Chicago cops murder 13 year old point blank

[Hmbre97 6326]

How would stricter gun control prevented that kid from carrying? It's not as if he didn't know he was too young to legally carry a handgun.

Maybe we should address the socioeconomic issues that led to him having a gun in the first place? Addressing the root cause of the issue seems like a novel approach. I'm interested to hear why you think he had a gun?

[immortal13 4059]

Just now, Hmbre97 said:

32 minutes ago, immortal13 said:

How would stricter gun control prevented that kid from carrying? It's not as if he didn't know he was too young to legally carry a handgun.

Maybe we should address the socioeconomic issues that led to him having a gun in the first place? Addressing the root cause of the issue seems like a novel approach. I'm interested to hear why you think he had a gun?

I don't know why he had a gun. Why don't you tell me?

[Hmbre97 6326]

I don't know why he had a gun. Why don't you tell me?

You don't have any ideas at all?

[ztejas 43524]

6 minutes ago, immortal13 said:

Oh I took no offense, man. Just had that question pop into my head when I read your post. Would any type of new control legislation have prevented this kid from packing that gun around and hence prevented this tragic incident? 

And yes it's essentially a rhetorical question because we all already know the answer. 

I don't think we do know the answer. Let's not pretend like this kid is buying that firearm legally. He isn't. There's a lack of control that leads to individuals like him possessing firearms in areas that are already unstable and at risk for these types of incidents. 

What is the legislation that should be enacted? I'm not sure. But the proliferation of firearms and consequent firearm related deaths in America is insane. And it's been insane for decades. 

Is private firearm ownership the root cause? Maybe - but I sure hope not. I guess that I think that as a society we can protect 2nd amendment rights without sacrificing reasonable gun safety. But maybe that's too much of an ask. 

[DalTxHornFan 3109]

Sad story.  I'm pretty sure that my parents would have objected to my 13 year old self from hanging out with 19 year old gang bangers, but that's just me and my old nostalgic self.

[ChiTownDoc 21154]

7 minutes ago, DalTxHornFan said:

Sad story.  I'm pretty sure that my parents would have objected to my 13 year old self from hanging out with 19 year old gang bangers, but that's just me and my old nostalgic self.

Lol.  You listened to your parents?  God damn, if every kid listened when their parents ‘objected’.  Imagine if they strenuously objected?  Lol

 

STFU

[DalTxHornFan 3109]

1 minute ago, ChiTownDoc said:

Lol.  You listened to your parents?  God damn, if every kid listened when their parents ‘objected’.  Imagine if they strenuously objected?  Lol

 

STFU

Seriously?  The 19 year old had the live gun.  It was his gun that got the kid killed.  IMHO, there is no objective way to say that LEO did anything wrong in this situation.  

[goatsaag 279]

5 minutes ago, DalTxHornFan said:

Seriously?  The 19 year old had the live gun.  It was his gun that got the kid killed.  IMHO, there is no objective way to say that LEO did anything wrong in this situation.  

The kid followed the cop's exact instructions and the cop still shot him. Objectively, that means the cop absolutely fucked up somewhere in that process.

[DigglerontheHoof 21208]

Every one of you cunts taking up for this piece of shit cop can DIAF.  Fuck cops; every goddamned one of them.  Cunts. 

[wildcat09 29360]

9 hours ago, tchookem said:

9 hours ago, Parliament said:

Cop made a huge mistake of course, but I don't see a crime here.

I'm not sure how making a mistake that ends a person's life isn't a crime. I understand arguing degrees of crime, but if you end a person's life and it isn't self defense... it's a crime.

This should be blindingly fucking obvious to anyone who isn’t a complete bootlicker. Nobody else gets a free pass to kill people so long as they say “ooopsy, I screwed up!”

[troph 24896]

The kid could have shot someone dead in the street, but the moment he did what the police asked him to do he should be arrested and jailed not executed in the street. The question isn’t what did the kid do to deserve being killed, any questions to be answered about the kid’s culpability should be reserved for the jury not an executioner before a trial.
 

Your kid may not hang with gang bangers but that’s as much to do with the fact gang bangers are no where to be found around your kids as much as it has to do with your parenting. 
 

if your son was pulled over by the police and had a bag of weed or drank too much and was underage with expired registration and he was shot and killed you wouldn’t agree his culpability had nothing to do with the right to execute him.  Why it’s any different for a child of color is beyond me.

Fuck all of this and fuck white people who explain why this kid doesn’t have a right to a trial by jury when he does what the police ask of him when he’s confronted.  That’s pure racism. It’s the fucking definition of racism. 
 

god dammit people. 

[Herbie Hancock 7369]

Anybody in here know who the Chicago police chief is

[Enchubben 5510]

22 minutes ago, troph said:

Fuck all of this and fuck white people who explain why this kid doesn’t have a right to a trial by jury when he does what the police ask of him when he’s confronted.  That’s pure racism. It’s the fucking definition of racism. 

god dammit people. 

I don’t think I’ve seen this posted anywhere fwiw. 

It’s just a tragic accident where there is fault on both sides, suspect and cop. Unfortunately when two people have a confrontation, both with weapons, sometimes one person walks away.

Also, from the longer video you can tell this cop tried to do everything he could to help. This isn’t something the cop wanted to live with, for certain. 

[Captainant 27694]

3 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

Also, from the longer video you can tell this cop tried to do everything he could to help. This isn’t something the cop wanted to live with, for certain. 

TIL shooting someone with their hands up is helping?

[troph 24896]

11 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

I don’t think I’ve seen this posted anywhere fwiw. 

It’s just a tragic accident where there is fault on both sides, suspect and cop. Unfortunately when two people have a confrontation, both with weapons, sometimes one person walks away.

Also, from the longer video you can tell this cop tried to do everything he could to help. This isn’t something the cop wanted to live with, for certain. 

You just did what I said. The moment he complies he has a right to be sure he won’t be killed. Full stop. There is nothing else to say and not a single fact in the universe of scenarios that would change this. It’s an unwavering principle of the rule of law.  Hands up, comply with police orders, you get arrested not executed.

[Enchubben 5510]

16 minutes ago, Captainant said:

TIL shooting someone with their hands up is helping?

Should have clarified. After the shooting. 

[Enchubben 5510]

8 minutes ago, troph said:

You just did what I said. The moment he complies he has a right to be sure he won’t be killed. Full stop. There is nothing else to say and not a single fact in the universe of scenarios that would change this. It’s an unwavering principle of the rule of law.  Hands up, comply with police orders, you get arrested not executed.

No it’s not what I said. He shouldn’t have been shot - I agree. Based on what I’ve seen so far it doesn’t look like the officer chased him with the intent of killing him for whatever happened prior to the chase. It was a result of him thinking he had a gun and was turning to shoot not putting his hands up and complying.

No one is claiming the kid got a fair deal because he’s guilty of something else. But sometimes you get dealt a shitty hand when you put yourself in a bad position like running from a cop with a gun.  Cop should be held accountable for the kids death. 

[RPM 26329]

10 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

I couldn't watch it .

I did and it wasn't hard. He was a little assassin that held on to the gun too long. Clean shoot. This is on the parents, not the police.

[Dahobbs 17627]

9 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

What?  The only people that can even start that thread don't think there's an issue.

Is there a reason you can't start that thread? And I don't think anybody doesn't think there is an issue. 

[troph 24896]

1 hour ago, Enchubben said:

No it’s not what I said. He shouldn’t have been shot - I agree.

.....

Cop should be held accountable for the kids death. 

This is all that matters here. 

[Huckleberry 33045]

1 hour ago, RPM said:

I did and it wasn't hard. He was a little assassin that held on to the gun too long. Clean shoot. This is on the parents, not the police.

You don't seem like you actually watched it. Please explain how this sequence of events means the police bear no responsibility.

"Freeze!"

***freezes***

"Turn around and show me your hands!"

***turns around and begins raising his empty hands to show them to the police***

***follows the police instructions to the letter***

***gets shot before his hands are all the way up***

***dies***

Let's be perfectly clear about something, the officer who gave the instructions screwed up very badly. It was one of the dumbest things he could have possibly done and contributed to the death because his instructions directly created the situation where he felt he had to shoot. It's not that hard to figure out, just run a simple thought exercise. In what scenario would his instructions not have resulted in a death? I can't think of any.

1. Kid drops gun before turning around. This actually happened. Kid is dead.
2. Kid freezes, doesn't drop gun before following instruction. In this scenario the kid would have turned around and faced the officers with a gun in his hand. He would have been shot dead.
3. Kid isn't just trying to be cool with a gun but actually wants to shoot someone. In this scenario the officer is instructing the person to do exactly what he would have to do in order to shoot the police officers. He gets shot dead and possibly shoots an officer in the process.
4. Kid disobeys instructions and starts running away again. This is the only scenario in which he possibly survives, although I think that's very unlikely. That shot was so quick that any sudden movement would have gotten the kid shot.

There are only two possibilities for why that instruction was given. Either that officer was incredibly stupid and gave a terrible instruction that guaranteed someone was going to die or else the officer was incredibly smart and intentionally gave an instruction that guaranteed someone was going to die. What the officer did when giving that instruction was either incredibly dumb or incredibly evil. There are no other possibilities. He created a situation where the only chance the person receiving his instructions had to survive was to disobey them.

Edited April 16, 2021 by Huckleberry

[Enchubben 5510]

4 minutes ago, troph said:

This is all that matters here. 

Yes. Thats why I took issue with you starting the whole racism discussion  with an argument that was a made by exactly no one in regards to an issue that has nothing to do with racism.

[RPM 26329]

On 4/16/2021 at 9:00 AM, Huckleberry said:

You don't seem like you actually watched it. Please explain how this sequence of events means the police bear no responsibility.

"Freeze!"

***freezes***

"Turn around and show me your hands!"

***turns around and begins raising his empty hands to show them to the police***

***follows the police instructions to the letter***

***gets shot before his hands are all the way up***

***dies***

Let's be perfectly clear about something, the officer who gave the instructions screwed up very badly. It was one of the dumbest things he could have possibly done and contributed to the death because his instructions directly created the situation where he felt he had to shoot. It's not that hard to figure out, just run a simple thought exercise. In what scenario would his instructions not have resulted in a death? I can't think of any.

1. Kid drops gun before turning around. This actually happened. Kid is dead.
2. Kid freezes, doesn't drop gun before following instruction. In this scenario the kid would have turned around and faced the officers with a gun in his hand. He would have been shot dead.
3. Kid isn't just trying to be cool with a gun but actually wants to shoot someone. In this scenario the officer is instructing the person to do exactly what he would have to do in order to shoot the police officers. He gets shot dead and possibly shoots an officer in the process.

There are only two possibilities for why that instruction was given. Either that officer was incredibly stupid and gave a terrible instruction that guaranteed someone was going to die or else the officer was incredibly smart and intentionally gave an instruction that guaranteed someone was going to die. What the officer did when giving that instruction was either incredibly dumb or incredibly evil. There are not other possibilities.

Kid fires 8 rounds, police pursue and gun is clearly visible in his hand. They order order him to stop, he complies but ditches the weapon behind his back out of sight of the police. There was .8 seconds between the gun being visible and his rapid arm movement from behind his back. Literally a split-second decision. Kid should have dropped the gun during the chase, froze or just maybe not have one to begin with. I have no problems with this shoot and I'm not a cop fanboi.

Edited April 18, 2021 by RPM

[Huckleberry 33045]

2 minutes ago, RPM said:

Kid fires 8 rounds, police pursue and gun is clearly visible in his hand. They order order him to stop, he complies but ditches the weapon behind his back out of sight of the police. There was .08 seconds between the gun being visible and his rapid arm movement from behind his back. Literally a split-second decision. Kid should have dropped the gun during the chase, froze or just maybe not have one to begin with. I have no problems with this shoot and I'm not a cop fanboi.

The kid didn't fire any rounds. You have no idea what you're talking about and should start over.

And you completely ignored the part where the arm movement (which wasn't rapid) was specifically commanded by the officer.

[RPM 26329]

1 minute ago, Huckleberry said:

And you completely ignored the part where the arm movement (which wasn't rapid) was specifically commanded by the officer.

I watched the video and ignored nothing. Darwin won.

Edited April 16, 2021 by RPM

[B00M 6431]

1 hour ago, RPM said:

I did and it wasn't hard. He was a little assassin that held on to the gun too long. Clean shoot. This is on the parents, not the police.

Is clean shoot some meme I'm unaware of? 

Is this kid even a person of color? I don't see how race is a factor in this case. The cops orders were incredibly dumb, the kid complied (too quickly I guess!), the cop over reacted and needs to face consequences. His mistake was perhaps due to insufficient training. Maybe his chief should go without pay for a bit too.

I'm just tired of all these videos of cops proactively defending themselves. There's got to be a reasonable way to address that.

 

 

[52-80 19207]

This is all due to the corrupt Chicago PD and if Chicago had no police everything would be better

[BabaYaga 15302]

9 hours ago, immortal13 said:

How would stricter gun control prevented that kid from carrying? It's not as if he didn't know he was too young to legally carry a handgun.

He had a gun because he belonged to a Latin Street Gang - the Latin Kings.  That also doesn't mean he should have been killed either.  

[RPM 26329]

Just now, B00M said:

Is clean shoot some meme I'm unaware of? 

You know classic SNL bits but have no idea what "a clean shoot" means?

[Armybrat 40858]

10 hours ago, Helobious said:

Don’t pretend like you actually care about that. Nobody does.

I think that issue is a major factor in why these cops react like they do - they are scared.

[BabaYaga 15302]

4 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

I think that issue is a major factor in why these cops react like they do - they are scared.

The cop knew he had a gun.

While the kid was running, he wasn't turning and firing. Cop can not and should not shoot at that point.

Suddenly, the kid stops, tosses something behind the fence, turns toward the officer and brings his hands up.

Officer had a fraction of a second, in a dark alley, to decide if the kid still had the gun, and whether he was raising his hands to fire, or raising his hands to surrender.

He guessed wrong.

[Pato del Muerto 52538]

10 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

What?  The only people that can even start that thread don't think there's an issue.

The answer to that is to take guns away. Who do you suppose is going to be on each side of that, and what are the odds of even limited success in either legislation or execution?

 

[Huckleberry 33045]

1 minute ago, BabaYaga said:

The cop knew he had a gun.

While the kid was running, he wasn't turning and firing. Cop can not and should not shoot at that point.

Suddenly, the kid stops, tosses something behind the fence, turns toward the officer and brings his hands up.

Officer had a fraction of a second, in a dark alley, to decide if the kid still had the gun, and whether he was raising his hands to fire, or raising his hands to surrender.

He guessed wrong.

Look, another poster who's ignoring the fact that the kid turned toward the officer and brought his hands up because that's what the officer told him to do.

Any opinion on that aspect of the situation?

[Johnny Sack 8397]

His dad must have been out of town on business.

[MonkeyDoughnut 10335]

5 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Look, another poster who's ignoring the fact that the kid turned toward the officer and brought his hands up because that's what the officer told him to do.

Any opinion on that aspect of the situation?

Guessing the officer should have stated MORE specifically = "turn around slowly with your hands already up" to avoid what happened with the kid turning around quickly showing the officer the gun in his right hand right before he turned round while raising his hands up towards the officer and giving the officer less than 1 second to determine if the gun holding kid was going to shoot at him

Edited April 16, 2021 by MonkeyDoughnut
grammar

[fattyflattie 4638]

5 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

what are the odds of even limited success in either legislation

Legislation, pretty good chance. 
 

5 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

execution

Lol. 
 

There are plenty of cities that allow guns but don’t have rampant gun violence like Chicago. So why is the answer to take guns away? 

[BabaYaga 15302]

1 minute ago, Huckleberry said:

Look, another poster who's ignoring the fact that the kid turned toward the officer and brought his hands up because that's what the officer told him to do.

Any opinion on that aspect of the situation?

As stated, he chose wrong - not a righteous shooting, but you can see the obscured arm behind the fence from the video.  Curious if a GSR swab will produce any prior shots fired by the child and the proximity of spent shells to the site.  

After the officer's commands, the kid, with his back to the officer, makes two furtive turns to his left. In one frame the gun is in his right hand. He then tosses it behind the fence and continues turning to his left to face the officer while bringing his hands up. As his hands come up about chest level the officer fires a shot. In that freeze frame the kid's hands are empty.

So yes technically the kid turned around and put his hands up. Unfortunately he started that with a gun visible in his hand. You'd have to have the reaction time of a computer or willing to get shot to determine the kid went from armed to unarmed in half a second. Tragic all around.  

 

 

 

[BabaYaga 15302]

In a fraction of a second things went from here:  gun....to no gun.

Jesus, a trained SMU operator would have a hard time making the proper call here.  

[Aqua Buddha 14599]

He didn't "drop" the gun.  He tried to hide the gun behind a fence.

[SimonBolivar 10958]

1 hour ago, RPM said:

I did and it wasn't hard. He was a little assassin that held on to the gun too long. Clean shoot. This is on the parents, not the police.

Its on the parents, the kid, and the cop. Life doesn't have to be and often isn't black and white. 

 

[Pato del Muerto 52538]

10 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Legislation, pretty good chance. 
 

Lol. 
 

There are plenty of cities that allow guns but don’t have rampant gun violence like Chicago. So why is the answer to take guns away? 

Which cities?  Per capita stats please. 
 

if you want to reduce gun violence, making guns illegal won’t do it. The people that commit gun violence will have little issues getting guns illegally. So the only next step would be to make them unavailable by taking them all, including yours and mine. And that...won’t be happening.

i guess you could make everyone well off financially and stable emotionally and that would also reduce gun violence.  So sure let’s try that. 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

2 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

He didn't "drop" the gun.  He tried to hide the gun behind a fence.

This is a good point.  Had he dropped the gun on the ground in view of the cop instead of trying to hide it, much less likely the cop pulls the trigger.

[RPM 26329]

Just now, SimonBolivar said:

Its on the parents, the kid, and the cop. Life doesn't have to be and often isn't black and white. 

 

If the first two would have acted responsibly, the third would never been involved.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

2 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Which cities?  Per capita stats please. 
 

if you want to reduce gun violence, making guns illegal won’t do it. The people that commit gun violence will have little issues getting guns illegally. So the only next step would be to make them unavailable by taking them all, including yours and mine. And that...won’t be happening.

i guess you could make everyone well off financially and stable emotionally and that would also reduce gun violence.  So sure let’s try that. 

You want to really make a dent on gun violence?  End the stupid war on drugs.  Legalize all drugs.  Spend the money treating addicts.  Release all nonviolent offenders, clear their records, and restore their civil rights.  With all that extra prison space, warehouse violent criminals for long sentences.  And any dickhead that commits a violent crime with a gun, guarantee them multi decade sentences without parole.  So when they get out they are like Red and too old to be much of a threat.

Banning bump stocks and suppressors doesn't do shit.  Banning scary black rifles won't do shit -- maybe 1% of gun murders are committed with scary black rifles. What I propose would do shit.  It would stop a lot of the violence, cost less and make society much safer for the average citizen and for citizens living in inner city war zones.

[Pato del Muerto 52538]

Just now, Johnny Sack said:

You want to really make a dent on gun violence?  End the stupid war on drugs.  Legalize all drugs.  Spend the money treating addicts.  Release all nonviolent offenders, clear their records, and restore their civil rights.  With all that extra prison space, warehouse violent criminals for long sentences.  And any dickhead that commits a violent crime with a gun, guarantee them multi decade sentences without parole.  So when they get out they are like Red and too old to be much of a threat.

Banning bump stocks and suppressors doesn't do shit.  Banning scary black rifles won't do shit -- maybe 1% of gun murders are committed with scary black rifles. What I propose would do shit.  It would stop a lot of the violence, cost less and make society much safer for the average citizen and for citizens living in inner city war zones.

I’m happy to support that

[High Plains Drifter 11050]

10 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

Personally, I’d love it if we could fix the violence there, and several other cities including Houston’s recent rise in murder rates.  But forget about the 20-50 people who will be shot there over the next few weeks, let’s talk about banning suppressors and 15 round mags.  
 

 

You are right. In addition to banning suppressors and 15 round mags, we should also ban handguns. Couldn't agree more.

 

[BabaYaga 15302]

Just now, High Plains Drifter said:

 

You are right. In addition to banning suppressors and 15 round mags, we should also ban handguns. Couldn't agree more.

 

Then push for this.  Get your candidates to run on a 'zero pistol platform'.  At least be transparent and clear about intentions and be open to pushback and discussion.

[Pato del Muerto 52538]

I wonder what the shootings of cops and by cops would look like if the ROE were changed to you don’t fire unless fired upon.  (And accompanying roe for knife attacks or what have you)
you want to be treated as heroes, act heroically. Shooting at anything that spooks you isn’t heroic. 

[RPM 26329]

19 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

You want to really make a dent on gun violence?  End the stupid war on drugs.  Legalize all drugs.  Spend the money treating addicts.  Release all nonviolent offenders, clear their records, and restore their civil rights.  With all that extra prison space, warehouse violent criminals for long sentences.  And any dickhead that commits a violent crime with a gun, guarantee them multi decade sentences without parole.  So when they get out they are like Red and too old to be much of a threat.

Banning bump stocks and suppressors doesn't do shit.  Banning scary black rifles won't do shit -- maybe 1% of gun murders are committed with scary black rifles. What I propose would do shit.  It would stop a lot of the violence, cost less and make society much safer for the average citizen and for citizens living in inner city war zones.

You had me, then you lost me.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

16 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

You are right. In addition to banning suppressors and 15 round mags, we should also ban handguns. Couldn't agree more.

 

Good luck with that.