Fox News wrote:By: Craig Wall
POSTED:APR 12 2016 08:49PM CDT
UPDATED:APR 12 2016 10:15PM CDT
There is outrage after Chicago police shot and killed a 16-year-old boy.

In Homan Square on Monday night, police pulled over a car that was connected to an earlier shooting. Police say Pierre Loury jumped out and an officer chased him.

Police say Loury then pointed a weapon at the officer and that is when he was shot. But a witness claims he saw officers "high five" each other after the teen was gunned down.

And now, protesters are demanding justice. A group held a vigil at the scene of the shooting and then marched onto the Eisenhower.

Even though the facts of this case are still far from clear, there are those on the side of Loury who claim this was not a justified shooting, despite what police say that he pointed a gun at an officer, and that the gun was recovered at the scene.

It threatened to turn ugly Tuesday night as protesters loudly and angrily confronted police in front of the station where the officers involved in the chase and shooting work. Police managed to keep order and move the protesters down the street.

Earlier, several hundred people marched down the alley to the spot where Loury was shot and killed as he ran from a police stop a block away.

“We do believe that this individual turned and pointed the handgun at the officer the handgun was recovered at the scene where the young man was shot,” said 1st Deputy Supt. John Escalante.

Police radio transmissions captured the intensity of the moment, and a neighbor facing the alley posted a video on Facebook of the scene shortly after the chaotic moment.

Loury’s mother, overcome with emotion, joined the vigil as supporters chanted against police and in support of Loury.

“They gunned down one of our brothers, they executed him. 16 years old. 16 years old. He should be here right now,” one person said at the vigil.

Police say Loury was a documented gang member. He posted a picture of himself holding a handgun on his Facebook page. People who knew him, though, did not think he would have been carrying a gun Monday night.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
The person in that picture looks a lot older than 16...

 Frazzled wrote:
That does indeed look like a Hi-Point.

What is the protest about?

 reds8n wrote:
One assumes that -- even if it varies from state to state/whatever -- there's generally laws against 16 years olds getting tats ?

 reds8n wrote:
One assumes that -- even if it varies from state to state/whatever -- there's generally laws against 16 years olds getting tats ?

 reds8n wrote:
One assumes that -- even if it varies from state to state/whatever -- there's generally laws against 16 years olds getting tats ?

 jmurph wrote:
Armed gang member in a car linked to an earlier shooting. I wonder why they aren't protesting for the victim who got shot? Oh wait, because we have thousands of blacks murdered every year and they don't seem to give a care about that.

University of Toledo criminologist Dr. Richard R. Johnson examined the latest crime data from the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports and Centers for Disease Control and found that an average of 4,472 black men were killed by other black men annually between Jan. 1, 2009, and Dec. 31, 2012.

Professor Johnson’s research further concluded that 112 black men died from both justified and unjustified police-involved killings annually during this same period.

So obviously police are the issue.

538 had a good article on just how bad it is for black Americans: http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/black-americans-are-killed-at-12-times-the-rate-of-people-in-other-developed-countries/

It infuriates me that with such a real crime problem, BLM and similar groups try to mug for cameras while taking resources and focus from a terrible true threat.

Even though the facts of this case are still far from clear, there are those on the side of Loury who claim this was not a justified shooting, despite what police say that he pointed a gun at an officer, and that the gun was recovered at the scene.

 Nostromodamus wrote:

But of course it's probably not his fault, he's only 16, poor little guy...

Rosebuddy wrote:

 Nostromodamus wrote:

But of course it's probably not his fault, he's only 16, poor little guy...

Well, yes, young people are indeed considered to be less legally responsible for what they do and what happens to them. This is a commonly held view. Teenagers are not fully developed and have significantly worse risk assessment and general wisdom than adults. A child is particularly not responsible for how, when and where they are raised, what opportunities and difficulties they face and how they deal with them without sufficient support.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


As the years go by, and I hear more and more about police incompetence and miscarriages of justice, I find it increasingly hard to believe anything the police say.

Rosebuddy wrote:

 Nostromodamus wrote:

But of course it's probably not his fault, he's only 16, poor little guy...

Well, yes, young people are indeed considered to be less legally responsible for what they do and what happens to them. This is a commonly held view. Teenagers are not fully developed and have significantly worse risk assessment and general wisdom than adults. A child is particularly not responsible for how, when and where they are raised, what opportunities and difficulties they face and how they deal with them without sufficient support.

nkelsch wrote:
A lot of people quick to talk in absolutes and justify a killing when there is a total lack of hard evidence supporting the current story of events and multiple witnesses which directly contradict the 'official story' right now. Makes it hard to armchair sentence a minor to death just because you want to be pro-police.

People seem quick to latch on to versions of events which support their agenda or preconceived biases. If this was a justified shooting, I would hope the police had bodycams to support it. Another reason bodycams should be required.

Considering this is the same group who murdered Laquan McDonald, and the city just settled for 5 mil with his family and murder charges have been filed... I can see why no one in Chicago would believe 'he was trying to shoot me' from an officer there.

 Nostromodamus wrote:

Even the dumbest fething teenager on earth knows what happens when you point a gun at a cop. Gang members certainly do. It is no surprise that he is now dead, and it is entirely down to his own actions, despite what his supporters would have you believe. He could have just ran, he could have complied with the officer, but he chose to draw a gun. His socio-economic situation did not pull a gun out of his pants and try to murder a police officer.

 Mr. Burning wrote:
Are police Unions for or against BodyCams? You would think they would be all over them considering how policing has been pushed into the public eye.

 Goliath wrote:

 jmurph wrote:
Armed gang member in a car linked to an earlier shooting. I wonder why they aren't protesting for the victim who got shot? Oh wait, because we have thousands of blacks murdered every year and they don't seem to give a care about that.

University of Toledo criminologist Dr. Richard R. Johnson examined the latest crime data from the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports and Centers for Disease Control and found that an average of 4,472 black men were killed by other black men annually between Jan. 1, 2009, and Dec. 31, 2012.

Professor Johnson’s research further concluded that 112 black men died from both justified and unjustified police-involved killings annually during this same period.

So obviously police are the issue.

538 had a good article on just how bad it is for black Americans: http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/black-americans-are-killed-at-12-times-the-rate-of-people-in-other-developed-countries/

It infuriates me that with such a real crime problem, BLM and similar groups try to mug for cameras while taking resources and focus from a terrible true threat.

Huh. It's weird that they expect the police to kill black people less than criminal gangs. I really don't understand their priorities in trying to get the people that uphold the law to kill fewer black people. I wonder why that is?

I suppose they should just go and protest outside the policegang station and convince the law-abiding gang members to shoot fewer black people when they're arresting them in their police gang cars.

I mean, the government *is* directly in control of all the local gangs, and there is a clear chain of command from elected officials to the policegang person on the street, so protests will definitely stop all of those gang shootings.