an unfortunate incident, it may also be the way the situation was handled.

OF FUCKING COURSE THEY DO! That doesn't address what she said.

I'll ignore your lie about the police never giving Tamir an order as if you know, but I did address her comment about how police approach a suspect with a gun.

OF COURSE YOU'LL IGNORE IT, WHY ADDRESS FACTS! And no you didn't, yiu just talked about COPS the TV show and how cops learn from mistakes.

Suggesting that she watch the show COPS was not meant as some kind of promotion (as if it would benefit me somehow) but to see for herself how police handle suspects with a gun.

OMFG!!

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

OF COURSE YOU'LL IGNORE IT, WHY ADDRESS FACTS! And no you didn't, yiu just talked about COPS the TV show and how cops learn from mistakes.

Okay hot shot. Let's see YOUR facts. Let's see what the grand jury, investigators, the public and media didn't see that you did. Where is this fact that police didn't order Tamir to freeze or not reach for his weapon????

 

[francoHFW]

OP- Good. Horrible incompetence, no warning it was a fake.

Yep, the grand jury should have checked with you first.

Ever heard of civil law, dupe? Of course you people are misinformed. 6' 190 lbs my ass.

No, that's 5'7" and 190 lbs.

bs

From the Left-Wing Cleveland Plain Dealer:

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- The Cuyahoga County Medical Examiner released the autopsy of 12-year-old Tamir Rice, shot by a Cleveland police officer Nov. 22.

The report, released Friday, showed Tamir stood 5 feet 7 inches tall and weighed 195 pounds. Tamir's appearance was "consistent with the reported age of 12 years old or older," the report said.

Tamir Rice autopsy shows he was shot once, suffered hemorrhaging before death

thought I deleted that. Fat little idiot.

 

[ClosedCaption]

OF COURSE YOU'LL IGNORE IT, WHY ADDRESS FACTS! And no you didn't, yiu just talked about COPS the TV show and how cops learn from mistakes.

Okay hot shot. Let's see YOUR facts. Let's see what the grand jury, investigators, the public and media didn't see that you did. Where is this fact that police didn't order Tamir to freeze or not reach for his weapon????

How long does it take to say those words? The entire incident was shorter than that.

Pick one:

NO evidence Cleveland officer ordered Tamir Rice to raise ...
www.dailymail.co.uk/.../Boy-pellet-gun-warned-friend-police-...
Daily Mail
Jun 13, 2015 - NO evidence that Cleveland police officer ordered Tamir Rice, 12, .... The friend told sheriff's deputies he had given the airsoft-type gun to him ...
Tamir Rice Case: No Hard Evidence Found That Cop ...
www.nbcnews.com/.../tamir-rice-case-friend-warned-12-y...
NBCNews.com
Jun 13, 2015 - Tamir Rice Case: No Hard Evidence Found That Cop Ordered Boy to Raise ... A friend told deputies he had given the pellet gun to Tamir hours ...
Witnesses did not hear Cleveland police officer order Tamir ...
www.cleveland.com/.../witnesses_did_not_hear_clevela....
The Plain Dealer
Jun 13, 2015 - Witnesses did not hear Cleveland police officer order Tamir Rice to show his ... Police said Loehmann gave the orders from the ajar passenger door of the ... The investigative materials make no determination as to whether the ...
Tamir Rice report: No proof officer warned before shots ...
www.cnn.com/2015/06/13/us/tamir-rice-report/
CNN
Jun 13, 2015 - Tamir Rice report: No proof police officer shouted warning before shooting .... Documents: No clear evidence cop who shot Tamir Rice ordered him to ... The friend told investigators he'd taken the air pistol apart and couldn't ...



Also add, YOU STILL have not addressed one point she brought up. You're trying really hard to defend your higher tax bill there bud

 

[boilermaker55]

So , murdering a 12 yr old with a toy gun is just so ok.
And I stand by my statement, if the police shot your son/daughter in a park and your son/daughter was playing with a toy gun; you would try with all your power to have the officers prosecuted.
And it is quite hypocritical for you to post that you now are backing the government in this instance.

However, laws were broken by the police. We expect you not to understand that too, "the donald" is your man.
You are lying if you were to say, if it was my child holding a toy pistol and he was murdered by the police I would turn the other cheek.
But when the politics and laws benefit your kind it is so right.
Hypocrite.

It's political. You wouldn't understand.

Correct. It is political. Then people can't figure out why Trump is kicking ass in the primaries.

We are sick of political. This is the results.

You don't know what I would say so how can you call anybody a hypocrite?

The police broke laws? What laws did they break? You better write to the prosecutors office and tell him the grand jury F'd up, because they sure didn't see any laws violated by the officers on the scene.

 

[boilermaker55]

Another hypocrite.

You are lying if you were to say, if it was my child holding a toy pistol and he was murdered by the police I would turn the other cheek

First, read the goddam topic. It was NOT a toy. It was a pellet gun. And it was deliberately designed to look like a .45. It was a WEAPON.

Second, I let my kids play with toy guns outside all the time, but I have NEVER allowed them to play with an actual weapon deliberately manufactured to look indistinguishable from a .45.

And gee, what do you know, no one has ever called 9-1-1 while they were playing, and they've never been shot by any cops! And I I ever caught them pointing their toy guns at anyone other than their playmates, that would be the last time they owned that toy and they know it.

Yes, idiot parents. Toy guns should never leave the backyard.

 

[boilermaker55]

It still is not a weapon that has killing power.
I stand by my statement.

You are lying if you were to say, if it was my child holding a toy pistol and he was murdered by the police I would turn the other cheek

First, read the goddam topic. It was NOT a toy. It was a pellet gun. And it was deliberately designed to look like a .45. It was a WEAPON.

Second, I let my kids play with toy guns outside all the time, but I have NEVER allowed them to play with an actual weapon deliberately manufactured to look indistinguishable from a .45.

And gee, what do you know, no one has ever called 9-1-1 while they were playing, and they've never been shot by any cops! And I I ever caught them pointing their toy guns at anyone other than their playmates, that would be the last time they owned that toy and they know it.