Should he have been killed?

DamnYankee said:
There's no way to know if the weapon was a pellet gun. It could have been a real gun. If someone points a gun at you in a threatening manner you're a fool not to shoot first. This ain't Hollywood people, this is the real world, and bad shit happens when people do dumb things.
Click to expand...

of course dunghole wants us to believe the police knew the gun was a pellet gun. the ol' hindsight or armchair warrior argument.
 
the issue presented is more than just

should an eighth grader armed with a pellet gun have been shot and killed by police?

the issue is...given the facts, is there anything else the officers could have done instead of killing him. dung would like us to narrow our minds and pretend the police had 'hindsight' before they shot. that is not the issue. hindsight is something that truly is an enigma.
 
DamnYankee said:
There's no way to know if the weapon was a pellet gun. It could have been a real gun. If someone points a gun at you in a threatening manner you're a fool not to shoot first. This ain't Hollywood people, this is the real world, and bad shit happens when people do dumb things.
Click to expand...
the trouble with your supposition is that it's not applied fairly across the board.

If a police officer shoots someone and his defense is 'he feared for his life because he was reaching for his waistband', he gets cleared, whether the person had anything in his waistband or not. If you or I shoot someone because they made a movement for their waistband and it's only a cellphone, we're going to prison.
 
Dungheap said:
So the question presented is "should an eighth grader armed with a pellet gun have been shot and killed by police?"

Um, no.
Click to expand...

How do you expect them to know it is a pellet gun? The gun he used is literally made to look like the real deal.
 
Problem is, these days the cops are trained to put two bullets center-mass. 1 in the leg would have stopped the poor little guy, who clearly had some type of judgement issue, but cops are trained to not use discretion.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
the trouble with your supposition is that it's not applied fairly across the board.

If a police officer shoots someone and his defense is 'he feared for his life because he was reaching for his waistband', he gets cleared, whether the person had anything in his waistband or not. If you or I shoot someone because they made a movement for their waistband and it's only a cellphone, we're going to prison.
Click to expand...

Nobody said anything here about waistbands. This kid was pointing the gun at people, one that was made to look like the real deal. Can you tell me how it would make anybody safer to let people point guns at others until they actually shoot somebody?
 
SmarterThanYou said:
the trouble with your supposition is that it's not applied fairly across the board.

If a police officer shoots someone and his defense is 'he feared for his life because he was reaching for his waistband', he gets cleared, whether the person had anything in his waistband or not. If you or I shoot someone because they made a movement for their waistband and it's only a cellphone, we're going to prison.
Click to expand...

This isn't close to your scenario. The kid had a gun pointed at the cop. From the cop's perspective, it a gun barrel, pointed at him.
 
Return of Dune said:
Problem is, these days the cops are trained to put two bullets center-mass. 1 in the leg would have stopped the poor little guy, who clearly had some type of judgement issue, but cops are trained to not use discretion.
Click to expand...
More Hollywood thinking here. You shoot at the center of mass because it's the largest target and not easily moved out of the way like an arm or a leg. It's a split-second decision-aim-shoot with a relatively inaccurate weapon, not a sniper set-up.

Queue-up Legion with some inane remark about a rifle exploding.
 
DamnYankee said:
This isn't close to your scenario. The kid had a gun pointed at the cop. From the cop's perspective, it a gun barrel, pointed at him.
Click to expand...

I understand that this may be unable to push past your authoritarian statist mindset, but if a cop points a gun at you, whether you've done nothing wrong or not, what do you do? now why is it that WE must be immediately subservient and they do not?
 
SmarterThanYou said:
I understand that this may be unable to push past your authoritarian statist mindset, but if a cop points a gun at you, whether you've done nothing wrong or not, what do you do? now why is it that WE must be immediately subservient and they do not?
Click to expand...

stop painting strawmen.

let us get something clear before we debate the issue:

1. who has authority in this country to control the citizens? don't be flippant, you know what i'm talking about, maintaining control of society.

2. if not our current government, who do YOU recommend.?
 
Supreme Being Yurt said:
stop painting strawmen.

let us get something clear before we debate the issue:

1. who has authority in this country to control the citizens? don't be flippant, you know what i'm talking about, maintaining control of society.

2. if not our current government, who do YOU recommend.?
Click to expand...

your civics class failed you. it's not governments job to control citizens, it's to protect their rights.

our government gave a select few people power to do what they feel necessary to maintain a supposed law and order while at the same time giving them immunity from almost any atrocity they may commit in doing so.

the last I remember, our preamble said 'WE THE PEOPLE' ordain and establish the constitution. not the government created the country.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
your civics class failed you. it's not governments job to control citizens, it's to protect their rights.
Click to expand...

They protect your rights by being willing to stand between you and somebody attacking you. In this case they were called to face a child brandishing a gun in a school. The people who had the gun pointed at them were the victims.

our government gave a select few people power to do what they feel necessary to maintain a supposed law and order while at the same time giving them immunity from almost any atrocity they may commit in doing so.
Click to expand...
Now, had he been pointing a wallet at them, I would agree. (See Amadou Diallo).

the last I remember, our preamble said 'WE THE PEOPLE' ordain and establish the constitution. not the government created the country.
Click to expand...

Which makes it so they too are "the people".

Usually you and I can find some agreement on this topic, but saying that cops have no right to protect themselves from harm when somebody is aiming a weapon at them is preposterous.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
I understand that this may be unable to push past your authoritarian statist mindset, but if a cop points a gun at you, whether you've done nothing wrong or not, what do you do? now why is it that WE must be immediately subservient and they do not?
Click to expand...
I understand that you have a problem with authority, but the fact is that they are trained licensed officers of the law and if they point a gun at you and tell you to shit your pants then you best start shitting.
 
TE=SmarterThanYou;932139]your civics class failed you. it's not governments job to control citizens, it's to protect their rights.
Click to expand...

you're right, except i got an A plus golden star in civics :) . i never said otherwise as to governments. are you suggesting we disband the entire police force in every state and DC?

our government gave a select few people power to do what they feel necessary to maintain a supposed law and order while at the same time giving them immunity from almost any atrocity they may commit in doing so.
Click to expand...

the immunity is atrocious, that doesn't take away from our protection. which you and i both enjoy.

t
he last I remember, our preamble said 'WE THE PEOPLE' ordain and establish the constitution. not the government created the country.
Click to expand...

this phrase and this government issue will continue far after you and i are no longer breathing.

what is society?

what is a rule of law?

what is law?

what is..................
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top