“reach for a gun” = anything, including full compliance
“reach for a gun” can look exactly like “lay on the floor” within that 1.5-2 seconds. “reaching” is meaningless. Shooting a suspect within 2 seconds for “reaching” is shooting on sight. A suspect needs the chance to disobey, shooting him within 1.5-2 seconds of arrival is crazy (unless shot at first).
They’re trying to protect their “just world” delusion.
Just fucking obey or we will shoot your in the face. And it won’t matter if your pregnant, innocent or a woman.
bolding mine.
You appear not to have watched the video. The kid didn’t pull anything.
jayjay, IF that had been a real gun, how long would it have taken the person reaching for it to grab it, point it and fire? 1.5 - 2 seconds? Do you believe cops have a right to defend themselves?
Maybe the cops shouldn’t have created a situation where split-second, close-range decisions were necessary in the first place–on either side? Maybe they should have allowed themselves more space for judging that they were dealing with a kid, with a toy.
In any case, no matter how “special…stupid” the kid may have been, it seems kind of demeaning to the profession of policing to imply that the result was a pure consequence of the kid’s action. Had the officers no agency of their own? Is a cop on alert supposed to be some kind of impassive, unstoppable force of death, like a train bearing down on anyone foolish enough to step on the tracks?
Yeah, that is a sometimes uncomfortable evolution. You have to submit first by default, figure out if there’s a mistake later. I mean yes, as a practical matter you cannot let every arrest/detention turn into a contest (especially when you have an armed citizenry) and Questions Of Law and Procedure are better left to the DA and court, but still…
(emphasis mine) I suppose some must be wondering how many people getting shot does it take before the rest of us citizens will “learn” what is expected of us.
Look, I am fine with the notion of getting control of the situation first and asking questions later, BUT it does worry me, the trend towards interventions becoming ever more aggressive and combative and the base presumption that anything other than exact instantaneous absolute compliance (whether or not instructions are clear) must be an act of resistance and prelude to deadly violence. Remember the guy the other month who got shot (not fatally, luckily) when he turned to comply with a request for his ID. At least that policeman seems to have immediately had an “oh, crap, this was not how this was supposed to go” moment.
(And even if you do comply strictly, and hope they don’t hurt you/traumatize your family/damage your property too badly before realizing they got the wrong dude… when you go to “sort it out later” you may get to see them ride off on an “acting in good faith” call, and meanwhile everyone’s STILL to be expected to just instantly drop to the mud!)
As I wrote in the other thread, and **Permensoe **just mentioned, the way they drove up to be virtually in his face, if it had been someone with a real gun and hostile intent he could have put 6 to 10 rounds into the car before it came to a full stop. They placed themselves in a position where they had no choice but hair-trigger response.
At some point, you get to where you’re not questioning ANYTHING the police do. Where is that point? Right now, they get to perform a home invasion and if you defend your home, you’re in for murder (of cop, which is unofficially but in reality worse than Murder 1 in the eyes of that so-called “justice” system). If they stop you in the street and shoot you within 2 seconds of the car pulling up, it’s perfectly justified because reasons. When it starts happening to white people on a 1 to 1 basis that it does now with black people, is it going to be seen by some of you as wrong and concerning then? Or is the color barrier in place, where you all insist that color has nothing to do with it NOW and never will because police are paragons of fairness, rectitude and objectivity?
Out of idle curiosity: Why did you get detained dozens of times over 64 years? If we go with a minimum 24 and just from age 12 to 64, that would mean you’re averaging twice a year.
Yeah. Why can’t you just obey the law so they don’t have to detain you, eh?
As to the video (where they kill a 12 year old), it’s actually quite insane behavior by the cops. If they believed he might be armed, then why in the fuck would they drive up and risk getting shot, while in the car like they did? The created the situation where the only option was kill or be killed.
If they are actually that afraid of getting shot, they sure don’t act like it.
Of course there are the cases over and over again of cops taking cell phones away from bystanders and destroying the evidence of their illegal activities.
When did this change, and was it publicized?
I suggest you have another look at your math
Traffic violations ?
Shit, I’ve been detained for Driving While Ugly.
And he was on a golf course at the time!
Yeah. I divided the wrong numbers. Okay. So you’ve gotten detained once every other year. So, you’re still racking up detentions faster than most people who aren’t career criminals.
You must be an incredibly dangerous driver leaving a lot of havoc in your wake to have been detained dozens of times for traffic violations. Either that or you don’t know what it means to be detained by the police.
If somebody is in a playground with a gun, the cops aren’t the only ones who are in danger of being shot. Kids have been killed before by friends who decided to play with a real gun, so just leaving Tamir Rice alone was not an option even if you knew he was just playing.
Tamir Rice’s death was avoidable with proper gun safety classes in school. Every child past a certain age should understand, for example, that guns are not toys, and that if you find one you should tell an adult and not pick it up and start playing with it. But they should also understand how important it is not to get rid of the orange tip on a toy gun that says “This is not a gun!” and that even a toy gun can scare people and get people hurt.
One thing I haven’t seen mentioned on all this talk of ‘Don’t Resist’, and ‘Pulling a Gun on a Cop Ensures or should Ensure Death’, is what do these people think the boy was planning if his hand went to his waist ?
The cops didn’t know it was a toy, certainly *; but the child Did.
Do they imagine he was going to scream “You’ll never take me alive, copper !!!” as he chose to blast them to eternity with a BB gun ? Had they waited, then had it been a real gun they might be shot: but he knew that it wasn’t a real gun, so wouldn’t be planning to kill them with it.
However, I can well understand why they didn’t rugby tackle him, nor give first aid after. He might have pummelled them to death. All these black suspects pose an immediate physical threat, being so large, and so strong. Maybe they thought he’d just come out of prison after a ten-year stretch.
That’s not defense. That’s preemptive attack.
I’m not convinced that LEOs in other juridictions typically open fire even when facing an adult with a weapon actually in hand.
The bar for using firearms in the USA seems absurdly low, even taking into account the huge number of guns in the hands of the population.