• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Chicago police shooting incident video released

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Jaskalas said:
His life was threatened by the gun the teen was holding. And by the quick "turn to shoot" that the teen did.

Yes, we can sit down in comfy chairs and pick it apart frame by frame. And realize the teen had tossed the gun. That his hands were empty as he turned. He was already dead by then. The gun and the movement is all it was. The decision to shoot is in the moment, and how a person is expected to react given the information they have at the time. You are misusing the information available after the fact. Rather than placing yourself in their shoes.
Click to expand...
The kid complied and was killed, if the cop didn't want him to comply he shouldn't have given the order. The kid was no threat when shot.
 
pete6032 said:
Was the cop justified in shooting him? Or did you just want to pop into the thread and piss on a dead child's grave?
Click to expand...
What are 13 year olds doing with guns on the street at night? Can you come up with one good reason for a 13 year old to be carrying a gun?
What part of illegal do you not understand?
 
Jaskalas said:
Having just watched it. Wow.

Armed teen, turns to face the cop. He is "dead" the second he turns around. You know why? Because he was armed. Cop already made the decision to shoot before he could see the empty hands, that the gun was tossed. This all happened too fast to react differently.



Did you watch the video? That is not what happened. A single still frame from it does not depict how fast it occurred. His "hands being up" was meaningless, the decision to pull the trigger was already made. Too little too late. If cops think you are armed. You need to move slow in a non threatening manner. "Turning around to shoot" is was reacted to by deadly force. That is justified. Even though it is not what the teen was trying to do, that is definitely how the cop saw it.
Click to expand...
Or you know, cops could be trained to not shoot first. Shooting should be a last resort at all times. Even if the kid had a gun and intended to shoot the cops the chances of him wheeling around and hitting an officer on his first shot would be minimal. Nonexistent if the cop had any cover at all like a professional would have if he thought for a even a second that shots were about to be fired. Fuck these cops and fuck all cops like them, and fuck people defending them. Can't handle the risk of death that comes with the job? Don't be a fucking cop, you fucking loser.
 
[DHT]Osiris said:
This might surprise you but being 13 with a gun isn't a legitimate reason to be shot by a cop.
Click to expand...
You carry a gun you fire a gun on the street in the city and the police come. What do you expect. This kid is no hero. He is a criminal. Answer the question what is he doing with the gun.
 
Zorba said:
Was he a threat to the officer with his hands up, complying with orders? No? Maybe the cop shouldn't have murdered him then. The cop being scared and hyped up doesn't justify him murdering a kid without taking two seconds to survey the situation.

Not sure why so many people are okay with summary executions, just be the man with body armor that signed up to be LEO got scared.
Click to expand...

Nope
You are not wrong. I'm not ok with any of it.
I just chose to focus on nicer things yesterday vs another miserable story.
 
Leymenaide said:
What are 13 year olds doing with guns on the street at night? Can you come up with one good reason for a 13 year old to be carrying a gun?
What part of illegal do you not understand?
Click to expand...


These guys would like a word with you
B9317873947Z.1_20150626141051_000_GADB6KK6V.2-0.jpg


What if he took a NRA gun safety program?
 
Leymenaide said:
What are 13 year olds doing with guns on the street at night? Can you come up with one good reason for a 13 year old to be carrying a gun?
What part of illegal do you not understand?
Click to expand...

He was clearly up to no good. I think the cops should arrest him and charge him with crimes. I don't think they should shoot him "just in case".
 
Leymenaide said:
You carry a gun you fire a gun on the street in the city and the police come. What do you expect. This kid is no hero. He is a criminal. Answer the question what is he doing with the gun.
Click to expand...
Alleged unlawful discharge of a firearm still doesn't justify a cop shooting you, they aren't judge dredd.
 
Leymenaide said:
You carry a gun you fire a gun on the street in the city and the police come. What do you expect. This kid is no hero. He is a criminal. Answer the question what is he doing with the gun.
Click to expand...
So you support summary executions for kids with guns? I didn't realize death was the penalty for underage gun possession. Does that mean cops can start mowing down all the kids at NRA brainwashing training camps?

Why do we talk about how he got that gun? Likely stolen from a "responsible" gun owner.

How about Kyle Rittenhouse? He was underage, with a gun, that he used to kill two people, should he have been shot in the chest? I seem to remember him walking right by the cops, with his gun and baby face fully visible.
 
Last edited:
Leymenaide said:
What are 13 year olds doing with guns on the street at night? Can you come up with one good reason for a 13 year old to be carrying a gun?
What part of illegal do you not understand?
Click to expand...
You should read the story. The kid was with an adult who was breaking crimes. The adult was shooting the gun in the street per report. The cops showed up. The adult decided to ditch the gun by giving it to the kid and telling him to run. They split up and ran in different directions.

The kid threw the gun down and gave himself up. Was shot. There is no evidence the 13 year old was actually breaking any laws to my knowledge other than running when an adult told him to. They caught the adult and are charging him with felony endangerment of a child and other similar crimes.
 
Sunburn74 said:
You should read the story. The kid was with an adult who was breaking crimes. The adult was shooting the gun in the street per report. The cops showed up. The adult decided to ditch the gun by giving it to the kid and telling him to run. They split up and ran in different directions.

The kid threw the gun down and gave himself up. Was shot. There is no evidence the 13 year old was actually breaking any laws to my knowledge other than running when an adult told him to. They caught the adult and are charging him with felony endangerment of a child and other similar crimes.
Click to expand...

Honestly it really doesn’t matter what the story is, police shouldn’t discharge their weapon unless A) they are fired upon first B) the perp is a direct threat to bystanders, C) the police witness firsthand the perp committing murder or shooting directly at others, that’s it.
 
ivwshane said:
Honestly it really doesn’t matter what the story is, police shouldn’t discharge their weapon unless A) they are fired upon first B) the perp is a direct threat to bystanders, C) the police witness firsthand the perp committing murder or shooting directly at others, that’s it.
Click to expand...

I think there has to be more exceptions in that list, i.e. an imminent thread to the officer, where "imminent" can further be defined.

In this case the officer was responding to a shooting and was chasing a suspect who he knew had a gun. I think the onus fell on the suspect to know the situation he was in. Unfortunately the suspect was a 13 year old who didn't have that ability. I don't put that on the officer.

I think arguments can be made whether he should have chased the suspect by himself and/or the direction he gave him, "show me your hands". But, I think it was a bang bang situation. (apologies for the choice of words, "bang bang")

I am open to other perspectives.
 
Last edited:
dank69 said:
Or you know, cops could be trained to not shoot first. Shooting should be a last resort at all times. Even if the kid had a gun and intended to shoot the cops the chances of him wheeling around and hitting an officer on his first shot would be minimal. Nonexistent if the cop had any cover at all like a professional would have if he thought for a even a second that shots were about to be fired. Fuck these cops and fuck all cops like them, and fuck people defending them. Can't handle the risk of death that comes with the job? Don't be a fucking cop, you fucking loser.
Click to expand...
My judgement from looking at this video *in this particular incident* is that the officer was not justified in shooting the subject, since when he turned around, he clearly did not have a gun in his hand. Granted, it was a high stress situation that required a split second decision, but being able to handle that is what a policeman is required to do.

That said, are you seriously advocating giving fugitives one free shot before an officer responds, just because the shooter *might* miss?
 
emperus said:
I think there has to be more exceptions in that list, i.e. an imminent thread to the officer, where "imminent" can further be defined.

In this case the officer was responding to a shooting and was chasing a suspect who he knew had a gun. I think the onus fell on the suspect to know the situation he was in. Unfortunately the suspect was a 13 year old who didn't have that ability. I don't put that on the officer.

I think arguments can be made whether he should have chased the suspect by himself and/or the direction he gave him, "show me your hands". But, I think it was a bang bang situation.

I am open to other perspectives.
Click to expand...
Yes, this brings up two important points. The first is that fleeing from the police, fairly or unfairly, usually leads to a worse outcome.

Secondly, the police need better training and policies on what to do if a subject flees. Do you pursue them in all cases, no matter what the offense? Is deadly force justified to stop someone from fleeing? How about a taser--many times they seem ineffective and lead to using deadly force.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top