Adam Toledo video released

[Derec]

Actually there are laws and issues with equal protection to make things fair.

And most non-white perps, including killers get arrested peacefully too. What's your point?

We had that guy in Georgia be armed after killing several people, and being arrested alive.

Was he armed when he was arrested?

The teen in Wisconsin killed people and walked right past the police, open carrying.

In self-defense, and firearms at protests is not something limited to white people either. At least he did not kill an innocent 8-year old girl like the armed #BLMers who had occupied the city block around the burned down Wendy's in Atlanta. By the way, the only suspect in that case who's been identified has been taken alive. So stop with cherry-picking cases, ok.

And we have this thirteen year old who was doing something they shouldn't have been doing (something very reckless!), and is killed during apprehension.

Yeah. When you do something reckless you run the risk of something bad happening to you. That's what makes it reckless.

There is a disconnect, and the Constitution says there shouldn't be... that it is about fairness.

There is no evidence that had Adam been white Anglo (Adam Dayton, perhaps?) and not a white Hispanic that things would have gone any differently.

 

[Derec]

No, the "violent criminal" was shooting in the air.

In the air? Ruben Roman was shooting at cars.

Also, unless you have a gun capable of shooting bullets at or above escape velocity, what goes up must come down. Shooting in the air is dangerous, especially in the middle of the city.

And the officer had more than a split second to make a decision. The officer choose to not take more than a split second to make the decision to shoot to kill.

There was less than a second between the frame that showed Adam in possession of the gun, raising it, and turning around and the frame when the cop is shown firing.

If bad decisions merited a killing, we wouldn't be worried about climate change at all.

Holy non sequitur, Batman!

 

[none]

Disagree--I don't believe he was playing chicken. He knew he was doing something illegal, he tried to flee. When it became obvious that wasn't working he tried to ditch the gun. He didn't realize how deadly the rules of the game were, that the cop was going to react to the quick movement of the gun. He didn't realize the cop would be focusing on the gun and see the motion.

He is a victim in all this, but his killer is the gang.

the cop was focusing on the gun?

Of course he was.

his gun?

 

[Derec]

I think it’s dishonest to have expected a frightened 13 year old to have had the forethought to know to drop the gun, yes.

Then the 13 year old should not be having the gun in the first place.

I don’t think a single person posting, if they were honest and put themselves in Adam’s shoes would have done better.

To be fair, I don't think a single person posting here would have been out at 2:30am shooting at cars with a gang member when we were 13.
Seriously, I do not how I would handle being pursued by the police at that age, but I know putting myself in such a situation was nowhere near my mind either.

I think it’s dishonest to not expect a law enforcement officer who commands someone to put their hands up and drop their weapon to actually give the suspect at least a second to drop the gun and out their hands up before shooting, giving the officer all the benefit of reaction time and giving the child zero. Yeah I think that’s dishonest AF.

I think you are being dishonest by conflating several issues here.
1. The reaction time issue has to do with the idiotic claim that Adam was "unarmed" because he threw his gun a fraction of a second before being shot. The reality is that at the time the officer gave the command to fire, Adam was still armed.
2. This is the issue of why the officer decided to fire at that particular instant and did not give Adam more time after giving him the command. The answer is that we cannot know what exactly caused the split-second decision to open fire. We know from neurology that these decisions are not entirely conscious, i.e. motor neurons fire before the person is aware they want a particular muscle to move. However, it was most likely the reaction to Adam's turning around while bringing up the gun. Had he simply dropped it, he probably would have been alive. Tragically, he decided to toss it behind the fence, which means he had to bring the shooting arm up to impart a horizontal impulse to the gun. But that looks very much like raising the gun to fire it, at which point the officer's training kicked in and he fired his weapon. Not very different than the case of Deon Kay, except that Kay was 18.

 

[Toni]

And most non-white perps, including killers get arrested peacefully too. What's your point?

Was he armed when he was arrested?

The teen in Wisconsin killed people and walked right past the police, open carrying.

In self-defense, and firearms at protests is not something limited to white people either. At least he did not kill an innocent 8-year old girl like the armed #BLMers who had occupied the city block around the burned down Wendy's in Atlanta. By the way, the only suspect in that case who's been identified has been taken alive. So stop with cherry-picking cases, ok.

And we have this thirteen year old who was doing something they shouldn't have been doing (something very reckless!), and is killed during apprehension.

Yeah. When you do something reckless you run the risk of something bad happening to you. That's what makes it reckless.

There is a disconnect, and the Constitution says there shouldn't be... that it is about fairness.

There is no evidence that had Adam been white Anglo (Adam Dayton, perhaps?) and not a white Hispanic that things would have gone any differently.

Rittenhouse is alleging self defense as are all the right wingers and I'm sure that's what his lawyers will argue. But that's not what the charges say.

Here's the thing: Adam was a 13 year old kid with some intellectual/learning disabilities. The police officer was an adult, and specifically trained to serve and protect. Instead of protecting Adam, the police officer was concerned for his own safety to the extent that he could not differentiate between Adam drawing his gun on him and complying with the police officer's command. Instead of helping, as an adult should do, the police officer killed him.

 

[Derec]

Jury acquitted the cop who killed Philandro Castile for doing just that.

Not quite.

You're right: they aren't 'apples to apples.' Not at all. There is a pretty big difference between 13 and 17, for one thing.

You finally get that!

There's another big difference between deliberately shooting and killing multiple people with a firearm you are too young to possess and maybe shooting at some cars.

Rittenhouse shot those people in self defense. Adam and Ruben were shooting at random cars. Big difference, yes, between self-defense and assault with a deadly weapon.

One of those big differences is that the cops didn't see Rittenhouse as a threat, even though he had just shot multiple people. Rittenhouse is not only alive, but is being praised all over Right Wing Talk whatever platform you care to name.

He was seen walking with his empty hands in full view, his rifle slung over his shoulder. He was not an immediate threat.
I do not like it, but being armed at these protests is fairly common, for blacks and whites, for left and right wingers alike.

Yeah, the cop felt his own life was in danger. Did he have another choice?

Take a gamble and maybe get killed. There have been cases of cops hesitating too long before shooting and getting killed or almost killed in the process.
See for example the case of Nika Holbert. The cop hesitated too long and it almost cost him his life.

Of course he did. He could have waited a full second.

Which could have been fatal.

Adam dropped the gun.

No, he didn't. He tossed it behind the fence. Had he merely dropped it, he would probably have been alive. Instead he performed a throwing motion, which means he had to raise the gun, which looked like raising the gun to fire in the split second in which the officer had to decide whether to shoot.

He was unarmed when the cop shot him.

He was armed when the officer made the decision to shoot.

The cop didn't give himself enough time to process what was happening. Adam is dead.

There wasn't enough time.

On the other hand, Adam had plenty of opportunities to drop the gun before he reached the gap in the fence and turned around.

 

[Toni]

Not quite.


You finally get that!

There's another big difference between deliberately shooting and killing multiple people with a firearm you are too young to possess and maybe shooting at some cars.

Rittenhouse shot those people in self defense. Adam and Ruben were shooting at random cars. Big difference, yes, between self-defense and assault with a deadly weapon.

One of those big differences is that the cops didn't see Rittenhouse as a threat, even though he had just shot multiple people. Rittenhouse is not only alive, but is being praised all over Right Wing Talk whatever platform you care to name.

He was seen walking with his empty hands in full view, his rifle slung over his shoulder. He was not an immediate threat.
I do not like it, but being armed at these protests is fairly common, for blacks and whites, for left and right wingers alike.

Yeah, the cop felt his own life was in danger. Did he have another choice?

Take a gamble and maybe get killed. There have been cases of cops hesitating too long before shooting and getting killed or almost killed in the process.
See for example the case of Nika Holbert. The cop hesitated too long and it almost cost him his life.

Of course he did. He could have waited a full second.

Which could have been fatal.

Adam dropped the gun.

No, he didn't. He tossed it behind the fence. Had he merely dropped it, he would probably have been alive. Instead he performed a throwing motion, which means he had to raise the gun, which looked like raising the gun to fire in the split second in which the officer had to decide whether to shoot.

He was unarmed when the cop shot him.

He was armed when the officer made the decision to shoot.

The cop didn't give himself enough time to process what was happening. Adam is dead.

There wasn't enough time.

On the other hand, Adam had plenty of opportunities to drop the gun before he reached the gap in the fence and turned around.

Oh I've always known the difference between 13 and 17. [removed]

The charges against Rittenhouse are for felony first degree intentional homicide as well as felony charges of attempted first-degree intentional homicide and two charges of first-degree recklessly endangering safety, and a misdemeanor charge of possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18. All felony charges came with "use of a dangerous weapon" modifier.

So, yeah, there are really big differences between the two kids. And yeah, I said kid because Rittenhouse was 17 when his mommy drove him across state borders to attend a protest and to kill him some protesters. You're fine with that because you don't believe in our constitutional right to protest. Plus, they were protesting the shooting of a black man, so, well of course that is justified.

 

[Derec]

Rittenhouse is alleging self defense as are all the right wingers and I'm sure that's what his lawyers will argue. But that's not what the charges say.

Did you see the video? That's pretty clear-cut case of self-defense.
An angry Rosenbaum (after having a nigga moment) chased Rittenhouse and threw an object at him.
Huber hit him with a skateboard while he was on the ground.
Grosskreutz advanced at him with his own gun drawn.

Again, watch the video and tell me why you think this was not self defense. These adult men, two of them with felony records, were chasing and attacking a child.

Here's the thing: Adam was a 13 year old kid with some intellectual/learning disabilities.

Which means your blame should be with Ruben Roman, the adult who was with him and who gave him the gun.

The police officer was an adult, and specifically trained to serve and protect.

That does not mean he acted unreasonably under the circumstances.

Instead of protecting Adam, the police officer was concerned for his own safety

What's wrong with a police officer being concerned for his own safety?

to the extent that he could not differentiate between Adam drawing his gun on him and complying with the police officer's command.

Adam made the fatal choice to throw the gun horizontally instead of merely dropping it. That's on him.

Instead of helping, as an adult should do, the police officer killed him.

Adam had plenty of opportunity to drop the gun. Smart choice would have been to drop it as soon as he saw the cops. Or at some point during the chase. Or even when he stopped at the fence. Stupid choice was to throw it because that meant he had to raise the shooting hand with the gun in it before letting it go.

Of course, the really smart choice would have been not to go out at 2:30AM to shoot at cars with Ruben Roman.

 

[Derec]

[removed] The charges against Rittenhouse are for felony first degree intentional homicide as well as felony charges of attempted first-degree intentional homicide and two charges of first-degree recklessly endangering safety, and a misdemeanor charge of possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18. All felony charges came with "use of a dangerous weapon" modifier.

Politically motivated charges and only the misdemeanor one has any basis in fact or law. Watch the video. It's pretty clear-cut case of self-defense.

If the DA were smart, he'd offer Rittenhouse a plea deal on the gun charge and move on.

So, yeah, there are really big differences between the two kids.

One was acting in self-defense after being attacked by three adults, two of them violent felons. The other was a gang banger who was shooting at cars with an adult gang member.
Yes, a big difference.

And yeah, I said kid because Rittenhouse was 17 when his mommy drove him across state borders to attend a protest and to kill him some protesters.

Kyle would not have killed anybody had he not been attacked by three adults. The first of them was angry because he wanted to use a burning dumpster to set a gas station on fire and somebody put the fire out.

Adam and Ruben were shooting at cars and it was just luck that they did not kill somebody like that 7 year old that was killed at a McDonalds very nearby.

You're fine with that because you don't believe in our constitutional right to protest.

I believe in the right of people to peaceably assemble.
That does not include vandalizing and burning down businesses nor looting from stores. Nor does it involve chasing down kids and throwing objects at them just because you are having a nigga moment.

Plus, they were protesting the shooting of a black man, so, well of course that is justified.

It does not matter what cause they are "protesting". Rioting, arson and looting are never justified. Neither is chasing down kids and throwing objects at them.

You trying to justify the Kenosha riots as "constitutionally protected" is beyond the pale. That was as much a peaceable assembly as the January 6th riot was constitutionally protected "petition[ing] the Government for a redress of grievances".

And what Kenosha riots and Rittenhouse defending himself from a trio of Antifa losers has to do with two gangbangers shooting at passing cars in Chicago, I have no idea.

 

[DBT]

Here is another police shooting that required split second decision making:

[YOUTUBE]https://youtu.be/zBsk9zjdZp8[/YOUTUBE]

 

[none]

Here is another police shooting that required split second decision making:

[YOUTUBE]https://youtu.be/zBsk9zjdZp8[/YOUTUBE]

required? elaborate?

 

[DBT]

Here is another police shooting that required split second decision making:

[YOUTUBE]https://youtu.be/zBsk9zjdZp8[/YOUTUBE]

required? elaborate?

The attacker, brandishing a large knife rushed at the other girl in an aggressive manner, apparently willing to kill.

What are the options for the officer? Let the attack happen or shoot?

Yelling didn't have an effect. Nobody was close enough to physically stop the attack.

In the heat of the moment, the options were, let the stabbing happen or shoot. The officer, making the decision in a split second, shot the attacker.

 

[Trausti]

Here is another police shooting that required split second decision making:

[YOUTUBE]https://youtu.be/zBsk9zjdZp8[/YOUTUBE]

required? elaborate?

The attacker, brandishing a large knife rushed at the other girl in an aggressive manner, apparently willing to kill.

What are the options for the officer? Let the attack happen or shoot?

Yelling didn't have an effect. Nobody was close enough to physically stop the attack.

In the heat of the moment, the options were, let the stabbing happen or shoot. The officer, making the decision in a split second, shot the attacker.

I dunno. He could have shot the knife out of her hand, like in the movies.

 

[none]

Here is another police shooting that required split second decision making:

[YOUTUBE]https://youtu.be/zBsk9zjdZp8[/YOUTUBE]

required? elaborate?

The attacker, brandishing a large knife rushed at the other girl in an aggressive manner, apparently willing to kill.

What are the options for the officer? Let the attack happen or shoot?

Yelling didn't have an effect. Nobody was close enough to physically stop the attack.

In the heat of the moment, the options were, let the stabbing happen or shoot. The officer, making the decision in a split second, shot the attacker.

YEAH REQUIRED.

 

[DBT]

The attacker, brandishing a large knife rushed at the other girl in an aggressive manner, apparently willing to kill.

What are the options for the officer? Let the attack happen or shoot?

Yelling didn't have an effect. Nobody was close enough to physically stop the attack.

In the heat of the moment, the options were, let the stabbing happen or shoot. The officer, making the decision in a split second, shot the attacker.

YEAH REQUIRED.

You say that like no decision was required.

 

[Swammerdami]

Rittenhouse: Self-Defense or Murder?

... You are correct, but not in the way you think, as Rittenhouse killed three people with that gun... and walked pass the officers without a second thought.

https://youtu.be/tkTnQfjRvk0

Thanks for the link; I'd never heard^* of Rittenhouse until I watched this video just now. (* - I'm sure I noticed a "Rittenhouse" at Google News' home page, but never clicked.)

To me, it is obvious that he fired in self-defense, beginning with his first victim who seemed psychotic and perhaps seeking suicide by shooter.

BUT, I thought that deaths resulting from a felony are Murder. If Rittenhouse was already committing a felony, the killings become Murders, right? Even if they were justifiable self-defense.

Rittenhouse is charged with "Minor in possession of firearm," but that's just a misdemeanor. He was brandishing the weapon — still not a felony? I've no doubt Rittenhouse is a racist asshole, but is he guilty of Murder?

Anyway, parsing all these killings one-by-one is rather beside the point. The whole gun-crazed race-hating country is dysfunctional; the stories that make the news are just the iceberg's tip.

 

[Gun Nut]

Suppose the situation was slightly different.
Suppose the police officer arrived at the scene to discover several 18+ year olds illegally possessing guns, standing around a 13 year old boy on the ground, apparently dead from a gunshot wound. The gang of 18 year olds explains they gave an illegal gun to the underage kid so that he can get used to playing with it and practice shooting at passing cars. Unfortunately, the poor boy accidently shot himself while holding it incorrectly. Everyone feels bad... and all of their thoughts and prayers went out to the dead kid...and they're now discussing who's lil' brother they are going to "recruit" to replace him.

Would the cop be responsible for the kids death? What if the kid accidently shot himself just as the cop arrived? What if that kid accidently shot himself a few seconds after the cop arrived... how close is this scenario getting to what happened?

 

[Toni]

Suppose the situation was slightly different.
Suppose the police officer arrived at the scene to discover several 18+ year olds illegally possessing guns, standing around a 13 year old boy on the ground, apparently dead from a gunshot wound. The gang of 18 year olds explains they gave an illegal gun to the underage kid so that he can get used to playing with it and practice shooting at passing cars. Unfortunately, the poor boy accidently shot himself while holding it incorrectly. Everyone feels bad... and all of their thoughts and prayers went out to the dead kid...and they're now discussing who's lil' brother they are going to "recruit" to replace him.

Would the cop be responsible for the kids death? What if the kid accidently shot himself just as the cop arrived? What if that kid accidently shot himself a few seconds after the cop arrived... how close is this scenario getting to what happened?

It's a long, long, long way from what happened.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Reality check: The officer saw the gun start to come up. At this point his choices are:

1) Within a small fraction of a second decide to shoot.

2) Hope the kid isn't trying to shoot him, because if he is the officer is dead.

Your reality check is not reality. If it were, you'd acknowledge
a) there is more than a fraction of a second,
b) it takes a firearm pointed in one's direction to make one a target, and
c) targets are not always hit (or people killed when shot).

Once again, this isn't a sporting event. You are focusing on things that have no bearing on the situation.

Your responses are inane enough without the babble.

We have .8 seconds from the frame with the gun to the frame with the shot.

Not all .8 seconds are available for the decision, though. The officer must decide and then pull the trigger--something that will take a good portion of those .8 seconds.

And by the time the firearm is pointed in your direction it's too late, you gave them the first shot. If they're any good, the first couple of shots.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Wondering if the gun was even loaded at the time. Yes, I know this makes no difference to the cop.

It makes no difference, period.