Black Teen Fatally Shot By Austin Police Was Naked And Unarmed

originally posted by: jjkenobi
I see a lot of questions about the use of force and what not.

I don't see anyone asking why this kid was running around naked and most probably charged/attacked a police officer.

That would be an interesting story I'm sure, but one that I doubt warranted deadly force.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

I'm sorry, none of this excuses lethal force in this situation. If being disarmed by a naked teenager is a worry of the police officer, don't draw your firearm. Like I've said previously, there are plenty of non-lethal methods they could have used to take this kid down.

You do know that there are police officers around the world that aren't allowed to carry firearms correct? I wonder how they manage?

a reply to: Gothmog

And I betcha they're all too happy to use shootings that started out as a traffic stop for a minor traffic violation in their statistics. If one side is going to use tat type of situation, it's only fair for the other side to use it as well.

The Guardian does a pretty good job of keeping track of killings by law enforcement. So good that the Director of the FBI has publicly said that its shameful that a UK newspaper has better data on law enforcement killings in the US than anybody in the US does. If you're oblivious to "these types of reports" then that's your own fault.

One unlawful killing is one too many. One unlawful killing that isn't prosecuted is one too many. But trying to portray it as you having a high likelihood of being offed by a cop while checking your mail is fanciful and ignorant.

originally posted by: eNumbra

I'll wait for toxicology reports before I start assuming someone's on PCP or simply deranged. Police are(should be) trained in numerous ways of taking control of a suspect, with everything in their arsenal, not just shoot anything that moves and settle for a suspension later

No problem, you go stand there and wait for a toxicology report while some bewildered naked men comes charging at you. You can take that gamble for all i care. I already shown in the thread here that this is very typical of a PCP case and how hard it is to take them down and how many people it actually takes. But you go right ahead and wait and stand there and hope that you did not misjudge your own safety and that of the other people this guy was chasing.

Him or you , Either way natural selection will be doing its job if you ask me .

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Black kid shot by black cop. So no racism.

I actually never said anything about racism, however a bunch of anti-pc people getting all offended for no reason have jumped in and accused me of saying as such.

In fact, it was the anti-pc people who introduced that word into the thread. The title of the thread is "black teen...", but that is just the title of the article.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: SlapMonkey


You do know that there are police officers around the world that aren't allowed to carry firearms correct? I wonder how they manage?

That is incorrect. Actually those are split into different types of police. You have the ones with non-lethal weapons and then the ones that do have lethal weapons. So when lets say a cop gets killed on the street they do show up and use lethal force. now you know how they manage.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Black kid shot by black cop. So no racism.

I actually never said anything about racism, however a bunch of anti-pc people getting all offended for no reason have jumped in and accused me of saying as such.

In fact, it was the anti-pc people who introduced that word into the thread. The title of the thread is "black teen...", but that is just the title of the article.

That still does not make you a innocent in sharing such a article with such a headline. I am sure there are versions out there that did not specify his skin color that you could have used.

a reply to: everyone

Or you could just grow some thicker skin and worry about the information I presented instead of taking offense whenever someone's skin color is mentioned. I like that tactic, so I'm going to stick with it.

originally posted by: TorqueyThePig

originally posted by: everyone

originally posted by: RainbowPhoenix
To all those defending the PoPo's rapid use of deadly force I would like to state that from personal experience I know that there are other ways to deal with this, namely strength in numbers.

You see I used to work as a special police officer on the night shift of a gated community and we had this one guy who would come visit his mother in the neighborhood, big big guy too. Sometimes he would be all whacked out on PCP running around terrorizing the neighborhood. This has happened on more than one occasion and not once has anyone had to shoot him.

The proper response is to wait for back up which should not be far off and overwhelm the suspect with numbers until they go down and use multiple cuffs if needed. I know I've been there.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

How do you wait for backup if the guy is already charging you ?

I believe another poster suggested the officer put an innocent pedestrian in between himself and the individual that charged him.

Because that makes sense.

I suppose that would still work for them since they can still blame the cop if that also goes wrong.

originally posted by: everyone

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: SlapMonkey

I'm sorry, none of this excuses lethal force in this situation. If being disarmed by a naked teenager is a worry of the police officer, don't draw your firearm. Like I've said previously, there are plenty of non-lethal methods they could have used to take this kid down.

You do know that there are police officers around the world that aren't allowed to carry firearms correct? I wonder how they manage?

You mean dont carry a firearm at all. whether he held the gun in his hand or had it on his hip the gun is still there for the taking when a officer gets jumped. I dont really know why you suggest that not drawing his gun would solve that potential problem.

Because then some kid wouldn't be dead right now who didn't deserve to be. Damn. We hire police officers to protect us so dammit we need to have certain standards for the actions they use while on the job. If that is too tough for them, we'll get someone else, but excusing sloppy police work that clearly resulted in unnecessary casualties because the kid may have been on drugs is terrible reasoning.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: everyone

Or you could just grow some thicker skin and worry about the information I presented

I did and responded to it directly mutliple times.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Because then some kid wouldn't be dead right now who didn't deserve to be.

How would you know he didnt deserve it ? You point the finger at others for suggesting that it could very well be a dangerous PCP durggie or some bathsalt insanity trip because we dont know it for a fact yet but here you are stating it as a fact that he didnt deserve it suggesting that it is a fact he would not have harmed anyone including the police officer.

a reply to: everyone

I'd rather people got hurt then dead.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: everyone

I'd rather people got hurt then dead.

Aah yeah right i see my mistake now. By not inlcuding the possibility of their potential death in my explanation to you it left it right open for you to try and squeeze through pretending that the people being chased and the cop being charged were not in any danger of being killed, because no one every has been killed withouth a weapon right?

Nicely tried though.

a reply to: everyone

It's a lot harder to kill someone with your fists than with a gun. That's for sure.

Like I said, other police departments around the world have figured out how to police their cities and towns without equipping their police with firearms. Pretending like a gun was ABSOLUTELY necessary in this situation is just foolish.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: everyone

It's a lot harder to kill someone with your fists than with a gun. That's for sure.

Like I said, other police departments around the world have figured out how to police their cities and towns without equipping their police with firearms. Pretending like a gun was ABSOLUTELY necessary in this situation is just foolish.

Yet the end result remains exactly the same.

It is also quit obvious that a person who you have a gun pointed at but still charges at you is not planning on playing a round of twister with you.

a reply to: everyone

So that excuses you shooting at him? Already got the gun out right? Might as well use it. It's attitudes like that that contribute to the contempt for the police that is sweeping the nation.

originally posted by: everyone

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: SlapMonkey


You do know that there are police officers around the world that aren't allowed to carry firearms correct? I wonder how they manage?

That is incorrect. Actually those are split into different types of police. You have the ones with non-lethal weapons and then the ones that do have lethal weapons. So when lets say a cop gets killed on the street they do show up and use lethal force. now you know how they manage.

I will just quote my own previous post to respond to your latest edit.

a reply to: everyone

So this officer was obviously a first responder. First responders, I imagine, aren't the group that is armed.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: everyone

So that excuses you shooting at him? Already got the gun out right? Might as well use it. It's attitudes like that that contribute to the contempt for the police that is sweeping the nation.

Why are you putting words into my mouth? Sounds like a weak position to me if you need to resort to that. It seems quit clear what i said. Someone who you have a gun pointed at but still decides to charge at you does not have any good intentions planned for you. Let that be a simple fact that we can all deduce from this situation.