The police shooting 13 y/o kids without bothering to discern a toy from a real gun

[Nuclear Unicorn]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by In_The_Wind (a host of the General Discussion forum).

are the same police that would be employed to enforce an assault weapon ban.

[brush]

1. I have feeling this would not have happened . . .

if it had been, let's be frank, a white kid with the toy gun.

We've got to get police officers more community relations training, and we need to figure out how to weed out TRIGGER-HAPPY COPS.

[FreakinDJ]

2. I used to walk Santa Rosa White Neighborhoods with BB guns

All the time growing up there

I've walked this same neighborhood late at night only weary of dogs on the loose not the hard working people who live there

We need Normal Citizens to review the investigations. By allowing them to be held secretly we never know if the investigating officers tried to gather the facts or merely rubber stamped a lie

[Decaffeinated]

25. It seems like that is pure conjecture on your part...

... or are you basing it on some facts?

[brush]

29. Yeah, the fact that I'd lived in this country for over 50 years

If we're not kidding ourselves we all know walking while black or brown, driving while black or brown, even just being a black or brown male — even a 13-year-old — in this country many times draws not so pleasant attention from some police officers and wannabes, be it from under training or stop-and-frisk laws.

Let's not kid ourselves that it doesn't exist. I wouldn't call that "conjecture" at all.

Want facts? How about the 4 very recent deaths from it lately:

Travon Martin gunned down by cop wannabe zimmerman; the black guy who had the car accident in the middle of the night and was looking to help — gunned down by police; the 19-year-old black woman who had car trouble at night and looked for help at a home — just gunned down with a shotgun blast to the face; now this Latino-American teenager gunned down by a cop who didn't bother to ascertain whether the toy the kid was holding was real or not. He just emptied his gun into the kid.

I repeat, not conjecture, facts.

[Decaffeinated]

36. What do any of those have to do with this case?

... in addition to your very specific claim that this specific individual was motivated by race to shoot the kid?

Especially when it is obvious to anyone with two brain cells to rub together that there are at least some scenarios where that very realistic looking toy could be taken as a threat?

[brush]

38. A little hesitance in opening fire was in order

Deny it all you want.

And if you don't see a parallel with the other incidents . . . well, it's just mind boggling to me.

[Decaffeinated]

39. There might be parallels...

... but none of them, in any logical or meaningful way, indict that specific officer, good or bad.

[nomorenomore08]

40. It's not about a specific officer. It's about a pattern of incidents over years and decades.

Things like this happen frequently enough that, at the least, it makes one wonder if the shooting of the 13-year-old was racially motivated.

[FreakinDJ]

33. Don't know what to say - I grew up in Santa Rosa

Don't have any media links to prove it as I was never shot by police for carrying my BB gun

As for the neighborhood in question - me and my then girlfriend rented 10 acers down on the end of Juniper and had some kegger parties a few off duty cops attended

The neighborhood wasn't such a problem they would have a few beers and listen to a band in the middle of a hay field

[Decaffeinated]

37. You expect me to believe...

... that the world isn't the same as when you grew up two, three or maybe four decades ago? Say it aint so! Color me shocked!

Yes, in the heady days of yesteryear, when all was bright and shiny with the world, a child could carry his Red Rider BB gun to his friends house to go watch Howdy Doody...

Cool story bro...

In 2013 there was a school shooting in Reno the day before this kid was shot. A child killed an adult teacher.

Welcome to the new reality where carrying an AK-47 replica down the road can lead to bad things, especially if you don't have the mental capacity or personal experience or legal knowledge to respond the exact correct way when law enforcement shows up.

[EOTE]

3. They're also the same police who enforce the jart ban.

Are you for bringing back jarts? They're also the police who enforce the ban on methamphetamine, why aren't you calling for the legalization of meth?

Not to mention the conflating of an assault weapons ban with common sense gun legislation. This whole line of reasoning is well beyond stupid.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

4. "common sense gun legislation"

I doubt you can even define that.

[EOTE]

8. I shouldn't have to, but closing the gun show loophole is certainly a small start.

But more to the point, the 'logic' displayed in your OP is pathetic. By that same 'logic', NOTHING should be banned because police would be responsible for enforcing that ban, right? Just sad and ignorant, really.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

12. "NOTHING should be banned because police would be responsible for enforcing that ban, right?"

If the police were to treat every encounter as a cause for deadly/military force then they should be deprived of the power.

The undefinable lunacy you espouse is leading to children being suspended for drawings at school, homes to be raided and children murdered by the cops who should be serving, rather than terrorizing, communities.

And as I pointed out before, you have plenty of laws that could have interdicted many of the rampage killers we've witnessed. The child killing police choose to ignore those laws and you choose to leave those laws ignored for no reason othe than it allows you to try and criminalize a basic human right.

[EOTE]

15. So, you're for replacing the police force and forgetting the stupid suggestion that we shouldn't

concern ourselves with gun legislation because cops would enforce those laws.

I definitely agree that bad cops should be deprived of their power, but your post really doesn't address that at all. Your post just says: Cops are bad so we need to have more guns!

Do you realize how stupid that suggestion is? By extension you are suggesting we should get rid of ALL laws because cops enforce them.

You know what would have stopped a good portion of gun massacres in this country? If guns weren't so damned easy to obtain. Of course the gun nutters won't be having any of that.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

19. That isn't even close to what I said.

The fear-mongering over semi-automatic rifles is what killed that child.

You know what would have stopped a good portion of gun massacres in this country? If guns weren't so damned easy to obtain.

Yeah, just like Prohibition got rid of alcohol. After all, what law-abiding citizen would drink once Prohibition was enacted? The only people drinking then would be criminals and they don't deserve any rights. Then maybe you and your jack-booted thugs can conjure up the gun control equivalent of The Chemists War.

[EOTE]

21. You suggested that we shouldn't have gun legislation because cops would enforce those laws.

Go on, tell me that that's not what you suggested. Do you realize how incredibly stupid that stance is?

[uponit7771]

5. Those aren't used for lynching by cop

[EOTE]

9. No, they're not.

Are you suggesting that cops shouldn't have guns? I'm suggesting that it's well past stupid to suggest that there shouldn't be gun regulations because police would enforce those regulations. The same could be said for ANYTHING that has ever been banned. We shouldn't make child abuse illegal because it's police officers that would enforce that ban. Just painfully stupid.

[uponit7771]

18. No, just don't use them primiarly on minorities where they wouldn't use them if the person was white

... regards

[EOTE]

20. I'm not quite sure what you're saying/suggesting, but I have great issue with police in this country

I think over all they are rotten to the core. I just think it's incredibly stupid to suggest that we need to get rid of laws because it's the police who enforce them.

[uponit7771]

22. "I'm not quite sure what you're saying/suggesting" :eek: !!! That a disproportionate amount of people

...killed by cops by these "mistakes" are people of color.

That back in the day it was OK to lynch a person of color just because...

Now it's OK for cops to kill a person of color just because (reasoning not justifying the mean NOR... NOR being applied proportionately across ALL races)

Regards

[EOTE]

24. OK, I understand what you're saying and I agree entirely.

I'm just not sure why it was posted in response to my post. Again, I have a very big problem with today's cops, I think overall they're a pretty rotten bunch. However, I don't think you can extend that to suggest that we should get rid of all laws.

[brush]

6. I don't understand your post

Did anyone mention legalizing meth, or jarts?

[EOTE]

7. No, I'm just pointing out what an incredibly silly argument is being made.

By suggesting that we don't want an assault weapons ban because police would be responsible for enforcing it, the suggestion is made that NOTHING should be banned because we'd have to deal with those same police. It's a ridiculously stupid suggestion.

[brush]

30. I get it now. I'm with you. nt

[G_j]

10. I don't get

your post..

[kcr]

11. Well, let's just get those murder laws off the books!

What are we thinking!?

[EOTE]

13. Seriously. Laws altogether, really. I mean, police are just going to shoot you.

Christ, I think today's cops are as fucked up as can be, but I don't go around suggesting that we should do away with laws because of that. What kind of twisted logic is this?

[kcr]

14. Pretty twisted

I've seen twisted logic when it comes to that topic, but that's pretty bad.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

16. False dichotomy.

The fear-mongering over semi-auto rifles caused that child to be gunned down.

[kcr]

17. Well

It wouldn't be application of seriously flawed logic without throwing out misused terms like "False dichotomy" Actually, I think I can say that was more like projection on your part.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

26. Ending the murder inducing hysteria over semi-auto rifles is NOT a call to strike all laws.

[kcr]

27. So your mentioning of bans was merely incidental, right?

We were supposed to ignore that part of the sentence? Because hte point you're making and arguing now? Not the same at all as the one in the OP.

[EOTE]

23. My god you have an utter disdain for logic.

You suggested that there shouldn't be an AWB because police would enforce that ban. Will you at least acknowledge that this is your view? It's pretty damned hard to have a reasonable conversation when you run away in fright every time you realize how stupid your argument is.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

28. I'm not suggesting anything, I'm stating plainly -- if you can be truthful for 5 mins. --

that the drummed-up hysteria and fear-mongering that is the foundation of the AWB is what is leading to incidences such as we're now reading about. Without lies and fear-mongering the AWB crowd has no basis for their agenda. So they ratchet up public angst to the point where a child carrying a toy is confronted with deadly force. But Heaven forefend the hysterics and fear-mongers back off their rhetoric and children not be gunned down in the streets or paramilitary raids. They know what's best for the "public good."

That's the entire point. You may not agree with the point but you should have the integrity to not distort what I say to satisfy your own ego.

[EOTE]

31. BS. You said NOTHING about any hysteria in your OP, just your contention that we shouldn't ban

things because police would enforce the bans. Now you're drumming up all kinds of bullshit about hysteria as if it's people's distrust of firearms that is causing death rather than the fucking guns themselves. Just plain ol' stupid. So you've completely abandoned the point in your OP? If that's the case, you should say so. Otherwise, please explain how your idiotic leap in logic doesn't suggest that we should do away with all laws altogether?

[kcr]

32. I think it's funny that when she must have realized how stupid and crazy the OP came across

and decided to switch gears, she figured the argument she's replaced it with was somehow better.

[EOTE]

34. It's like she's arrived at a conclusion and desperately trying to find out how she got there.

Even when the argument is made far more eloquently, I shudder when I think of what's going on in the minds of those who offer this kind of argument. What are they suggesting, exactly? We need to keep our assault rifles so that we can kill the cops if they come to take them from us? I'm trying to wrap my head around this particular kind of illness, but I don't like where it's taking me.

[FreakinDJ]

35. The Cops operate with impunity

Is the problem

Lately its shooting unarmed citizens

Tomorrow - who knows what

But I feel it perfectly legitamit to conceive those who would operate so recklessly with little or no regard for citizen rights to be bashing down doors with SWAT teams taking aim and asking questions later

[In_The_Wind]

41. Locking

Discuss politics, issues, and current events. No posts about Israel/Palestine, religion, guns, showbiz, or sports unless there is really big news. No conspiracy theories. No whining about DU.