Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

He was a 12yr old kid, He must have thought the police officers were kidding with him. He did not know they would actually kill him.

Man, then what was his education? By 8 I knew, and was drilled into me by my school, when you see a cop, a fire fighter or anything like that, you listen to them.

elberkonic wrote:
He was a 12yr old kid, He must have thought the police officers were kidding with him. He did not know they would actually kill him.

Long before I reached the age of 12, I was well aware never to play with a toy gun around a police officer, and to follow their instructions. I was especially aware that drawing a gun (toy or not) after a police officer told me to put my hands up was a very bad idea.

elberkonic wrote:
He was a 12yr old kid, He must have thought the police officers were kidding with him. He did not know they would actually kill him.

In my opinion his age isn't a significant factor. A 12 year old can do serious harm with a gun just as easily as a 30 year old, and is arguably more dangerous due to immaturity.

 dogma wrote:

elberkonic wrote:
He was a 12yr old kid, He must have thought the police officers were kidding with him. He did not know they would actually kill him.

In my opinion his age isn't a significant factor. A 12 year old can do serious harm with a gun just as easily as a 30 year old, and is arguably more dangerous due to immaturity.

And that's what it really comes down to.

Being 12 makes his death more tragic IMO. It might also mean that he didn't know better and didn't realize just how serious his actions were. If the cops were in the wrong his age might be a viable factor when it comes to determining a punishment.

But being 12 doesn't make him any less of a potential thread.

Relapse wrote:
Funny that a white 20 year old gets shot and killed under practically the same circumstance by a black officer and no one at the liberal news services thinks twice about it.
In both instances, though, it seems the officer was justified. The difference is there wasn't the big debate, marches, etc. in the Salt Lake case.

http://www.westernjournalism.com/uh-oh-black-police-officer-shoots-unarmed-white-man-wheres-riot/

The victim, 20-year-old Dillon Taylor, whom family and friends say was unarmed at the time of the shooting, was shot and killed by a police officer, whose name has not yet been released, in Salt Lake City, UT.

According to Police Chief Chris Burbank, the shooting was caught on the officer’s body camera, but he did not say whether Taylor was armed at the time of the shooting, nor, after watching the footage, had he decided whether the use of deadly force was justified.

Police reportedly arrived on scene because of a “man waving a gun around.” Taylor must have matched the description of the suspect, but witnesses claim that Taylor may have been pulling up his pants, causing the officer to think he was drawing a weapon.

The investigation in Salt Lake City, Utah into the officer’s conduct will continue without a riot and looters, without distractions from the DOJ, without Al Sharpton and his race baiting. It will be conducted as all investigations are, much like Ferguson, Missouri should have been.

Just proves what I've been saying, American police are too trigger happy.

elberkonic wrote:
He was a 12yr old kid, He must have thought the police officers were kidding with him. He did not know they would actually kill him.

My thoughts exactly. Have an exalt

At twelve years old, he should have known the police officers weren't kidding when they were shouting at him to put his hands up.

 Hordini wrote:
At twelve years old, he should have known the police officers weren't kidding when they were shouting at him to put his hands up.

Did the police shout hands up, you only have their word for it. At the speed things happened did they have time?

 loki old fart wrote:

 Hordini wrote:
At twelve years old, he should have known the police officers weren't kidding when they were shouting at him to put his hands up.

Did the police shout hands up, you only have their word for it. At the speed things happened did they have time?

They told him to put his hands up three times, and yes, they would have had time. It doesn't take long.

 Hordini wrote:




Between the time they arrived and the time that the boy was shot, they told him to put his hands up three times and he reached for the gun.

How did they tell him to put his hands up three times, in any intelligible fashion, in 2 seconds (the time between police arriving and the boy being shot)?

 whembly wrote:

 jhe90 wrote:
From page one, the gun looks very real, no obvious markings to show its a fake, no orange tip, no bright colours, separate magazine.

The police may have made wrong choice but they had seconds to decide and that looks much like a real firearm

Actually, the debate among here is that the police made the RIGHT choice and that the 12 yo made the WRONG choice.

In another words, the police made a tragic, right choice of action.

So shooting kids with toy guns on sight is a right thing to do?
That is rubbish. If the officer had made the right choice, no one would have been killed. The right choice in this scenario would have been for the cop to react calm and patiently, rather than to charge in guns blazing.

 dogma wrote:

elberkonic wrote:
He was a 12yr old kid, He must have thought the police officers were kidding with him. He did not know they would actually kill him.

In my opinion his age isn't a significant factor. A 12 year old can do serious harm with a gun just as easily as a 30 year old, and is arguably more dangerous due to immaturity.

 d-usa wrote:

 dogma wrote:

elberkonic wrote:
He was a 12yr old kid, He must have thought the police officers were kidding with him. He did not know they would actually kill him.

In my opinion his age isn't a significant factor. A 12 year old can do serious harm with a gun just as easily as a 30 year old, and is arguably more dangerous due to immaturity.

And that's what it really comes down to.

Being 12 makes his death more tragic IMO. It might also mean that he didn't know better and didn't realize just how serious his actions were. If the cops were in the wrong his age might be a viable factor when it comes to determining a punishment.

But being 12 doesn't make him any less of a potential thread.

I'm in total agreement.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Hordini wrote:




Between the time they arrived and the time that the boy was shot, they told him to put his hands up three times and he reached for the gun.

How did they tell him to put his hands up three times, in any intelligible fashion, in 2 seconds (the time between police arriving and the boy being shot)?

It'll be interesting to have some context put to that video. I was thinking they might have worked out their tactics on the way, judging by the speed things happened, if that video is real time.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 jhe90 wrote:
From page one, the gun looks very real, no obvious markings to show its a fake, no orange tip, no bright colours, separate magazine.

The police may have made wrong choice but they had seconds to decide and that looks much like a real firearm

Actually, the debate among here is that the police made the RIGHT choice and that the 12 yo made the WRONG choice.

In another words, the police made a tragic, right choice of action.

So shooting kids with toy guns on sight is a right thing to do?
That is rubbish. If the officer had made the right choice, no one would have been killed. The right choice in this scenario would have been for the cop to react calm and patiently, rather than to charge in guns blazing.

No, but shooting someone about to point a gun at you is the right thing to do. The gun turning out to be fake doesn't matter at all.

Judging people using hindsight is ultra fair.

 Hordini wrote:
Between the time they arrived and the time that the boy was shot, they told him to put his hands up three times and he reached for the gun.

There was no audio on the tape, so I don't know if this is true. However, I find it difficult to believe that they could relay an instruction, have it understood and disobeyed 3 times in about a second and a half; which is how long it took between when they arrived and when they opened fire. They allegedly yelled "show your hands" specifically, I don't believe you can yell that in an intelligible manner 3 times in that timeframe.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 jhe90 wrote:
From page one, the gun looks very real, no obvious markings to show its a fake, no orange tip, no bright colours, separate magazine.

The police may have made wrong choice but they had seconds to decide and that looks much like a real firearm

Actually, the debate among here is that the police made the RIGHT choice and that the 12 yo made the WRONG choice.

In another words, the police made a tragic, right choice of action.

So shooting kids with toy guns on sight is a right thing to do?
That is rubbish. If the officer had made the right choice, no one would have been killed. The right choice in this scenario would have been for the cop to react calm and patiently, rather than to charge in guns blazing.

Easy to say when you don't have to make a snap decision when someone pulls out a gun. It's not a film, guns kill. In the UK you might have more reason to suspect a replica, but guns are common place in the US and easy to acquire. It's not that unreasonable to assume they are the real thing.. I completely understand police who don't want to gamble with leaving their wife a widow when someone pulls a gun.

He was a kid and didn't deserve to die. But nor did the cops, and that's what they're thinking when someone draws a weapon. It's unfortunate, but what do you expect if you pull out a replica gun in front of armed police. I don't see the need to point fingers here. The kid was dumb and the consequences serious, sacking or prosecuting people won't change a thing or make any difference in future.

To those who are saying "In two seconds they could have not said put your hands up"
You do realize cop cars have speakers in them right? Allowing for them to drive up while saying "Put your hads up"

 Howard A Treesong wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 jhe90 wrote:
From page one, the gun looks very real, no obvious markings to show its a fake, no orange tip, no bright colours, separate magazine.

The police may have made wrong choice but they had seconds to decide and that looks much like a real firearm

Actually, the debate among here is that the police made the RIGHT choice and that the 12 yo made the WRONG choice.

In another words, the police made a tragic, right choice of action.

So shooting kids with toy guns on sight is a right thing to do?
That is rubbish. If the officer had made the right choice, no one would have been killed. The right choice in this scenario would have been for the cop to react calm and patiently, rather than to charge in guns blazing.

Easy to say when you don't have to make a snap decision when someone pulls a gun. It's not a film, guns kill. In the UK you might have more reason to suspect a replica, but guns are common place in the US and easy to acquire. It's not that unreasonable to assume they are the real thing.. I completely understand police who don't want to gamble with leaving their wife a widow when someone pulls a gun.

He was a kid and didn't deserv to die. But not did the cops, and that's what they're thinking when someone p"draws a weapon. It's unfortunate, but what do you expect if you pull out a replica gun in front of armed police. I don't see the need to point fingers here. The kid was dumb and the consequences serious, sacking or prosecuting people won't change a thing or make any difference in future.

I dunno.

For the kid, absolutely not.

For the police? Maybe.

I'll be right up front and say I don't like police. A lot of them that I've dealt with are the uber macho, I'm-in-uniform-and-I'm-in-charge-MoFo! type of people. Could be just my area, but whatever.

On one hand, I can understand and even agree with shooting the kid; Ignorance/pretend means that the kid is probably more dangerous than a 20 something with a gun, simply because (Hopefully) the 20 something knows what it can do. Yes, the cop shouldn't have left it up to chance and no, he shouldn't have risked making his wife a widow (If he has one. Point stands either way).


On the other...... Shouldn't the police figure out some way to prevent this kinda gak? Like a mini Riot Shield or something to protect themselves in cases like these? A riot buckler would've allowed them to get closer to the kid to taze (While not exactly healthy, better to be not-exactly-healthy than dead.) him.

I mean, as much as I hate the Po-Po, and they are kinda necessary to civilization, but I'm not sure I see the reason for them to go in guns blazing. That's the Swat Team's job.


All I'm saying, is they need to stop with the shootings if they want to be seen with any sort of positive light, and persecuting the people responsible is kinda the easiest way to do it. Not the best, but the easiest.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
To those who are saying "In two seconds they could have not said put your hands up"
You do realize cop cars have speakers in them right? Allowing for them to drive up while saying "Put your hads up"

And of course the kid would have known 100% that the police were directing that at him rather than someone else?

After all, whenever any car drives past a public park and someone shouts something we know exactly who they're shouting at.

Don't think the cruiser was equip with speaker system. Though a I read somewhere that LEO's yelled three times "hands up" before the kid got opted up for making the wrong move

Which seems really difficult to do in the timeframe on the tape.

elberkonic wrote:
He was a 12yr old kid, He must have thought the police officers were kidding with him. He did not know they would actually kill him.

When has anyone since time immemorial, thought the cops were joking with him????

 Frazzled wrote:

elberkonic wrote:
He was a 12yr old kid, He must have thought the police officers were kidding with him. He did not know they would actually kill him.

When has anyone since time immemorial, thought the cops were joking with him????

Since strippers dressed as cops became a thing

 Frazzled wrote:

elberkonic wrote:
He was a 12yr old kid, He must have thought the police officers were kidding with him. He did not know they would actually kill him.

When has anyone since time immemorial, thought the cops were joking with him????

Maybe he watched Super Troopers the night before?

Well. At least he wasn't after skittles!

 CptJake wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

elberkonic wrote:
He was a 12yr old kid, He must have thought the police officers were kidding with him. He did not know they would actually kill him.

When has anyone since time immemorial, thought the cops were joking with him????

Maybe he watched Super Troopers the night before?

Seems like a bored kid waiting for his mates. He even made a snowball at one point. Not very mature by the looks of it.

 CptJake wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

elberkonic wrote:
He was a 12yr old kid, He must have thought the police officers were kidding with him. He did not know they would actually kill him.

When has anyone since time immemorial, thought the cops were joking with him????

Maybe he watched Super Troopers the night before?

Meow!

 thedarkavenger wrote:
Well. At least he wasn't after skittles!

I didn't hear or read anything about him being into purple drank.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 jhe90 wrote:
From page one, the gun looks very real, no obvious markings to show its a fake, no orange tip, no bright colours, separate magazine.

The police may have made wrong choice but they had seconds to decide and that looks much like a real firearm

Actually, the debate among here is that the police made the RIGHT choice and that the 12 yo made the WRONG choice.

In another words, the police made a tragic, right choice of action.

So shooting kids with toy guns on sight is a right thing to do?
That is rubbish. If the officer had made the right choice, no one would have been killed. The right choice in this scenario would have been for the cop to react calm and patiently, rather than to charge in guns blazing.

Easy to say when you don't have to make a snap decision when someone pulls out a gun. It's not a film, guns kill. In the UK you might have more reason to suspect a replica, but guns are common place in the US and easy to acquire. It's not that unreasonable to assume they are the real thing.. I completely understand police who don't want to gamble with leaving their wife a widow when someone pulls a gun.

They should have waited to see what the kid was going to do with the gun he pulled out. He might have probably and tried to put the gun on the ground or throw it away. In my opinion, the police should never be the agressors, they should never fire unless fired upon. Agression begets agression. The police charging in like that was just begging for someone to get killed.

He was a kid and didn't deserve to die. But nor did the cops, and that's what they're thinking when someone draws a weapon. It's unfortunate, but what do you expect if you pull out a replica gun in front of armed police. I don't see the need to point fingers here. The kid was dumb and the consequences serious, sacking or prosecuting people won't change a thing or make any difference in future.