Cleveland cop kills child

to be fair, here is a vid with audio from the call...the caller did say it was probably fake and he also said the kid was pointing it at everyone and scaring the # out of people

www.cnn.com...

originally posted by: Grovit
a reply to: VirusGuard
maybe this...maybe that
your arguments and theories are lame....definitely

That's my point but when the police say anything it's not a maybe but becomes an actual fact with little to no investigation and even in the case were it defies logic.

Tell me just why would a 12 year old kid pull what he knows to be a plastic gun on a cop he knows to be packing the real deal.

Suicide and he wanted to die or the cops are lying and he never went for his gun.

The cop screwed up and need to pay without finding excuses for him or covering up

a reply to: Grovit
it reads

"There's a guy in there with a pistol, you know, it's probably fake, but he's like pointing it at everybody," the caller said, according to audio provided by CNN affiliate WEWS.

That's what boys do with toy guns in a park, they point them at people

Do you know if this gun was one of the Co2 things that shoot with one duel of energy because they well sting or was it just a pure toy gun

originally posted by: VirusGuard


Tell me just why would a 12 year old kid pull what he knows to be a plastic gun on a cop he knows to be packing the real deal.

Suicide and he wanted to die or the cops are lying and he never went for his gun.

The cop screwed up and need to pay without finding excuses for him or covering up

you dont know any of that.....youre guessing and reaching.

i posted this in another thread about this so i will post it here as well.

one of the rules of gun safety is to assume the gun is loaded...correct?

a logical extension of that is to assume the gun a person is going for is real.....

om thinking when youre on the street dealing with crime 40 hours a week, when you come across a weapon you assume its real.

originally posted by: VirusGuard

That's what boys do with toy guns in a park, they point them at people

and this is the end result of that

i was never allowed to take my toy guns to the park...even back in the 80's my parents realized that was not a good idea..
guess his parents didnt feel the same way....

a reply to: VirusGuard

Even the Spring loaded AirSofts sting at a close range, but yea, the CO2 powered ones can pack a hell of a sting. Even put a eye out. (Sorry, I had to go there, but it is true)

I feel bad for everybody involved, but am going to wait until the investigation is completed.

originally posted by: lonesomerimbaud
You guys need to ask yourselves is this acceptable for a society to continue the way things are. You know these incidents will not stop happening unless there is a change.

Is it the police who should change tactics? From the police point of view the only way of minimising risk to officers is to respond the way they do presently. However, it has proved not to be without constant misunderstandings, mistakes and even possible abuse. The balance is tipped in the officer's favour to guarantee him/her a certain level of protection.

It might be tipped a bit too much. Jim Fisher, a former FBI agent, attempted to do what law enforcement and the government has failed to do - compile some rudimentary police shooting statistics.
Police Involved Shooting Statistics: A National One-Year Summary

In 2011, according to data I collected, police officers in the United States shot 1,146 people, killing 607. Between January 1, 2011 and January 1, 2012 I used the Internet to compile a national database of police involved shootings. The term "police involved shooting" pertains to law enforcement officers who, in the line of duty, discharge their guns. When journalists and police administrators use the term, they include the shooting of animals and shots that miss their targets. My case files only include instances in which a person is either killed or wounded by police gunfire. My data also includes off-duty officers who discharged their weapons in law enforcement situations. They don't include, for example, officers using their firearms to resolve personal disputes.
...
The government does maintain records on how many police officers are killed every year in the line of duty. In 2010, 59 officers were shot to death among 122 killed while on the job. This marked a 20 percent jump from 2009 when 49 officers were killed by gunfire. In 2011, 173 officers died, from all causes, in the line of duty. The fact police officers feel they are increasingly under attack from the public may help explain why they are shooting so many citizens.
...
It is perhaps not surprising that more than 95 percent of all police involved shootings were ruled administratively and legally justiified.

I'd like to just copy the whole thing here, but that's not very proper. I encourage members to read this article in its entirety. He goes on to note that most shootings involved a person armed with a handgun, vehicle, or knife; some 50 individuals were armed with air/airsoft/replica guns and a few were unarmed.

Of note, the figures declined dramatically from 2011 to 2012 - down to 48 officers slain. An additional 47 officers died in accidents and one federal officer was killed.

I tend to feel most police shooting incidents I hear about are justified, but some - like this one - seem a bit more outrageous. I am however surprised that there were so many, according to Mr. Fisher.

a reply to: VirusGuard

What's with the endless race baiting? You're injecting race into this based purely on your own beliefs and nothing more. If it were a black/hispanic/Asian officer, what would your answer be then? Or what about a black female officer? Or a black female gay officer? Then what's the go-to "reason" for you?

As sad as the situation may be, from all appearances in the reporting so far, the LEO acted within the law and within policy. No department trains their officers to wait till they've been shot at, or just flat out shot period, before using lethal force. Somebody ignoring verbal commands and reaching for a weapon, especially when the officers involved can SEE the weapon being reached for (as in the person isn't just sticking their hand in a pocket, but is clearly reaching for a weapon) is an imminent threat. You don't have to wait till you're being shot at, and expecting that officers do so is absurd on its face.

The screw up was on the part of the caller for giving poor and mixed information in the first place, on dispatch for not relating all the pertinent information they had. But it's not the fault of the officer, at least not based off what's been reported so far. What you think the law should be or policy should be is immaterial, and impractical. And the race baiting is just completely over the top.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

No, the cop couldn't, as that's not how they're trained. You aim center mass and fire until the threat is neutralized.

If you think, in a high-stress situation with a handgun at [insert number here] yards away, that a non-professional target shooter can do something like "aimed for the kids leg and just injured him," you don't understand defensive shooting at all. The age of a potential shooter is irrelevant--the deadliness of the weapon held by the 12-year-old is.

Hold on a second. You said 'a non pro' but the cop is a 'pro' is he not?? So, yes he should have shot to injure not shot to kill! He knew the kid was around 12 years old and the person on the phone even said that the gun could be a fake toy one, so the cop should have approached more carefully the situation.

originally posted by: TruthxIsxInxThexMist
the person on the phone even said that the gun could be a fake toy one,.

cause people at the bar on the phone are always right huh?

could have been fake means it could have been real too

a reply to: Greven

I have a 5 year old daughter.

If I saw some 12 year old kid pull out what looked to be a BB gun, or a real gun, and point it at my daughter...

I would have shot him too.

BB guns can do damage also...

I don't give a crap what color, race, or nationality this boy was. If the gun didn't have the orange safety tip on it, his parents should have taken it from him. If he purposely took off the safety tip, then he wanted it to look like a real gun.

If he thought he could just blindly point guns (BB or not) at other kids on a playground, he has another thing coming.

I am a father, and if you threaten my little girl, you will pay the consequences.

Sincerely,
Fathers of daughters everywhere....

a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

I absolutely hate the "They should have shot to wound, not kill" argument. Any one who says that has been watching entirely to much Hollywood drivel.

You can shoot a person in the arm or leg and they can bleed out in seconds if an artery is hit. And Arteries are fairly large. Also not a lot of meat on a arm or leg of a 12yr old so even if the shot was taken, who knows where the bullet would have gone next. Other people have been killed in this manner.

This was also a rookie cop so was probably shaking like a leaf when he saw the gun on the kid. Yes, it was an AirSoft, but even up close, most look like the real deal, especially when the orange tip has been removed or painted over.

But I still want to see what the investigation says along with the supposed video.

I do know this. This happened on the East side of town which is violence ridden and it is not uncommon for kids to be arrested in connection to armed robberies and other shootings. That's the culture on that side of town.

Is it so bad in our country now that police officers are afraid of 12 year olds?

originally posted by: onequestion
Is it so bad in our country now that police officers are afraid of 12 year olds?

im thinking the issue was the gun, not the age

some people will never get it

a reply to: Shamrock6

What's with the endless race baiting? You're injecting race into this based purely on your own beliefs and nothing more. If it were a black/hispanic/Asian officer, what would your answer be then? Or what about a black female officer? Or a black female gay officer? Then what's the go-to "reason" for you?

But the numbers speak for themselves and blacks are being murdered and the police keep getting away with it by using one excuse or another and the numbers show that you are five times more likely to be killed by a cop if you are black and most the time it's a white guy pulling the trigger.

How Often are Unarmed Black Men Shot Down By Police?

The blacks are over represented in jails, its not race baiting, It applied maths and the number don't lie.

Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction

I am no left wing liberal and have about as much regards for someone that has never done a days work in their life as you and blacks again are over represented in the particular group and many will even admit themselves.

They don't buy into the American dream that is fast becoming a nightmare for everyone but if we allow the police to keep killing them like vermin without recourse then it's our heads on the blocks next.

Mr whitey is being stocked up to defend his hood from an engineered clash of the races which come from the top and manifests itself in cops killing blacks but it's not the blacks you need to fear but the state itself who seeks to use us to remove un productive slaves that just won't work a 40 hour week to scrape a living even if they could.

Have you read some of the posts on the internet about what Mr Whitey is going to do if these "Apes" come looking for trouble in the wrong part of town because they don't except the decision of our fixed justice system and decide to riot because talking to the police didn't work.

We are being setup for a race war, its a plain as day and I won't have any part in it

if that's race baiting then I am guilty as charged

a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

Uh....no. Cops are not professional shooters. A professional shooter is somebody who earns a paycheck by shooting. A cop doesn't earn his paycheck that way. A cop is trained to shoot center mass, for a variety of reasons ranging from its the biggest target available to it's the target with the least amount of movement.

To your point, I carry a .45. By and large, it doesn't matter where I hit somebody if I were to engage a target, the wound is going to be catastrophic and quite possibly lethal. As the other poster pointed out, your limbs are full of arteries. A person would have just as much chance of bleeding out if I were to hit an arm or leg as they would from a gut shot.

Real world shooting isn't hollywood shooting. LEOs aren't professional shooters. As much as we would all love to be able to spend 40 hours a week, every week, at the range it's not ever going to be a reality. Holding real world LEOs to the standards of LEOs in Die Hard just plain doesn't work.

a reply to: VirusGuard

Throw all the facts out you want, I won't disagree with them. What I will disagree with is you claiming that your statements are not race baiting. You're positing scenarios that as of right now have no basis in any kind of facts. There's no indication of any racial element to the incident, but you insist on painting it in a racist light, up to and including saying you don't know if the cop is KKK and just wanted to try out his new gun. Sorry friend, but that's race baiting.

My point remains: if it were a black female who happens to be a lesbian, what's your reasons behind the shooting then? You want to posit it as white on black race crimes, so I'm going to go the other direction and ask you a simple question: 12 year old black child is killed by black female lesbian rookie officer. Same circumstances as the referenced shooting. What's the root cause then? You've ignored the question once already.

a reply to: Shamrock6

What about holding real world LEOs to the standards of other LEOs?

Go look up what European LEOs do. Iceland had its first fatal police shooting ever this year.

A man who was firing a shotgun in his home has been killed in Iceland in what is believed to be the first time that a person has been shot dead by armed police in the country's history.
...
"The police are deeply saddened by this tragic event and would like to extend their condolences to the family of the individual in question," he added.

Iceland, a country where gun ownership is widespread, has one of the lowest violent crime rates in the world.

European police frequently shoot to wound (e: or more accurately, disable) - and aim at limbs. Perhaps they are just better shooters.

E: example where the man would have been justifiably shot dead in the U.S.

a reply to: Greven

The Iceland shooting has not said anywhere, never has, that the reason this is the first fatal shooting is because its police typically shoot at limbs. The whole point of that shooting is that it's the first fatality of a member of the public the country officially has due to a police shooting. Anything over and above that is speculation on your part I'm afraid.

a reply to: Greven

False. Example: UK and Israeli police are trained to shoot at either the head or legs. Why? Because they're training to shoot around a possible suicide vest. If you think center mass shots are lethal, check out the statistics on head shots.

In the 70s, several euro countries counter-terrorist teams were trained to shoot at limbs because they believed the risk to operators was justifiable because of possible intelligence gleaned from the terrorists. I don't know of a single organization that continues to train officers or operators to shoot arms and legs, other than a scenario where the arm or leg is the only target
available.

Were you to continue your research, you'd see that people European cops encounter are far less likely to be armed than the ones American cops encounter. You'd see that gun crime in general is lower across the board, for myriad reasons. And you'd also find instances where officers were stabbed or shot without ever deploying their sidearm, again for any number of reasons.

No thanks, been blown up already. Don't care to add shot and or stabbed to the list