Now #BLMers are rioting in Minneapolis after black murderer kills himself

[atrib]

and yet, your standard that you're setting for living in the most opulent civilization this planet has ever witnessed is "survival" - not actively starving to death.
that's it? that's the best you can do? the most you can aspire to is that living in this absolute *ocean* of resources is "don't die too early due to lack of food"

Just because you live in what you describe as an "ocean of resources" does not give you the right to steal what is not yours.
Vast majority of people make lives for themselves that are far beyond mere survival by working for a living. And we as a society recognize that some people can't work so there are government programs such as social security disability, housing subsidies etc. that provide a life beyond mere survival (but admittedly not a very nice life if you don't have other resources).

But there are people who want nice things, the overpriced Nike sneakers endorsed by some overpaid and underworked ball player, or the latest iPhone or something more expensive like a Merc or a Caddy, without working for it. So they resort to stealing, robbing etc. So, yes, engaging in crime is still very much a choice.

It is not as black and white as you make it out to be. I was raised in a stable home by parents and family who loved and supported me and taught me right from wrong, which has a lot to do with the choices I made in my life. I can't imagine what it would be like being a child in a home where your father is in prison and your mother is a crack whore. You are 12 years old, your friends are in and out of juve for petty crimes, and you don't have the money to buy an ice cream cone, much less those $500 sneakers that are all the rage in the neighborhood. Who does this kid learn from? Who are his role models? Who teaches this kid to make the right choices? Imagine this same kid at 18, functionally illiterate, barely able to read, because nobody in his life cared enough to teach him. Can you imagine what it might be like to walk in his shoes? Of course you can't. You don't even see them as human beings.

 

[Elixir]

Who teaches this kid to make the right choices?

In Derectopia, The Warden.
A well trained police force would have him in reprogramming almost before he commit his first misdemeanor.
Kinda like Trump, and how he locked up all those thousands of 1-10 year old brown kids. Not one of them has broken into your house, right?

 

[prideandfall]

How are they idiots?

the inherent misapplication of logic required to reduce a complex issue into a kitchy photo op that presumes to cleverly utilize disparate mantras in order to appeal to yahoos who want any excuse to justify their blind rejection of the notion that "lives matter" is inherently idiotic.
sure, i get that it tickles you to be able to go "look! look! a black man is in this picture! see! black lives don't matter*!" but the entire premise strikes me as being stupid.
*independently of course because obviously they matter in relation to all lives i mean pft it's not like you're hypocritical at all, you have to recognize the value of life in a very general way so long as you never have to address or deal with any of the ways in which black lives are treated as inferior to white lives.

FFS, you are so full of hate.

yes, and? just because i have an unusual hobby doesn't make me wrong.

 

[ruby sparks]

congratulations trausti, in the entirety of the internet you managed to find a picture of 3 idiots.
quite an accomplishment.

How are they idiots? FFS, you are so full of hate.

Yeah, I thought it was a pretty cute picture. I never imagined anyone would be seriously upset about it.

It's a nice picture.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You go pointing a realistic replica gun at people, you might die.

This sounded like victim blaming to me, and is what I responded to. Evidently I was wrong:

His age has no bearing on this. The cops are going to evaluate the situation they see, not unknown numbers.

Had the cops shot and killed a 5-year old, they'd have been just as justified ("age has no bearing"); hence we derive that the earlier post was NOT victim blaming. (Use of the passive voice might have helped — as phrased the statement could easily be mistaken for victim blaming.)

Four years old? Three? Is there some threshold where cops should have shown leniency?

I will admit the cops "saw a hard-to-evaluate situation." Instead of questioning the child from a safe distance, the driver of the police vehicle drove up right next to him, and the cops immediately jumped out of the car, exposing themselves to possible gunfire. Whatever compelled them to do that should share the blame. Now at close proximity to a toy gun — a holstered toy gun! — the cops had no choice but to empty their magazines into the helpless child.

As usual you are playing monday morning quarterback. It doesn't work that way--you don't get to know the situation in deciding what to do. You are coming up with answers that would help when it's a kid playing but which likely would have gone badly if the threat was real.

What's wrong with this picture?

Since Loren doesn't know — or pretends not to know^* — Tamir's age, I will reveal it. Tamir Rice was twelve years old when he was gunned down by Cleveland police. Twelve. Tamir wasn't yet even a teenager. (* - On reread this sounds almost snarky. But why didn't Loren write "Tamir was 12 but it has no bearing" if he knew the age? Either he didn't know the age, or chose deliberately to suppress it.)

I think Tamir was tall for his age and could be mistaken — by someone who made no attempt to engage him in conversation — for a strapping 14 year-old buck. But — and I am curious whether Loren will address this question — if conditions were identical and a 12 year-old white boy with blond hair (who might appear to be 14) were the "suspect", would the homicide have been just as likely?

The pictures generally shown were when he was younger. He looked older than that.

What should the Rice family have done to save the life of their son? His white-skinned playmates were playing with toy guns; should the family have warned him: "Sorry, black boys can't have toy guns"?

1) Warned him not to play with a toy that didn't have an orange tip.

2) Warned him not to try to ditch things if the cops show up.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

There is something wrong with the social compact when officers of the state are absolved of shooting unarmed civilians because of fear/cowardice.

Being armed with a realistic replica counts as armed. Being armed with a knife (Jacob Blake) counts as being armed. And being armed with a gun and shooting oneself does not count as a police shooting anyway (Eddie Sole, the cause of the recent Minneapolis riots from OP).

It is obvious that there us a problem with the social compact when a significant portion of the population think civilians with criminal records merit being shot. It is obvious that the reaction to the brutal treatment of George Floyd shows that the is a problem with our social compact.

Nobody thinks that people with criminal records merit being shot just for having criminal records. But those criminal records may explain why they attacked police or resisted arrest with violence.
And as far as George Floyd goes, he had a lethal amount of fentanyl in his system.

View attachment 29198
Floyd's lungs were filled with liquid because of his fentanyl overdose. Chauvin's actions turn out to be a red herring. Murder charges should be dismissed, and would have been already if it wasn't politically expedient to railroad him.

The term "lethal amount" with things like fentanyl is a red herring--the fact that he walked into the store says he did not have what was for him a lethal dose of fentanyl. Someone habituated to opiods can be fine on a dose that would kill someone who didn't use them.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Not only tall but he is also a portly fellow, a bit long in the waistband. He was 5'7" and 195 lbs. That's literally off the charts for a 12 year old boy.
View attachment 29196
In fact, his height is median for a 15 year old, but his weight is between the 90th and 95th percentile for an 18 year old. If you didn't get a good look at his face he could pass for an adult male - in fact, the 20-something George Zimmerman has a similar height and build. Even the caller who thought he might be a minor probably would have guessed something like 16 and not 12.


Not 14 but 15-18. And who knows. Counterfactuals are impossible to answer. But white kids have been shot for having a wii controller, so not even a realistic firearm replica, so I think you are making too much of race.


I do not think anybody should be playing with realistic looking guns, especially with orange tips removed and when you look significantly older than your age.



Or like not play with realistic firearm replicas. And note, kids not much older than Tamir have used such weapons to commit armed robbery. Have you heard of Tyre King?

WTF does it matter that Tamir Rice was tall for his age???????????????????????????


Exactly what is so broken in you that you must go to such enormous lengths to justify the murder of a child by police?

His point is that Tamir did not look like a child!

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The body cam video shows him saying he could not breath while sitting in the car. He asked to lay on the ground. He was not forced there. And the officers followed their training.

Old training, policies had been revised some years earlier and there was no reason to take him out of the car in the first place. This was purely punitive behavior.

 

[laughing dog]

2) Warned him not to try to ditch things if the cops show up.

He was shot and killed because he did not "ditch" (i.e. obey police orders) his toy fast enough.

More importantly, and on point - the social compact is broken when people defend state sanctioned killings of unarmed civilians who pose no actual threat to anyone or police officers brutally subduing and killing an unarmed civilian who posed no threat to anyone.


R

 

[atrib]

Nobody thinks that people with criminal records merit being shot just for having criminal records. But those criminal records may explain why they attacked police or resisted arrest with violence.
And as far as George Floyd goes, he had a lethal amount of fentanyl in his system.

View attachment 29198
Floyd's lungs were filled with liquid because of his fentanyl overdose. Chauvin's actions turn out to be a red herring. Murder charges should be dismissed, and would have been already if it wasn't politically expedient to railroad him.

Are you licensed as an MD in any US state? Are you qualified to perform post-mortem evaluations of human cadavers? Of course not. You are voicing your unqualified opinions to defend the killing of an unarmed black man, a killing that was not necessary to safeguard the lives of the police or bystanders.

Mr Floyd was walking around and interacting with people just fine before he was killed by the police. He died because two grown policemen sat on his back for an undetermined length of time, and a third officer exerted pressure on his neck for almost nine minutes, thereby asphyxiating him. The policemen continued this level of force for about three minutes AFTER Mr. Floyd had stopped breathing and stopped responding, for no apparent reason, and despite the advice of the bystanders and even one of the other officers who wanted to roll Mr Floyd on his side so he could breathe. Mr Floyd is dead is because Chauvin did not heed these warnings. Mr Floyd would likely be alive today if the police, and Chavin in particular had not acted the way they did.

 

[repoman]

Old training, policies had been revised some years earlier and there was no reason to take him out of the car in the first place. This was purely punitive behavior.

I think that they decided to have him go the jail's clinic or maybe standard hospital instead of taking him there themselves.

That has little bearing on the neck pressure and maybe more important the chest pressure from the other cops. But the latter is hard to get a handle on.

 

[Toni]

Not only tall but he is also a portly fellow, a bit long in the waistband. He was 5'7" and 195 lbs. That's literally off the charts for a 12 year old boy.
View attachment 29196
In fact, his height is median for a 15 year old, but his weight is between the 90th and 95th percentile for an 18 year old. If you didn't get a good look at his face he could pass for an adult male - in fact, the 20-something George Zimmerman has a similar height and build. Even the caller who thought he might be a minor probably would have guessed something like 16 and not 12.


Not 14 but 15-18. And who knows. Counterfactuals are impossible to answer. But white kids have been shot for having a wii controller, so not even a realistic firearm replica, so I think you are making too much of race.


I do not think anybody should be playing with realistic looking guns, especially with orange tips removed and when you look significantly older than your age.



Or like not play with realistic firearm replicas. And note, kids not much older than Tamir have used such weapons to commit armed robbery. Have you heard of Tyre King?

WTF does it matter that Tamir Rice was tall for his age???????????????????????????


Exactly what is so broken in you that you must go to such enormous lengths to justify the murder of a child by police?

His point is that Tamir did not look like a child!

As a matter of fact, Tamir Rice DID look like a child in the images captured of his shooting. It was extremely obvious that this was a child by his gait, his posture, his demeanor.

But I guess black skin wipes out all consideration of actual age.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

His point is that Tamir did not look like a child!

As a matter of fact, Tamir Rice DID look like a child in the images captured of his shooting. It was extremely obvious that this was a child by his gait, his posture, his demeanor.

But I guess black skin wipes out all consideration of actual age.

You're playing monday morning quarterback here. We have a lot more video than the police had observing time.

 

[Arctish]

His point is that Tamir did not look like a child!

As a matter of fact, Tamir Rice DID look like a child in the images captured of his shooting. It was extremely obvious that this was a child by his gait, his posture, his demeanor.

But I guess black skin wipes out all consideration of actual age.

You're playing monday morning quarterback here. We have a lot more video than the police had observing time.

The reason the police had little observing time is because they killed Tamir Rice immediately upon arrival.

You know they drove right up to him at a high rate of speed, Loehmann opened his door before the car came to a stop then jumped out and shot Rice in less than 2 seconds.

They should have made sure Rice was the person they'd been called about. They didn't.

They should have assessed the situation and realized there was no immediate threat. They didn't.

They should have planned how to approach Rice without escalating the situation or putting themselves or Rice in danger. They didn't.

They should have given him the opportunity to put his 'weapon' down. They didn't.

We went over all of this before. Loehmann might have been shouting "Drop your weapon" as the cruiser came roaring up, but that doesn't mean Rice could understand his words through the closed car windows or had time to process them. And you have yet to explain how Rice was supposed to comply without using his hands.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You're playing monday morning quarterback here. We have a lot more video than the police had observing time.

The reason the police had little observing time is because they killed Tamir Rice immediately upon arrival.

You know they drove right up to him at a high rate of speed, Loehmann opened his door before the car came to a stop then jumped out and shot Rice in less than 2 seconds.

They should have made sure Rice was the person they'd been called about. They didn't.

They should have assessed the situation and realized there was no immediate threat. They didn't.

They should have planned how to approach Rice without escalating the situation or putting themselves or Rice in danger. They didn't.

They should have given him the opportunity to put his 'weapon' down. They didn't.

We went over all of this before. Loehmann might have been shouting "Drop your weapon" as the cruiser came roaring up, but that doesn't mean Rice could understand his words through the closed car windows or had time to process them. And you have yet to explain how Rice was supposed to comply without using his hands.

The same thing I said to laughing dog--your approach works fine if it really is a kid playing with a toy. It doesn't work so well if it's an actual bad guy.

 

[laughing dog]

You're playing monday morning quarterback here. We have a lot more video than the police had observing time.

The reason the police had little observing time is because they killed Tamir Rice immediately upon arrival.

You know they drove right up to him at a high rate of speed, Loehmann opened his door before the car came to a stop then jumped out and shot Rice in less than 2 seconds.

They should have made sure Rice was the person they'd been called about. They didn't.

They should have assessed the situation and realized there was no immediate threat. They didn't.

They should have planned how to approach Rice without escalating the situation or putting themselves or Rice in danger. They didn't.

They should have given him the opportunity to put his 'weapon' down. They didn't.

We went over all of this before. Loehmann might have been shouting "Drop your weapon" as the cruiser came roaring up, but that doesn't mean Rice could understand his words through the closed car windows or had time to process them. And you have yet to explain how Rice was supposed to comply without using his hands.

The same thing I said to laughing dog--your approach works fine if it really is a kid playing with a toy. It doesn't work so well if it's an actual bad guy.

The same thing that has been said to you numerous times - the police should be able to ascertain (not immediately guess) whether the civilian is actually armed and threatening before opening fire. For some unfathomable reason, you prize the life of a trained professional who is paid to take these risks more than the life of an amateur who may be doing nothing wrong.

 

[Arctish]

You're playing monday morning quarterback here. We have a lot more video than the police had observing time.

The reason the police had little observing time is because they killed Tamir Rice immediately upon arrival.

You know they drove right up to him at a high rate of speed, Loehmann opened his door before the car came to a stop then jumped out and shot Rice in less than 2 seconds.

They should have made sure Rice was the person they'd been called about. They didn't.

They should have assessed the situation and realized there was no immediate threat. They didn't.

They should have planned how to approach Rice without escalating the situation or putting themselves or Rice in danger. They didn't.

They should have given him the opportunity to put his 'weapon' down. They didn't.

We went over all of this before. Loehmann might have been shouting "Drop your weapon" as the cruiser came roaring up, but that doesn't mean Rice could understand his words through the closed car windows or had time to process them. And you have yet to explain how Rice was supposed to comply without using his hands.

The same thing I said to laughing dog--your approach works fine if it really is a kid playing with a toy. It doesn't work so well if it's an actual bad guy.

Remember how on the day of the shooting the Deputy Chief and the Patrolman's Association president both described Loehmann and Garmbeck pulling into the parking lot, taking a moment to assess the situation and identifying Rice as the suspect, seeing Rice pick up a gun and put it in his waistband, then exiting the vehicle and approaching Rice while telling him to put his hands up, and only shooting Rice when Rice pulled the gun from his waistband instead of complying? We now know that it was a pack of lies, but that was the official story until the video was released.

The Deputy Chief and the Patrolman's Association president were describing proper police procedure. The one I and others believe Garmbeck and Loehmann should have followed. The one you keep saying doesn't work as you attempt to justify a policy of Shoot on Sight. But it does work, which is why police departments across the country developed it and train their officers to follow it. Because bad stuff happens when they don't.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The same thing I said to laughing dog--your approach works fine if it really is a kid playing with a toy. It doesn't work so well if it's an actual bad guy.

The same thing that has been said to you numerous times - the police should be able to ascertain (not immediately guess) whether the civilian is actually armed and threatening before opening fire. For some unfathomable reason, you prize the life of a trained professional who is paid to take these risks more than the life of an amateur who may be doing nothing wrong.

You're still assuming there isn't a threat. Your take-it-slow approach will fail badly if the threat is real.

 

[Arctish]

The same thing I said to laughing dog--your approach works fine if it really is a kid playing with a toy. It doesn't work so well if it's an actual bad guy.

The same thing that has been said to you numerous times - the police should be able to ascertain (not immediately guess) whether the civilian is actually armed and threatening before opening fire. For some unfathomable reason, you prize the life of a trained professional who is paid to take these risks more than the life of an amateur who may be doing nothing wrong.

You're still assuming there isn't a threat. Your take-it-slow approach will fail badly if the threat is real.

If there is a threat, and if the threat is imminent, then they have to act quickly.

But before they act, they need to understand what the threat is and where it's coming from so they have some idea what to do about it. Otherwise they'll just be flailing about blindly and innocents could be hurt or killed, including themselves.

You can't just skip the part about assessing the situation and expect them to choose the correct course of action. Not unless you think the correct course of action is always 'shoot first and ask questions later'.

 

[marc]

You're still assuming there isn't a threat. Your take-it-slow approach will fail badly if the threat is real.

If there is a threat, and if the threat is imminent, then they have to act quickly.

But before they act, they need to understand what the threat is and where it's coming from so they have some idea what to do about it. Otherwise they'll just be flailing about blindly and innocents could be hurt or killed, including themselves.

You can't just skip the part about assessing the situation and expect them to choose the correct course of action. Not unless you think the correct course of action is always 'shoot first and ask questions later'.

The 'if there IS a threat' approach LP is suggesting would mean that police would never be able to capture any suspect ever. Any suspect they see they would shoot on sight assuming the 'threat' to be real... and yet in the real world we see time and again how people who are actual threats are captured without taking a shot, how mass shooters are taken into custody unharmed.

Jeezz... In LP's imaginary world the biggest threat to everyone would be the police.