Chicago cops murder 13 year old point blank

[Pato del Muerto 52539]

Just now, BabaYaga said:

They are needed because, as stated, of the political ramifications of armed soldiers on foreign soil.  

 

Yeah the political ramifications of shooting non-combatants on foreign soil. 

[immortal13 4059]

1 hour ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

Without reading through the rest of this thread, I'm going to give you a really unpopular answer.  Stricter gun control means, if you are a citizen carrying a gun in public, that would be illegal and you would likely be shot.  Then we wouldn't have these instances where there is any question.  Have a gun outside your domicile?  Then you get shot.  

If you are really looking for any cut or dry answers, that's the only one.  

I'm specifically talking about this kid. He wasn't carrying legally, so how would more gun control laws have prevented this incident?

[RPM 26329]

Just now, goatsaag said:

Oh, right. He showed his hands too fast, shoot him.

If he clearly had a weapon .08 seconds earlier, slow movement was to his advantage.

[Huckleberry 33045]

10 minutes ago, justhookit said:

 

 

I mean we have a video complete with audio. The cop absolutely did not tell him to turn around. There is a gun in the kids hand less than a second before the kid is shot. The cop radios for an ambulance 3 seconds after the shot and immediately goes into medical rescue mode. This sucks but leaving the thread title as  “Chicago cops murder 13 year old point blank” is a joke.

He said "stop" and the kid stopped. He said "show me your hands" to a kid who was standing at a right angle to him. How do you propose someone shows you their hands when they're starting by facing sideways relative to you? If you ask someone to show you their hands and then shoot them a quarter second after they start showing you their hands then you should have given a better instruction. This isn't even arguable.

[EuroHorn 3267]

4 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

He said "stop" and the kid stopped. He said "show me your hands" to a kid who was standing at a right angle to him. How do you propose someone shows you their hands when they're starting by facing sideways relative to you? If you ask someone to show you their hands and then shoot them a quarter second after they start showing you their hands then you should have given a better instruction. This isn't even arguable.

As you were being a douchebag to everyone I’ll point out that you kept saying the cop said turnaround. The cop didn’t.  Quit making shit up. 

and this is a terrible take ...

Quote

This is a terrible take. When you are aiming a firearm at a human being and you tell that human being "turn around and show me your hands" and then that human being follows your instructions exactly as you gave them, you shouldn't shoot that person in the chest.

The officer instructed the suspect to turn around and show his hands. That is instructing a person who you're concerned might have a weapon to turn around, face you, and start raising their hand. It's a stupid thing to do and is the reason why the tragedy happened. It's basically asking the person to set themselves up to get shot. I'm absolutely not sure what CPD protocol is but I've seen enough videos to know that instructions to freeze, lie down on the ground, and put your hands behind your back don't just happen in the movies.

 

Edited April 16, 2021 by EuroHorn

[justhookit 4191]

2 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

He said "stop" and the kid stopped. He said "show me your hands" to a kid who was standing at a right angle to him. How do you propose someone shows you their hands when they're starting by facing sideways relative to you? If you ask someone to show you their hands and then shoot them a quarter second after they start showing you their hands then you should have given a better instruction. This isn't even arguable.

I’m not arguing that part. I was pointing out that y’all were putting the cops command “turn around” in quotes. He didn’t say it and that’s not arguable.

[InkaUtexas 26022]

7 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Of course they don’t like it. 

strike first

strike hard

no mercy

why would anybody ‘like’ the idea of being put in a dangerous situation but only being allowed to react?  That’s why the military brass create these kinds of rules.  Because they are needed. Otherwise some of our guys would be shooting at everything. 

The Rules do not restrain them, their training does. There are a lot of incidents were the ROE was violated and punishment is quite severe. Other times it is violated and no one says a damn thing. 

And keep in mind they also have an offensive compost. Lots of examples where someone running up a mountain carrying a weapon, but not engaging US forces is dropped by an unseen sniper or hit by an Apache. I do not think trying to compare the situations are the same. It makes sense on paper, but it is not the reality. 

LE needs to have their own and the last thing we need to do is model them more after the military. There is enough of that already. 

[Judge Roybeanbag 11819]

6 minutes ago, immortal13 said:

I'm specifically talking about this kid. He wasn't carrying legally, so how would more gun control laws have prevented this incident?

They may not have prevented it.  But if there is no legal carrying outside of your own property, then there’s not much room for complaining when someone gets shot for having a gun outside of their own property.  

[clapclapclap 9000]

16 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

This is a terrible take. When you are aiming a firearm at a human being and you tell that human being "turn around and show me your hands" and then that human being follows your instructions exactly as you gave them, you shouldn't shoot that person in the chest.

The officer instructed the suspect to turn around and show his hands. That is instructing a person who you're concerned might have a weapon to turn around, face you, and start raising their hand. It's a stupid thing to do and is the reason why the tragedy happened. It's basically asking the person to set themselves up to get shot. I'm absolutely not sure what CPD protocol is but I've seen enough videos to know that instructions to freeze, lie down on the ground, and put your hands behind your back don't just happen in the movies.

Well you were correct about the above being a terrible take, since the office never yelled at him to turn around.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/16/us/adam-toledo-chicago-police-shooting.html

In one of the videos, the officer yelled at him to stop. “Stop right now!” the officer screams while cursing, telling him to drop his gun. “Hands. Show me your hands. Drop it. Drop it.”

As Adam turned and lifted his hands, the officer opened fire, striking him once in the chest. 

 

Again, here's the video, what's the timestamp where he says 'turn around'?

All I hear is the officer running while yelling, "Police.  Stop.  Stop.  Right effing now."  As he says, "Hey, show me your effing hands" the officer stops, raises his shooting hand, and says,  "Drop it" and then immediately shoots. 

It seems pretty clear that the suspect's turning around during, "Drop it" is what triggered the shooting.  Also seems pretty clear the officer thought the kid was still holding the gun when he shot.  And if the kid hadn't dropped the gun, there's a decent chance the officer would have been shot if he had waited to fire.  So I'll side with the officer's decision making, I'm not willing to trade a lot more dead officers for more living gangbangers.

It appears the mic was turned on at 1:57 of the video, during the chase, officer slows down and stops at 2:04, shooting at 2:05.  It was instantaneous potential life or death defensive decision making.

 

Edit:  I now see that others have made this point.

Edited April 16, 2021 by clapclapclap

[scottsins 1968]

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.

* .84 seconds

[Dahobbs 17627]

29 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

Pretty sure being 13, out at 2am on a Monday morning with a gun, running from a cop after his buddy just fired a gun 8 times nearby, attempting to throw away a gun and spin towards officer is maybe a little farther from my definition of perfect than yours.

It is like you're intentionally missing my point. 1) it was a general statement and not specific to this incident, 2) I agree the kid has some responsibility for the sad course of events, 3) when I say react perfectly, I meant in the specific moment as opposed to all of life leading up to it, 4) of course he didn't react perfectly, that is why he is dead - - see below.

 

15 minutes ago, RPM said:

If he clearly had a weapon .08 seconds earlier, slow movement was to his advantage.

Absolutely. It was to his advantage to react perfectly and slowly. He didn't do that because humans, particularly untrained ones, do not react perfectly in stressful situations. I doubt the kid processed that he was moving too quickly, in fact, given how time seems to move when under stress, I'm sure he thought he was moving really slowly. This situation was tragic and I don't think the shooting itself was wrong in the moment. But, better procedures and training would have resulted in more clear instructions so that the cop and kid wouldn't have been placed in a situation where perfect reactions by both had to be made in order to avoid a death. I really don't understand why that is controversial. 

[RPM 26329]

2 minutes ago, scottsins said:

* .84 seconds

Correct. I mistakenly added a 0.

[52-80 19207]

1 hour ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

Pretty sure being 13, out at 2am on a Monday morning with a gun, running from a cop after his buddy just fired a gun 8 times nearby, attempting to throw away a gun and spin towards officer is maybe a little farther from my definition of perfect than yours.

Yeah but don’t you see many 13 year olds out at 2am popping off guns grow up to be great lawyers and politicians. The kid had so much potential left. 

[Huckleberry 33045]

31 minutes ago, EuroHorn said:

As you were being a douchebag to everyone I’ll point out that you kept saying the cop said turnaround. The cop didn’t.  Quit making shit up. 

and this is a terrible take ...

 

 

30 minutes ago, justhookit said:

I’m not arguing that part. I was pointing out that y’all were putting the cops command “turn around” in quotes. He didn’t say it and that’s not arguable.

 

21 minutes ago, clapclapclap said:

Well you were correct about the above being a terrible take, since the office never yelled at him to turn around.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/16/us/adam-toledo-chicago-police-shooting.html

In one of the videos, the officer yelled at him to stop. “Stop right now!” the officer screams while cursing, telling him to drop his gun. “Hands. Show me your hands. Drop it. Drop it.”

As Adam turned and lifted his hands, the officer opened fire, striking him once in the chest. 

 

Again, here's the video, what's the timestamp where he says 'turn around'?

All I hear is the officer running while yelling, "Police.  Stop.  Stop.  Right effing now."  As he says, "Hey, show me your effing hands" the officer stops, raises his shooting hand, and says,  "Drop it" and then immediately shoots. 

It seems pretty clear that the suspect's turning around during, "Drop it" is what triggered the shooting.  Also seems pretty clear the officer thought the kid was still holding the gun when he shot.  And if the kid hadn't dropped the gun, there's a decent chance the officer would have been shot if he had waited to fire.  So I'll side with the officer's decision making, I'm not willing to trade a lot more dead officers for more living gangbangers.

It appears the mic was turned on at 1:57 of the video, during the chase, officer slows down and stops at 2:04, shooting at 2:05.  It was instantaneous potential life or death defensive decision making.

 

Edit:  I now see that others have made this point.

Yes, he never gave the specific instruction to turn around, that was bad info from somewhere else and that's on me.

But that doesn't change the issue with the instruction. The officer was chasing a suspect involved in a shooting. The claim from those defending all of his actions is that he was afraid for his life because he suspected this person had a firearm. Then he told the person whom he suspected of having a firearm to show him his hands. As soon as that suspect began to show him his hands, the officer shot him.

It's true that in the split second situation shooting was defensible. The problem is that the officer contributed to to creating the split second situation by instructing a suspect whom he believed to have a firearm to show him his hands.

"Stop! Stop right fucking now!"

Suspect stops

"Hands! Show me your fuckin' hands!"

Suspect drops weapon and begins to show his hands

"Drop it! Drop it!"

Shot is fired simultaneously to the second instruction to drop it. The suspect dropped the gun at roughly the same time as the first instruction to drop it.

The officer was obviously concerned for the kid after the shooting, I don't think anyone can reasonably say he wanted to shoot him. But it is completely reasonable to say that he gave a very poor instruction in that moment that created the situation where he felt he had to shoot. If an officer is chasing a possibly armed suspect on foot I seriously hope they're not trained to ask the suspect to show their hands like that. Largely because that puts the officer in imminent danger if the suspect truly is armed. I'm genuinely not sure why it's difficult to admit that the officer screwed up here. The kid obviously screwed up, it's not that hard to admit the errors by each party that led to the death.

[BabaYaga 15302]

28 minutes ago, RPM said:

Correct. I mistakenly added a 0.

[SarkAfterDark 1693]

How was the kid supposed to know the cop only wanted to see the back of his hands(he didn't)? Kid is 13 and I'm sure anytime he has been asked to show his hands since he was a toddler meant show me your palms. Which explains the turn rather the cop specifically asked for that or not.

 

When the kid stopped the cop could have put distance between them. He didn't. He gave instructions that were followed and he killed a kid. Kid didn't shoot at the cop or even point the gun at him. Had the cop waited .5 seconds longer he would have seen there was no threat. Instead the kid following the instructions he gave put him "in fear of his life". In which he realized a half a second later wasn't the case. 

 

For all those "this was a good shoot" people, what exactly should the kid have done at the time of confrontation with the cop that would have saved his life. And whatever happened prior isn't punishable by execution on the street.

 

 

[Dahobbs 17627]

16 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

Yeah but don’t you see many 13 year olds out at 2am popping off guns grow up to be great lawyers and politicians. The kid had so much potential left. 

What is the point of this statement other than to devalue the life of the kid? Regardless of whatever else he had done wrong, he did not deserve death in that instant. That is not how our system of justice works. And that is not how a just or moral society should operate. Honestly, you should be ashamed of and disgusted with yourself. The kid fucked up big time. No doubt. If he wasn't shot, maybe he never turns his life around and becomes a career criminal. Or maybe he gets out and does something productive with his life, even it is mundane job as a janitor.  But neither of those hypotheticals should matter in judging this incident. 

Edited April 16, 2021 by Dahobbs

[Johnny Sack 8397]

2 minutes ago, SarkAfterDark said:

How was the kid supposed to know the cop only wanted to see the back of his hands(he didn't)? Kid is 13 and I'm sure anytime he has been asked to show his hands since he was a toddler meant show me your palms. Which explains the turn rather the cop specifically asked for that or not.

 

When the kid stopped the cop could have put distance between them. He didn't. He gave instructions that were followed and he killed a kid. Kid didn't shoot at the cop or even point the gun at him. Had the cop waited .5 seconds longer he would have seen there was no threat. Instead the kid following the instructions he gave put him "in fear of his life". In which he realized a half a second later wasn't the case. 

 

For all those "this was a good shoot" people, what exactly should the kid have done at the time of confrontation with the cop that would have saved his life. And whatever happened prior isn't punishable by execution on the street.

 

 

Drop the gun on the ground where the cop could see it.  Not toss it behind a fence while turning with your body shielding the cop's view because you're trying not to get caught in possession of a gun.  Because when you do the latter the cop has no reason to think there isn't a gun in your hand.  Drop the gun on the deck instead of trying to hide it.

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

Arm Chair Quarterbacks...

 

[EuroHorn 3267]

26 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

 

 

Yes, he never gave the specific instruction to turn around, that was bad info from somewhere else and that's on me.

But that doesn't change the issue with the instruction. The officer was chasing a suspect involved in a shooting. The claim from those defending all of his actions is that he was afraid for his life because he suspected this person had a firearm. Then he told the person whom he suspected of having a firearm to show him his hands. As soon as that suspect began to show him his hands, the officer shot him.

It's true that in the split second situation shooting was defensible. The problem is that the officer contributed to to creating the split second situation by instructing a suspect whom he believed to have a firearm to show him his hands.

"Stop! Stop right fucking now!"

Suspect stops

"Hands! Show me your fuckin' hands!"

Suspect drops weapon and begins to show his hands

"Drop it! Drop it!"

Shot is fired simultaneously to the second instruction to drop it. The suspect dropped the gun at roughly the same time as the first instruction to drop it.

The officer was obviously concerned for the kid after the shooting, I don't think anyone can reasonably say he wanted to shoot him. But it is completely reasonable to say that he gave a very poor instruction in that moment that created the situation where he felt he had to shoot. If an officer is chasing a possibly armed suspect on foot I seriously hope they're not trained to ask the suspect to show their hands like that. Largely because that puts the officer in imminent danger if the suspect truly is armed. I'm genuinely not sure why it's difficult to admit that the officer screwed up here. The kid obviously screwed up, it's not that hard to admit the errors by each party that led to the death.

Just apologize for being a liar and admit you lied...

[52-80 19207]

3 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

What is the point of this statement other than to devalue the life of the kid? Regardless of whatever else he had done wrong, he did not deserve death in that instant. That is not how our system of justice works. And that is not how a just or moral society should operate. Honestly, you should be ashamed of and disgusted with yourself. The kid fucked up big time. No doubt. If he wasn't shot, maybe he never turns his life around and becomes a career criminal. Or maybe he gets out and does something productive with his life, even it is mundane job as a janitor.  But neither of those hypotheticals should matter in judging this incident. 

The justice system didn’t kill him. He put himself in a precarious situation that resulted in that. 
 

We didn’t devalue his life. He did when he chose to pop off guns and evade cops in the dark of night. 
 

Why try so hard to pin this on everything and everyone except the very person behind it all. 
 

If you put yourself at risk by jumping out of airplanes for fun, you don’t “deserve” to die. But if you did, don’t be surprised. 

[BabaYaga 15302]

2 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

The justice system didn’t kill him. He put himself in a precarious situation that resulted in that. 
 

We didn’t devalue his life. He did when he chose to pop off guns and evade cops in the dark of night. 
 

Why try so hard to pin this on everything and everyone except the very person behind it all. 
 

If you put yourself at risk by jumping out of airplanes for fun, you don’t “deserve” to die. But if you did, don’t be surprised. 

Yep, you spend your life messing around train tracks, good chance you eventually get hit by a train.

[BabaYaga 15302]

3 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

Why try so hard to pin this on everything and everyone except the very person behind it all. 
 

lol, you know why.....

[Cajun 11722]

11 minutes ago, EuroHorn said:

Just apologize for being a liar and admit you lied...

Just ignore.  He's never wrong.  Ever.

[elfenix 34331]

19 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

Why try so hard to pin this on everything and everyone except the very person behind it all. 

maybe, just maybe, the trained adult in this situation should be the trained adult in the situation, rather than putting the onus on an untrained child. 

[Hanrahan 1306]

Wait, did a bunch of you all flat out make up that the cop specifically said, “turn around!”? Jesus.

[52-80 19207]

3 minutes ago, Hanrahan said:

Wait, did a bunch of you all flat out make up that the cop specifically said, “turn around!”? Jesus.

What about police murder unarmed 13 year old at point blank? You mean to tell me that’s not true either ?

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

First lie creates the narrative!

[Dahobbs 17627]

1 hour ago, 52-80 said:

The justice system didn’t kill him. He put himself in a precarious situation that resulted in that. 
 

We didn’t devalue his life. He did when he chose to pop off guns and evade cops in the dark of night. 
 

Why try so hard to pin this on everything and everyone except the very person behind it all. 
 

If you put yourself at risk by jumping out of airplanes for fun, you don’t “deserve” to die. But if you did, don’t be surprised. 

Didn't I specifically say the kid shared the blame? What about that is hard for you to understand? Didn't I specifically say that I thought the shooting was ok given the circumstances? All I've said is that, even if all of that is true, we can still improve the system to help avoid situations like this. That's it. Y'all can't even discuss this honestly because you think anyone who says "let's do better" is somehow excusing the actions of the kid that led up to the shooting itself. What is disgusting is saying that we should ignore this incident and this loss of life because the kid was criminal that had it coming. Nothing he did deserved a death sentence. Why try so hard to avoid any effort to improve our justice system?

Edited April 16, 2021 by Dahobbs

[SarkAfterDark 1693]

1 hour ago, Johnny Sack said:

Drop the gun on the ground where the cop could see it.  Not toss it behind a fence while turning with your body shielding the cop's view because you're trying not to get caught in possession of a gun.  Because when you do the latter the cop has no reason to think there isn't a gun in your hand.  Drop the gun on the deck instead of trying to hide it.

Wouldn't he basically have to turn around to drop the gun. And for him to toss it I'm sure it would have required "fertile" movement that likely would have resulted in him getting shot. Then y'all would argue he should have dropped it in the manner that he did and not towards the cop. 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

2 minutes ago, SarkAfterDark said:

Wouldn't he basically have to turn around to drop the gun. And for him to toss it I'm sure it would have required "fertile" movement that likely would have resulted in him getting shot. Then y'all would argue he should have dropped it in the manner that he did and not towards the cop. 

No.  Just drop it by your side.  Simple.

[Herbie Hancock 7369]

it would have required "fertile" movement that likely would have resulted in him getting shot.

I made some fertile movements with your mom that resulted in her getting something shot at her.

[Gatorubet 30274]

No.  Just drop it by your side.  Simple.

Yeah. The kid should respond to pressure situations perfectly, but trained cops can shoot you because they don’t have to perform well in pressure situations. Simple.

[immortal13 4059]

If only the boy had been informed about the current gun laws, this tragedy could have been avoided.

[txhorns 2411]

I don't see any reason the cop should be charged or punished in this situation but it is certainly a case that can be used to better train officers for future confrontations.

[Cajun 11722]

Not to take away from the kid, the subject, or this debate, but lost in this is the level of Big Brother shit going on within that video.  

And you know that's just the tip of the iceberg.

Fuck the surveillance state and fuck it hard.

[BabaYaga 15302]

11 minutes ago, txhorns said:

I don't see any reason the cop should be charged or punished in this situation but it is certainly a case that can be used to better train officers for future confrontations.

I would pay through the nose for the kind of training that allows me to recognize that a threat existed at 02:38:39, but had ceased to be by 02:38:40 and have sufficient reaction time to adjust.

[Dahobbs 17627]

11 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

I would pay through the nose for the kind of training that allows me to recognize that a threat existed at 02:38:39, but had ceased to be by 02:38:40 and have sufficient reaction time to adjust.

It is everything before that moment that needs to be addressed. How are you not getting this? Better instructions would have helped. Better tactics would have helped. We may never achieve perfection, but there is still improvement that can be made. Why resist that? I really don't understand. 

[BabaYaga 15302]

5 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

It is everything before that moment that needs to be addressed. How are you not getting this? Better instructions would have helped. Better tactics would have helped. We may never achieve perfection, but there is still improvement that can be made. Why resist that? I really don't understand. 

Tell us exactly what needs to become standard implementation based upon your extensive library of knowledge?

[BabaYaga 15302]

I have an idea @Dahobbs, being the expert, can take a try at this, and hopefully not make the mistakes of the reform-police activists made and shot the actor in each scenario multiple times

Maybe he'd learn that this is really basic use of force
1- action is faster than reaction. If someone is holding a gun, they can raise it and shoot it at someone, before that person can react.

2- cops don't have to act after the fact, they can (and should) react to the threat of force
 

 

Edited April 16, 2021 by BabaYaga

[Cajun 11722]

31 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

I would pay through the nose for the kind of training that allows me to recognize that a threat existed at 02:38:39, but had ceased to be by 02:38:40 and have sufficient reaction time to adjust.

Just reimagine it brah!

[Dahobbs 17627]

16 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Tell us exactly what needs to become standard implementation based upon your extensive library of knowledge?

What a cheap copout. I don't need to be an expert to see there is room for improvement. It has been addressed previously, but his commands led precisely to his need to make a split second decision. The kid did what he asked and that got him shot. From my lay perspective, I think instead of having the kid "show me your hands" when the kid wasn't facing him, he should told him to freeze, and then slowly raise his hands. He could have also told him to slowly lie down. In that particular scenario, those commands would have been better. Finally, it seems like he should have created space between himself and the suspect and acquired cover until he was sure the suspect was disarmed. I'm confident an expert could provide more detail on what else could have been changed to improve the chances of a good outcome. My whole point is that we should have that conversation. You don't even want to try, which is just fucking bizarre. 

Edited April 16, 2021 by Dahobbs

[BabaYaga 15302]

2 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

What a cheap copout. I don't need to be an expert to see there is room for improvement. It has been addressed previously, but his commands led precisely to his need to make a split second decision. The kid did what he asked and that got him shot. From my lay perspective, I think instead of having the kid "show me your hands" when the kid wasn't facing him, he should told him to freeze, and then slowly raise his hands. He could have also told him to slowly lie down. In that particular scenario, those commands would have been better. Finally, it seems like he should have created space between himself and the suspect and acquired cover until he was sure the suspect was disarmed. I'm confident an expert could provide more detail on what else could have been changed to improve the chances of a good outcome. My whole point is that we should have that conversation. You don't even want to try, which is just fucking bizarre. 

Oh, training in verbiage.  How impactful.  I'm sure we can soon translate this to service groups across the globe.  So after having shots fired (presumably AT him), in a dark alley, at night chasing a known suspect with the gun that was previously fired AT him, the clear and succinct distinction between freeze and what to do with his hands would have made the difference.

I am telling you from online reading, there are SMU operators going back and forth about this - these the highest training units the US military has, agreeing that in a scenario like that, there was no way to know what was going to happen, and they'd have done the same thing.  These are the experts.  Nobody knows more about close in fighting than they do.  Nobody.  Across the entire globe....

Nobody is saying more training isn't needed - just that the shit you keep pushing is fucking stupid.

[Dahobbs 17627]

13 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Oh, training in verbiage.  How impactful.  I'm sure we can soon translate this to service groups across the globe.  So after having shots fired (presumably AT him), in a dark alley, at night chasing a known suspect with the gun that was previously fired AT him, the clear and succinct distinction between freeze and what to do with his hands would have made the difference.

I am telling you from online reading, there are SMU operators going back and forth about this - these the highest training units the US military has, agreeing that in a scenario like that, there was no way to know what was going to happen, and they'd have done the same thing.  These are the experts.  Nobody knows more about close in fighting than they do.  Nobody.  Across the entire globe....

Nobody is saying more training isn't needed - just that the shit you keep pushing is fucking stupid.

LOL. 

Look man, if the experts come away with the conclusion that absolutely nothing could have been improved in that situation and that there is no teachable lesson at all, fine. I'm glad they looked at it. You seem opposed to even the suggestion that maybe, just maybe, there something we can learn here. That's fucking weird and "fucking stupid." 

Edited April 16, 2021 by Dahobbs

[gmr548 16590]

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.  

Jesus Fucking Christ this board is indistinguishable from texags

[Cajun 11722]

10 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

Jesus Fucking Christ this board is indistinguishable from texags

Can't we have a police shooting thread w/o bringing aggy into it?

Goddamn man, don't we have enough to deal with here?

[RollLeft 5045]

51 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

I have an idea @Dahobbs, being the expert, can take a try at this, and hopefully not make the mistakes of the reform-police activists made and shot the actor in each scenario multiple times

Maybe he'd learn that this is really basic use of force
1- action is faster than reaction. If someone is holding a gun, they can raise it and shoot it at someone, before that person can react.

2- cops don't have to act after the fact, they can (and should) react to the threat of force
 

 

3:30 "I didn't understand how importance compliance was..."  Dude sounds racist and like Fox propaganda, obviously doesn't "get it". - half of Surly Posters, half of the time

[Hanrahan 1306]

What a cheap copout. I don't need to be an expert to see there is room for improvement. It has been addressed previously, but his commands led precisely to his need to make a split second decision. The kid did what he asked and that got him shot. From my lay perspective, I think instead of having the kid "show me your hands" when the kid wasn't facing him, he should told him to freeze, and then slowly raise his hands. He could have also told him to slowly lie down. In that particular scenario, those commands would have been better. Finally, it seems like he should have created space between himself and the suspect and acquired cover until he was sure the suspect was disarmed. I'm confident an expert could provide more detail on what else could have been changed to improve the chances of a good outcome. My whole point is that we should have that conversation. You don't even want to try, which is just fucking bizarre. 

That’s not how use of force escalation is taught to police. A cop is taught to shoot before the suspect has an opportunity to fire. I’ve done the shoot/don’t shoot training and if the guy had a gun a second or so before hand, and the cop didn’t see him drop it, turning into what very well could be a shooting position is going to earn you a bullet.

[scottsins 1968]

2 hours ago, BabaYaga said:

I have an idea @Dahobbs, being the expert, can take a try at this, and hopefully not make the mistakes of the reform-police activists made and shot the actor in each scenario multiple times

Maybe he'd learn that this is really basic use of force
1- action is faster than reaction. If someone is holding a gun, they can raise it and shoot it at someone, before that person can react.

2- cops don't have to act after the fact, they can (and should) react to the threat of force
 

 

Yep.  Guy with little no training performs poorly in exercise designed to test his training.

[goatsaag 279]

2 hours ago, BabaYaga said:

So after having shots fired (presumably AT him), in a dark alley, at night chasing a known suspect with the gun that was previously fired AT him

You are creating a scenario that didn't happen. No, the gun was never shot at the cop who eventually killed this kid.