Tamir Rice case (12yo boy shot while carrying BB gun) - FULL VID RELEASED on 01/08/15

[Colicat]

i think this is a fukked up situation, but i dont see it as an example of police brutality

There were no people around. Assuming the gun was real, the "suspect" was only a threat to himself.

If you are a police officer approaching an "emotionally disturbed" individual who is a threat to their own safety, you would attempt to run them over with your police vehicle?

The officers heard "black male" and automatically deemed him a threat. This threat, in their mind, warranted him being shot within two seconds upon arrival.

This is excessive force. This IS brutal treatment of a minor. This IS brutal treatment of a human being. This IS police brutality.

 

[theworldismine13]

There were no people around. Assuming the gun was real, the "suspect" was only a threat to himself.

If you are a police officer approaching an "emotionally disturbed" individual who is a threat to their own safety, you would attempt to run them over with your police vehicle?

The officers heard "black male" and automatically deemed him a threat. This threat, in their mind, warranted him being shot within two seconds upon arrival.

This is excessive force. This IS brutal treatment of a minor. This IS brutal treatment of a human being. This IS police brutality.

that could be true that they simply saw a black man, or it could not, the other side is just as plausible, and i would say its more plausible
there is nothing in the video that excludes other explanations

the suspect was not a threat to himself? how do you figure that? he was pointing the gun at people and scaring the shyt out of them

the kid was sitting down when the cop car was approaching, for them to run him over they would have to run over the benches, what video did you see? the fact that he was sitting down is probably why they did approach him directly, and the issue is the kid approached the cops, i think that is where it becomes plausible for it to not be police brutality

i dont think the kid knew what he was doing, but the second when he approached the cop car he stepped into a danger zone that made other explanations possible aside from racism or police brutality

 

[88m3]

There were no people around. Assuming the gun was real, the "suspect" was only a threat to himself.

If you are a police officer approaching an "emotionally disturbed" individual who is a threat to their own safety, you would attempt to run them over with your police vehicle?

The officers heard "black male" and automatically deemed him a threat. This threat, in their mind, warranted him being shot within two seconds upon arrival.

This is excessive force. This IS brutal treatment of a minor. This IS brutal treatment of a human being. This IS police brutality.

I think you're right @Colicat

 

[Colicat]

that could be true that they simply saw a black man, or it could not, the other side is just as plausible, and i would say its more plausible
there is nothing in the video that excludes other explanations

the suspect was not a threat to himself? how do you figure that? he was pointing the gun at people and scaring the shyt out of them

the kid was sitting down when the cop car was approaching, for them to run him over they would have to run over the benches, what video did you see? the fact that he was sitting down is probably why they did approach him directly, and the issue is the kid approached the cops, i think that is where it becomes plausible for it to not be police brutality

i dont think the kid knew what he was doing, but the second when he approached the cop car he stepped into a danger zone that made other explanations possible aside from racism or police brutality

To the bolded: reread my statement.

Upon the officer's arrival, there was no one in the vicinity of the child. Upon their arrival, the boy was not "scaring the shyt out of " anyone. Tamir was not in the progress of committing any crime. Why was the response to a citizen (who could have had an open carry permit) to ambush the scene.
Why was the rationale not: "well maybe he has a permitted gun and we need to check and make sure he is not menacing anyone here."
Why was the rationale: "Let me ambush you, yell stop put your hands up, stop put your hands up, stop put your hands up, in a matter of seconds then shoot.?"

I'll tell you why. The kid was Black. Black people, men especially, don't get the benefit of doubt. We don't get a chance to comply. We don't have the luxury of not being shot on site.

That's that privilege at work. But let's blame it on a rookie mistake. Sounds about right.

 

[theworldismine13]

To the bolded: reread my statement.

Upon the officer's arrival, there was no one in the vicinity of the child. Upon their arrival, the boy was not "scaring the shyt out of " anyone. Tamir was not in the progress of committing any crime. Why was the response to a citizen (who could have had an open carry permit) to ambush the scene.
Why was the rationale not: "well maybe he has a permitted gun and we need to check and make sure he is not menacing anyone here."
Why was the rationale: "Let me ambush you, yell stop put your hands up, stop put your hands up, stop put your hands up, in a matter of seconds then shoot.?"

I'll tell you why. The kid was Black. Black people, men especially, don't get the benefit of doubt. We don't get a chance to comply. We don't have the luxury of not being shot on site.

That's that privilege at work. But let's blame it on a rookie mistake. Sounds about right.

The rationale was that he was waving guns at people and he had committed a crime and that he was a danger

There is nothing in that video that suggests he wasn't a danger to people

It's very much possible that racism was involved but the critical point that makes other explanations plausible is that the kid approached the vehicle

 

[Colicat]

The rationale was that he was waving guns at people and he had committed a crime and that he was danger

There is nothing in that video that suggests he wasn't a danger to people

It's very much possible that racism was involved but the critical point that makes other explanations plausible as that the kid approached the vehicle

The police ambushed the child. The child was frightened and gave a fight or flight response. He was a child. His reaction was understandably illogical. The police were called to the scene to investigate a menacing complaint. No one was around at the time. He wasn't in the progress of menacing anyone. The only person around was Tamir. What justified the type of response given by the police? Even if there was a report of a gun, Ohio is an open carry state. He could have been permitted to carry. The police did not witness any crime in progress. Why the hell did "rational," trained adults escalate a docile situation into a hostile one?

Why?... Because he was a Black male....

 

[无名的]

The police ambushed the child. The child was frightened and gave a fight or flight response. He was a child. His reaction was understandably illogical. The police were called to the scene to investigate a menacing complaint. No one was around at the time. He wasn't in the progress of menacing anyone. The only person around was Tamir. What justified the type of response given by the police? Even if there was a report of a gun, Ohio is an open carry state. He could have been permitted to carry. The police did not witness any crime in progress. Why the hell did "rational," trained adults escalate a docile situation into a hostile one?

Why?... Because he was a Black male....

Minimum age to open carry in Ohio is 18.



fukking delusional.

 

[Colicat]

Minimum age to open carry in Ohio is 18.



fukking delusional.

Are you implying that the officers knew it was a minor?

.... They didn't know because they didn't pause to question Tamir. They shot 1st, investigated second.

fukking idiot...

 

[无名的]

Are you implying that the officers knew it was a minor?

.... They didn't know because they didn't pause to question Tamir. They shot 1st, investigated second.

fukking idiot...

Oh... so wait... the caller tells 911 the gun is probably a fake... and the cops are supposed to believe that... but the caller says he's a juvenile... and the cops aren't supposed to believe that.

 

[tmonster]

the rugged individualist narrative will be the end of society

 

[tmonster]

Oh... so wait... the caller tells 911 the gun is probably a fake... and the cops are supposed to believe that... but the caller says he's a juvenile... and the cops aren't supposed to believe that.

you can't have it both ways either

 

[Colicat]

Oh... so wait... the caller tells 911 the gun is probably a fake... and the cops are supposed to believe that... but the caller says he's a juvenile... and the cops aren't supposed to believe that.

The 911 operator didn't relay that the gun was possibly fake, nor did she indicate that it could have been a minor.... go over the reports and try again.

911 operator to the police:
"In the park by the youth center, there's a black male sitting on the swings. He's wearing a camouflage hat, a gray jacket with black sleeves. He keeps pulling a gun out of his pants and pointing it at people,"

The police should have investigated the scene instead of escalating a non-threatening situation.

 

[theworldismine13]

The police ambushed the child. The child was frightened and gave a fight or flight response. He was a child. His reaction was understandably illogical. The police were called to the scene to investigate a menacing complaint. No one was around at the time. He wasn't in the progress of menacing anyone. The only person around was Tamir. What justified the type of response given by the police? Even if there was a report of a gun, Ohio is an open carry state. He could have been permitted to carry. The police did not witness any crime in progress. Why the hell did "rational," trained adults escalate a docile situation into a hostile one?

Why?... Because he was a Black male....

I don't doubt that the kid had no idea about what he was doing

But the reports is what justified the response, witnesses had reported a crime being committed, and the person that was committing the crime was armed, as far as the cops knew he was armed even if he was alone and the child was not acting like a child

There was nothing docile about that situation

From the cops point of view they were being approached by an armed person

 

[theworldismine13]

The 911 operator didn't relay that the gun was possibly fake, nor did she indicate that it could have been a minor.... go over the reports and try again.

The police should have investigated the scene instead of escalating a non-threatening situation.

Why do you say it's a non threatening situation

How is waving and pointing a gun non threatening?

 

[Colicat]

I don't doubt that the kid had no idea about what he was doing

But the reports is what justified the response, witnesses had reported a crime being committed, and the person that was committing the crime was armed, as far as the cops knew he was armed even if he was alone and the child was not acting like a child

There was nothing docile about that situation

From the cops point of view they were being approached by an armed person

Here is where we differ. The scene was not out of control.
The cops were not approached. They approached, rather ambushed, Tamir. An armed individual by themselves in a public park in Ohio should not have warranted that ambush. Whether there are reports of menacing or not. The initial response was overkill. Ohio is an open carry state. For all the police know, Tamir could have been a permitted gun owner.

But he didn't get that benefit of the doubt. Why?