Rewarding bad behavior

[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!

 

[NYcarbineer]

It's a thread about justifiable use of force by law enforcement.

It's hilarious and telling that you can't answer the question.

I'll answer the question for you. You believe that killing black kids with BB guns is excellent; you believe that killing white snipers aiming at law enforcement would be a crime.

That about it?

Actually no, it's a thread about the injustice of taxpayers rewarding people who's family members broke the law and paid the unfortunate price.

Which makes it about your hypocrisy because you insist that the kid was justifiably killed but you think the government had no right to shoot that white rightwing sniper.

It's obvious you're hell bent on changing the subject. So I'll just say that IF the feds did shoot Bundy, and his family sued the federal government for millions of dollars, what would you have said then????

Anyone else here agree with RayCleveland that a 12 year old with a BB gun is more dangerous to law enforcement than the sniper in the picture about pointing his high powered rifle at law enforcement?

Sign in please if you agree with Raymond.

We saw the picture of this toy gun, so did you.

Why are you still lying?

Brainwashed bigot...

Is that a yes or a no? RayfromCleveland thinks that sniper was no threat, let alone a deadly threat.

Based on his color and ideology I'm guessing...

 

[ClosedCaption]

Keep picking up the tab. I'm sure you'll pay less in the future by blaming all the shootings on all the dead guys. Have fun paying up.

 

[NYcarbineer]

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!

They could have issued disarmament orders from 50 yards away. Or from farther with amplification.

 

[NYcarbineer]

It is truly hilarious, and very telling, that not RWnut around here is able to look at that picture of a white conservative guy pointing a scoped, high powered rifle at law enforcement and simply say

yes, that is a definite threat and certainly justifies the use of lethal force by the law.

Not one. In the context of this thread and their OTHER opinion,

it is all you need to know.

 

[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!

They could have issued disarmament orders from 50 yards away. Or from farther with amplification.

Sheeit, let's go even more basic than that. They could've issued ANY ORDER. But this Cleveland guy wants you to believe that he feared for his life *wink* and that's why they rolled right next to him. Riiiight.

Why would he fear for his life when he never saw the gun? Oh right, big black kid is the next "reason". White adult sniper? Meh...

 

[SwimExpert]

How many police officers have been killed with the gun he had?

How many people can tell a .45 from a pellet gun being pointed at them from a few feet away, retard?

What magical superpowers did the cop possess which told him this was not a .45 pointing at him and was a weapon which has never been used to kill a cop, retard? Bionic x-ray eyes?

Why are you being so obtuse, retard? You are coming across as a "black people can do no wrong and cops can do no right" kind of retard.

The dumb bitch let her son walk around pointing a weapon at people in the park. A weapon intentionally designed to look like a .45.

The cop shot within 2 seconds. Two seconds. It took you longer to read this than the cop's refer to shoot. Two seconds.

The dumb bitch let her son walk around pointing a weapon at people in the park. A weapon intentionally designed to look like a .45.

The dumb bastard pointed the weapon at people in the park.

The dubastard got up and approached the police with the gun in his hand right up to the moment he was shot.

It was not a toy. It was a pellet gun. A weapon. It was a weapon intentionally designed to look like a .45. There is no way the cop could have known it was NOT a .45.

Dumb ass retards can't get any of this through their willfully stupid skulls.

The cops cannot justify racing up to a few feet of the kid in their car. That made it impossible for them to take the proper action.

Since you know so much about police procedure, tell us why.

Just for the record given your stance on this shooting of the kid,

do you agree or disagree that the feds would have been 100% justified in blowing this guy's brains out?

If you need to know, he's a Bundy gang sniper taking aim at federal agents.

Yes. They would have been 100% justified in blowing his brains out. Tactically, that would have been a horrible idea. Chances are every single law enforcement officer would have died if this person had been shot.

Now that we've cleared that up can we please cease with the false equivalencies?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

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!

They could have issued disarmament orders from 50 yards away. Or from farther with amplification.

Sheeit, let's go even more basic than that. They could've issued ANY ORDER. But this Cleveland guy wants you to believe that he feared for his life *wink* and that's why they rolled right next to him. Riiiight.

Why would he fear for his life when he never saw the gun? Oh right, big black kid is the next "reason". White adult sniper? Meh...

Who said he never seen the gun? Obviously he did which is why he shot.

And again, it was raining out that day. The driver of the police car wanted to block the suspects path to the rec center. It was assumed he was going to run, and they wanted him to run the opposite direction. The car slid and did get closer than they wanted it to. but the police officer driving the car was trying to protect the public and a very well thought out move I believe.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It is truly hilarious, and very telling, that not RWnut around here is able to look at that picture of a white conservative guy pointing a scoped, high powered rifle at law enforcement and simply say

yes, that is a definite threat and certainly justifies the use of lethal force by the law.

Not one. In the context of this thread and their OTHER opinion,

it is all you need to know.

Who said they weren't?

I just don't like people trying to change the subject, so I'm not going to have a lengthy discussion about a situation that has nothing to do with this thread.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

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

 

[Wilbur Right]

Chances are every single law enforcement officer would have died if this person had been shot.

What were those chances you speak of? 1 in 10? 1 in 500? Put a number on it and tell how you got there. Just curious on this.

 

[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.

 

[SwimExpert]

Chances are every single law enforcement officer would have died if this person had been shot.

What were those chances you speak of? 1 in 10? 1 in 500? Put a number on it and tell how you got there. Just curious on this.

No, I'm not going to attempt to satisfy your asinine demands. "Better than not" is more than adequate, and is also painfully obvious to anyone with a functional cerebral cortex.

And how did I get there? Take a look at the fucking picture and apply 9th grade history class for god's sake. The Bundy group has the high ground, plus cover. The law enforcement officers are in the middle of a hole with no cover. It's not rocket science to figure out what would have happened if law enforcement opened fire.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

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.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

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

 

[MaryL]

Living in the Cleveland area, I'm a little upset over the city of Cleveland's settlement of 6 million dollars to the family of Tamir Rice.

Tamir was the 12 year old kid that a Cleveland police officer shot when he pulled out a realistic looking toy gun at the officer. The investigation found no wrong doing by the police and even had a Grand Jury trial for the shooting officer who was found within his rights of self-defense.

So why did a broke city--like Cleveland, make the mother of this kid an instant millionaire?

There is something terribly wrong with our legal system when we reward irresponsible and bad behavior. The claim here is that they gave this taxpayer cash away to avoid a much higher payout.

There shouldn't be any payout. Did the city really fear being held liable for a much larger amount, or is this all politics with fear of not being reelected if they did the right thing by protecting taxpayer money?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/26/us/tamir-rice-family-cleveland-settlement.html?_r=0

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.

 

[Freewill]

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

You'll have a hard time convincing francogoebbels of anything. Perception is reality, damn the facts.

 

[Freewill]

Living in the Cleveland area, I'm a little upset over the city of Cleveland's settlement of 6 million dollars to the family of Tamir Rice.

Tamir was the 12 year old kid that a Cleveland police officer shot when he pulled out a realistic looking toy gun at the officer. The investigation found no wrong doing by the police and even had a Grand Jury trial for the shooting officer who was found within his rights of self-defense.

So why did a broke city--like Cleveland, make the mother of this kid an instant millionaire?

There is something terribly wrong with our legal system when we reward irresponsible and bad behavior. The claim here is that they gave this taxpayer cash away to avoid a much higher payout.

There shouldn't be any payout. Did the city really fear being held liable for a much larger amount, or is this all politics with fear of not being reelected if they did the right thing by protecting taxpayer money?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/26/us/tamir-rice-family-cleveland-settlement.html?_r=0

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.

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.

 

[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.

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

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.

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?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Living in the Cleveland area, I'm a little upset over the city of Cleveland's settlement of 6 million dollars to the family of Tamir Rice.

Tamir was the 12 year old kid that a Cleveland police officer shot when he pulled out a realistic looking toy gun at the officer. The investigation found no wrong doing by the police and even had a Grand Jury trial for the shooting officer who was found within his rights of self-defense.

So why did a broke city--like Cleveland, make the mother of this kid an instant millionaire?

There is something terribly wrong with our legal system when we reward irresponsible and bad behavior. The claim here is that they gave this taxpayer cash away to avoid a much higher payout.

There shouldn't be any payout. Did the city really fear being held liable for a much larger amount, or is this all politics with fear of not being reelected if they did the right thing by protecting taxpayer money?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/26/us/tamir-rice-family-cleveland-settlement.html?_r=0

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.