Tamir Rice shooting (12yr old)

hedonist

JC29856 said:

why is the St Louis PD tweeting about tamir rice?


http://jezebel.com/st-louis-pd-posts-tips-to-keep-your-kids-from-getting-1666683225
"your children should have rules for toys gun"
your officers should have rules for real guns!

This morning, the St. Louis Police Department put, on its official Twitter and Facebook accounts, a rambling, weird message to parents of children who play with toy guns—guns like the one 12-year-old Tamir Rice was playing with before an officer rolled up and immediately shot and killed the boy. The message: here are some important safety tips for kids so they don't get themselves shot by a trigger-happy police officer LARPing Rambo.

While some of it could have been written better, I see nothing wrong with the message and intent.

Talk with your children to help keep them and others safe? Crazy!

JC29856

Some could construe the public service announcement by the STL police department as crazy because in referencing tamir rice in the announcement they are attempting to help keep children safe and others safe from the POLICE.

benjs

JC29856 said:

Some could construe the public service announcement by the STL police department as crazy because in referencing tamir rice in the announcement they are attempting to help keep children safe and others safe from the POLICE.

That would be misconstrued in my opinion. A police officer's job is to "serve and protect". If a police officer perceives a threat, he or she has the right by law to exert his or her force to "serve and protect" if need be. If you can explain to citizens how to avoid a false perception of a threat, and it doesn't infringe any of their rights, why is that such a crazy or outlandish idea?

JC29856

The point of reference was the tamir rice incident.
The false perception of a threat wasn't the reason the kid was killed and it wasn't by citizens!
Tamir Rice as i know is a citizen and his rights were infringed upon, he's dead.
What are you saying?
If a perceived threat is someone carry a real gun in Ohio then change the law or change those who have false perceptions.
What are you saying?

cincybearcat

Lots of craziness here....kid playing with a gun out in public that looks real....kid not scared to death of cop car pulling up enough to drop gun and hands up even before it gets close....and damn they fired shots so fast!!

No way a cop should fire shots that fast, couldn't even assess the situation. And the sad thing, has they just taken a minute the kid would be alive and we could be having a more productive conversation about how shitty parenting has gotten.

benjs

JC29856 said:

The point of reference was the tamir rice incident.
The false perception of a threat wasn't the reason the kid was killed and it wasn't by citizens!
Tamir Rice as i know is a citizen and his rights were infringed upon, he's dead.
What are you saying?
If a perceived threat is someone carry a real gun in Ohio then change the law or change those who have false perceptions.
What are you saying?

The false perception of a threat may not have been the reason the kid was killed, but it was at least the justification the cop gave prior to exerting force.

Again,
1) The officer had been told by dispatch that there was someone armed with a gun and brandishing it at people.
2) The officer went to the scene and witnessed someone armed with a gun.

Logic 101 would suggest that the person armed with a gun at the scene is likely the same person who was "brandishing it at people". I've watched the video and I'm not deluded enough to say that the cop acted appropriately: that was a disturbingly heavy-handed response that resulted in a death that shouldn't have been, based on someone's words falsely communicated to the police officer. The officer then naively went in with the full expectation of seeing a guilty and armed person.

What am I saying?
What am I saying?

I'm saying that if the police force recognize potential harm to citizens and wish to minimize it, why would anyone call that kind of effort crazy: isn't that what a police force is supposed to do? To expect a sudden shift in police behaviour is naive, it will take tons of time and effort. In the meanwhile, to do nothing at all seems less than reasonable. Telling people to make sure that a fake gun is OBVIOUSLY fake can cause no harm.

Last-12-Exit

benjs said:

JC29856 said:

The point of reference was the tamir rice incident.
The false perception of a threat wasn't the reason the kid was killed and it wasn't by citizens!
Tamir Rice as i know is a citizen and his rights were infringed upon, he's dead.
What are you saying?
If a perceived threat is someone carry a real gun in Ohio then change the law or change those who have false perceptions.
What are you saying?

The false perception of a threat may not have been the reason the kid was killed, but it was at least the justification the cop gave prior to exerting force.

Again,
1) The officer had been told by dispatch that there was someone armed with a gun and brandishing it at people.
2) The officer went to the scene and witnessed someone armed with a gun.

Logic 101 would suggest that the person armed with a gun at the scene is likely the same person who was "brandishing it at people". I've watched the video and I'm not deluded enough to say that the cop acted appropriately: that was a disturbingly heavy-handed response that resulted in a death that shouldn't have been, based on someone's words falsely communicated to the police officer. The officer then naively went in with the full expectation of seeing a guilty and armed person.

What am I saying?
What am I saying?

I'm saying that if the police force recognize potential harm to citizens and wish to minimize it, why would anyone call that kind of effort crazy: isn't that what a police force is supposed to do? To expect a sudden shift in police behaviour is naive, it will take tons of time and effort. In the meanwhile, to do nothing at all seems less than reasonable. Telling people to make sure that a fake gun is OBVIOUSLY fake can cause no harm.

Well said.

JC29856

I get now in your opinion people shouldn't/can't miscontrue what a police department is tweeting about with the title Kids will be kids? but the cop can perceive something different than what his own eyes actually show him in a state where it's perfectly legal to openly carry a gun.

Logic 101 says that in order to perceive a threat to other people and in order to brandish a gun at other people, real other people must be present.

Last-12-Exit

JC29856 said:

I get now in your opinion people shouldn't/can't miscontrue what a police department is tweeting about with the title Kids will be kids? but the cop can perceive something different than what his own eyes actually show him in a state where it's perfectly legal to openly carry a gun.

Logic 101 says that in order to perceive a threat to other people and in order to brandish a gun at other people, real other people must be present.

You remind me of my wife. One thing is said, you hear something completely different. I kid. It nay be legal to carry, it is not legal to point one at people.

JC29856

Last-12-Exit said:

JC29856 said:

I get now in your opinion people shouldn't/can't miscontrue what a police department is tweeting about with the title Kids will be kids? but the cop can perceive something different than what his own eyes actually show him in a state where it's perfectly legal to openly carry a gun.

Logic 101 says that in order to perceive a threat to other people and in order to brandish a gun at other people, real other people must be present.

You remind me of my wife. One thing is said, you hear something completely different. I kid. It nay be legal to carry, it is not legal to point one at people.

Explain what was said...maybe another perspective would help.
I heard that people shouldn't misconstrue written words but the cop can perceive people that aren't actually there.

g under p

Please don't be surprised that they won't be any indictment for this incident much less a firing of the officer involved shooting. That's just the way it is in this country.

Peace

mickeyrat

JC29856 said:

I get now in your opinion people shouldn't/can't miscontrue what a police department is tweeting about with the title Kids will be kids? but the cop can perceive something different than what his own eyes actually show him in a state where it's perfectly legal to openly carry a gun.

Logic 101 says that in order to perceive a threat to other people and in order to brandish a gun at other people, real other people must be present.

isnt there a differnece here in your terms?
To brandish means to have in hand does it not?
Open carry suggests worn in a holster on the hip
. Not to mention the ease of CCW here in ohio with some of the most lax laws in regards to purchase ,resale etc......

benjs

JC29856 said:

Last-12-Exit said:

JC29856 said:

I get now in your opinion people shouldn't/can't miscontrue what a police department is tweeting about with the title Kids will be kids? but the cop can perceive something different than what his own eyes actually show him in a state where it's perfectly legal to openly carry a gun.

Logic 101 says that in order to perceive a threat to other people and in order to brandish a gun at other people, real other people must be present.

You remind me of my wife. One thing is said, you hear something completely different. I kid. It nay be legal to carry, it is not legal to point one at people.

Explain what was said...maybe another perspective would help.
I heard that people shouldn't misconstrue written words but the cop can perceive people that aren't actually there.

Yes, a cop can perceive people that aren't actually there when the system - which he's trained to trust - has told him they were there. It's called following trusted information. People with common sense, when witnessing a person waving a gun around, might have some tendencies to walk away, leaving said armed person with the gun, and none other around. If we only acted on things we witnessed with our own pair of eyes (as opposed to taking someone else we trust's word for it), several historical genocides which required external intervention to stop likely would still be occurring. Or, worse, completed. Of course, on the converse, American interventionism in the Middle East is a great example of the danger of following trusted information blindly, but that's because clearly we are too trusting when it comes to our government and police force's intentions, but that's not what we're discussing here, is it?

You seem to think I'm denying a problem. I'm not. I was incredibly clear about that in my comment about the officer's outrageously heavy-handed response based on limited and insufficient information. But if we're going to continue with the topic at hand (the police force's tweet), we're discussing the value of informing the public about the significance of ensuring that fake weaponry is clearly perceptible as fake weaponry, with the goal of ensuring non-malicious intent and conveying that to authorities clearly. Personally, I have zero problem with a tweet with that purpose.

JC29856

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/st-louis-county-police-chief-apologizes-for-tamir-rice-facebook-post/

"Warn them that these 'toys' do look like real guns and could result in the police getting called on them. The police may get called to respond to 'a child with a gun,' 'maybe a toy gun,' it is important to know how officers are trained to respond," the message said, adding advice for children to follow if they are confronted by police.

MAYBE ITS POLICE TRAINING NOT KIDS PLAYING?

Thursday afternoon, Chief Jon Belmar issued a statement acknowledging the post was "a misguided communication strategy and was offensive to many people."

Belmar went on to call the message "insensitive to Tamir's family and the sorrow they are currently experiencing."

"The post conveyed the message that my officers respond to calls involving a child with a gun with indiscretion and little regard for life," Belmar said. "I want to emphasize that my officers respond to calls with discernment, and have the highest regard for human life. We train officers to take all facts and circumstances into consideration when making decisions about using force."

mickeyrat

heres Hoping this young mans life being taken wasn't in vain

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2014/12/05/ohio-politics-now-kasich-creating-task-force.html

A look at what is happening in Ohio politics:

After a scathing Department of Justice report released yesterday that said police in Cleveland are poorly trained and act recklessly , accusations that sheriff’s deputies used racial slurs in text messages in Montgomery County, and unrest across the country , Gov. John Kasich announced plans last night to create a new task force that “will listen to Ohio’s communities, research best practices and make recommendations to state and local policy makers on improving community-police relations."

According to the release, Kasich will be joined at noon today by Attorney General Mike DeWine, Sen. Nina Turner, D-Cleveland, Rep. Sandra Williams, D-Cleveland, Rep. Alicia Reece, D-Cincinnati, Director of Public Safety John Born, and Director of Department of Jobs and Family Services Cynthia Dungey.

The DOJ report came out as investigations continue into the death of 12-year-old Tamir Rice who had an air pistol when he was shot and killed by a Cleveland police officer recently .

The report made national headlines yesterday:

CNN: Justice Dept.: Cleveland police has pattern of excessive force
New York Times: Cleveland Police cited for abuse by Justice Department
Washington Post: Cleveland police have pattern of abuse, DOJ finds
Northeast Ohio Media Group: Cleveland police regularly draw, shoot guns unreasonably, states report

According to an Associated Press report, “Officers’ excessive use of force has created deep mistrust in Cleveland, especially in the black community, the report concluded.”

Earlier this year, John Crawford was shot and killed by police in Beavercreek, Ohio, while he carried a pellet gun in a WalMart. A grand jury did not indicted the officer who fired the shots. The DOJ is investigating the incident.

JC29856

Because the cops didn't yet have a corpse to handcuff, they decided to handcuff the next best thing, Tamirs 14 year old sister.
Mom said she didn't know what to do go with her dying son or stay with her distraught daughter.

Ironically Tamir was playing cops and robbers, it's unclear thou which one he was.

josevolution

That is just so fucking sad a 12 yr old dead it makes me so sick ....

muskydan

Last-12-Exit said:

JC29856 said:

I get now in your opinion people shouldn't/can't miscontrue what a police department is tweeting about with the title Kids will be kids? but the cop can perceive something different than what his own eyes actually show him in a state where it's perfectly legal to openly carry a gun.

Logic 101 says that in order to perceive a threat to other people and in order to brandish a gun at other people, real other people must be present.

You remind me of my wife. One thing is said, you hear something completely different. I kid. It nay be legal to carry, it is not legal to point one at people.

Thats Gold Jerry, Gold!!!! Thanks for the laugh.

oceaninmyeyes

JC29856 said:

Not knowing that a camera recorded the entire incident, the police told what appear to be at least five lies about what happened.

1. Police said that Tamir Rice was seated at a table with other people.

2. Police said that as they pulled up, they saw Tamir Rice grab the gun and put it in his waistband.

3. Police said they got out of the car and told Tamir Rice three times to put his hands up but he refused.

4. Police said that Tamir Rice then reached into his waistband and pulled out the gun, and was then shot and killed by Officer Timothy Loehmann.

5. Timothy Loehmann was described as a rookie.


http://m.dailykos.com/story/2014/12/02/1348833/-Tamir-Rice-The-story-behind-the-execution-character-assassination-coverup-of-a-senseless-murder#

As rgambs stated: Video doesn't lie. Officers need to be wearing body cameras. People aren't going to be able to stomach this kind of behavior when they can see it unfold on video. Because police work so closely with the DA's offices by nature of their work, the DA's often choose to look the other way when so plainly that should not be done. Maybe special prosecutor's need to be called in for all police shootings. Clearly the present system is broken.

Last-12-Exit

oceaninmyeyes said:

JC29856 said:

Not knowing that a camera recorded the entire incident, the police told what appear to be at least five lies about what happened.

1. Police said that Tamir Rice was seated at a table with other people.

2. Police said that as they pulled up, they saw Tamir Rice grab the gun and put it in his waistband.

3. Police said they got out of the car and told Tamir Rice three times to put his hands up but he refused.

4. Police said that Tamir Rice then reached into his waistband and pulled out the gun, and was then shot and killed by Officer Timothy Loehmann.

5. Timothy Loehmann was described as a rookie.


http://m.dailykos.com/story/2014/12/02/1348833/-Tamir-Rice-The-story-behind-the-execution-character-assassination-coverup-of-a-senseless-murder#

As rgambs stated: Video doesn't lie. Officers need to be wearing body cameras. People aren't going to be able to stomach this kind of behavior when they can see it unfold on video. Because police work so closely with the DA's offices by nature of their work, the DA's often choose to look the other way when so plainly that should not be done. Maybe special prosecutor's need to be called in for all police shootings. Clearly the present system is broken.

How would a body camera stopped this kid from being killed? At most, it may have prevented the cops from lying when giving their version of the story.

The system itself is not broken. The people in the place to run the system are the problem. I personally don't think DW should have been indicted anyway. The cops in New York definitely should have been. I'm conflicted with the Tamir Rice case because the did have what appeared to be a real gun to those cops. The information that was given to them was there was a guy in the park flashing a gun. Should they have gotten out of the car guns blazing? I doubt it, but I wasn't there and the video doesn't have sound so we don't know what, if anything was said.