Police in Iowa Shoot and Kill 19 yr. old After Father Dialed 911 to Teach him a Lesson

XionZap
Regardless of what preceded the execution of the young boy....

Ok, now I see the disconnect in your flawed logic. Nothing that happened prior to shots finally being fired matters to you. Others disagree. Others see a young man attempting to kill at least one innocent bystander (seen fleeing from the booth he smashed), endangering hundreds of lives with a reckless high speed chase through city streets, and repeatedly using deadly force by intentionally ramming another vehicle multiple times.

XionZap
...and of the incredibly stupid decision by the boys father to "teach him a lesson"

This we can agree on. The father's choice to get police involved was a poor one.

XionZap
a rogue cop decided to empty his clip into the young boys vehicle because he didn't shut the engine off.

Hyperbole and/or lies don't make your reasoning sound. Seven shots were fired, and that's not an empty magazine. The situation is sad enough without you sensationalizing it with lies/hyperbole.

XionZap
Look: I tried not to embarrass you, but you did make several grammatical and contextual errors in your confusing post

Have no fear, I'm not embarrassed at all. Interesting that you now claim several, yet were only hung up on just the one instead of addressing any of the rational points laid out. Between all of your hyperboles and lies I have a strong suspicion that you haven't even seen the dash cam footage from either vehicle. Here's a tip... cases of actual excessive force quite often are situations where dash cam footage "mysteriously disappears". Here, we have not only one dash cam, but two!

Again, you fall back on weak fallacies. This time with an Ad Hominem regarding maturity, and a clearly false claim that I didn't "own up to" what you saw as a grammatical error. I clearly owned up to the use of the word "else" numerous times, and explained my reasoning behind it. Never once did I deny it.

As for your laughably misdirected request of "In the future please try to stay on topic", it would be good to heed your own advice. I've attempted rational discourse only for you to repeatedly derail things focusing on one sentence where you feel a single word was misused. Clearly you have nothing logical to debate over the facts laid out in my original post, and you still dodge the question of "In your opinion, how much deadly force is a civilian allowed to use before an officer uses deadly force as well?". All that you've shown is a willful ignorance of the facts, blatant hyperboles/lies, and a clear lack of anything resembling a logical stance on the issue. Good luck with that, but many here can see right through it.

They murdered him in my opinion. He was unarmed and reckless driving, dukes of hazard stuff does not necessitate firing a lethal weapon into the vehicle. And between a cops life and the kids, sorry, the police officers are not the ones that count to me, they are paid by tax dollars and have abused their authority, I want every single one of them fired. Anyone that carries out unlawful laws, breaks the constitution and basic common law, and supports corporations, bildenburg, and fascist governments needs to stripped from their tax paying jobs, pensions taken away, and real independent investigations done to determine their crimes with drugs, rapes and murders (because some do this), and many thrown in jail.

But the people and their children come first, not the cops. And certainly not the politicians. If the boat is sinking, the leaders are shark bait, their real job is to serve and protect and they've violated it massively. They think they're elected kings, in fact, they're minions, mascots at a game, mcdonld's workers, civil employees, they are but Employees and Servants of the people.

All on public purse, all responsible positions from politicians, to police, to judges, should be on hero mode of serve and protect with complete transparency to equalize, make strong and abundant, everyone's lives, create clean and healthy systems, truth and good educations, ensure no one lives in slums or substandard conditions, and works overboard not to criminilze people, not to have harsh laws and bylaws, but freedom and respect for every child and work to help everyone they can, straighten out their lives. Instead of suppress the truth, the technology, enslave the people, and sell them out to the corporations and pharmas and war makers.

Servants who work with the citizens counsels without religion or special interest groups trying to suppress humanity, but answering a real calling to assist like teachers who feel the calling to teach or counselors, and for no other reason do they even seek those jobs, PERIOD.

The whole system is criminal and illegal/unlawful. It doesnt matter how many fake laws they pass, FASCISM IS ILLEGAL.

The police should have handled this as if it was their own son with their mandate to not harm him, and do all they can to keep him and all around him safe. Not murder him.

Also, as far as the father phoning the police. If anyone steals your vehicle, be it a stranger or a family member, and you don't report it, and they do something that causes accident, injury or death, you are held responsible or partially responsible.

Phoning the police was the correct thing to do.

What I witnessed on the cops dash cam video was a MURDER of a young boy - execution style, by a "pumped up cop," and that's not unusual for them to react in such an angry, hostile, and extremely aggressive manner - happens all the time. These are akin to revenge killings - "how dare you not stop for me" kind of BS. I saw ABSOLUTELY NO reason whatsoever to shoot the kid. There was NO justification for this. Anybody who thinks that there was is in need psychiatric counseling.

I heard no command from any officer to tell the young boy to shut down the engine, nor did I hear anything commands for him to dismount the vehicle. I saw the police get out of their police car(s) and they IMMEDIATELY opened fire. I heard SEVEN shots. If two rounds went into his chest - as was claimed - then that means that the offending officer (pig) had a clear view of the kid and could see that he was UNARMED and posed no threat to anyone.



AND: "He took off with my truck. I call the police, and they kill him, he said." That comment is not a description of a stolen vehicle.

XionZap
What I witnessed on the cops dash cam video was a MURDER of a young boy - execution style...

Really? "Execution style"? Was he on his knees being shot to the back of the head, or was he blindfolded and tied to a post first? I missed that part of the one dash cam shown in your video link. Again, the situation is sad enough without you sensationalizing it with added hyperbole.

What I saw in this footage was reckless endangerment of numerous innocent drivers, through a high speed chase, and the young man using deadly force repeatedly against officers before finally being shot.

A vehicle, much like a firearm, is a tool. Both can be quite deadly when used, and this young man made his intentions clear, multiple times, that he was using his weapon of choice with harmful intent. Now go view the other dash cam's footage where he smashes a booth as a person flees for their life on foot. Your claim that the young man "posed no threat to anyone" is absurd. He was clearly a threat to himself, other innocent drivers, at least one individual running for his/her life on foot, and to the officers themselves. As long as he was behind the wheel with the engine running he was a danger to all in the area.

How much deadly force is a civilian allowed to use before an officer uses deadly force as well?

Bassago
reply to post by Darkphoenix77

 

During the chase, Comstock rammed McPherson’s car. The truck eventually stopped, but Comstock revved the engine and refused orders to turn it off.

The "kid" led the cops on a vehicular chase and rammed a police car with his truck. Then when ordered out of the truck revved it like he was going to ram again. Sounds like self defense to me.

I normally have little sympathy for cops who shoot unarmed people but this kid was armed with a truck and had already shown he was prepared to use it against people. I'd have shot at him too.

I agree, I would have shot to. But they could have used something other then a gun maybe shoot teargas through the window or some other way.

Don't be misled by word games often played by those who would instinctively, and quite automatically come to the defense of murdering thug/cops.

I say this in reference to my use of the term/phrase "execution-style" killing. Please note that all I have to do is to check my local paper on any given day, and I'll be sure to come across an example of an execution style-murder. Its often that we see and hear the local police in my home town (and throughout the US for that matter) often refer to certain kinds of murders as just that - execution-style killings. (see link below) Many of these are drug related 'street shootings' that take place out in the open (though not always), so to speak, as was the execution-style killing of the young man in question in the article linked below.

For a person to have been executed in a manner such as this doesn't necessarily mean that the victim(s) had to have been found bound, gagged, or even that they needed to have been in a kneeling position, for them to qualify for the term killed "execution-style."


Please note that the young Comstock boy was shot twice in the chest at close range while five more rounds aimed to kill him penetrated the truck he was driving. He obviously wasn't given the chance to exit the vehicle. This is what I mean by an "execution-style" killing.

Police Cameras Capture Video Of Execution Style Killing In Germantown - August 21, 2013 7:28 AM

Excerpt:

PHILADELPHIA (CBS) - An execution-style street homicide was captured by police surveillance cameras in the city’s Germantown section Tuesday night. Police say they began receiving reports at about 10pm of gunshots along the 200-block of West Seymore Street. When police arrived on the scene they found a 29-year-old man in the street suffering from three close-range gunshot wounds to the head and back.

reply to post by XionZap

Having watched the video footage the following can also be stated:

The kid had every opportunity to stop, he had every opportunity to take the correct action to avoid further trouble with the law. So I guess we should ignore the face he ran multiple red lights, at least 2 of them. And that he rammed into the police vehicle 3 separate times. And that he drove down the wrong way on a one way street, and that he was speeding through a neighborhood where people would be driving slowly and possibly walking.

Not to mention jumping the curve and driving through a part erratically. Or that he stole a vehicle, doing damage to it and the equipment along the way.

While yes it would have been nice if the police were able to take him alive, but if one ups the crimes while committing a crime, all bets are off. The police can not afford to be nice to a person who is breaking the law and continues to be a threat to themselves and others.

So as your contention would be that they did not have to kill him, answer this, what would have been the outcry if while going through a red light he had hit a car and killed a child? Or if that van he wen going pass at a high rate of speed was full of students and he hit it, seriously injuring or killing a few of them? Should the law be so lienent with him then?

While I can sympathise with his family for the lose of a child, at the same time, can we be so sympathetic if he had murdered someone in the process, even by accident?

And if went off because his father had refused to purchase him a pack of cigarettes, one must ask what would his reaction had been if say a girl he was dating refused to have sex with him or if he was refused the sale of cigarettes at a local store.

Chris Rock best summed it up: If you do not want to get your ass kicked by the police, Obey the law. Don't run, cause if you run, the police are coming with an ass kicking in tow.

reply to post by sdcigarpig


None of your claims or observations regarding the behavior of the boy warranted his execution!!! End of story!!!

Let me also add - and quite seriously - that any of you here who shall knowingly come to the defense of this kind of barbaric behavior on the part of the police (any police) will have been participating actively in the murders just as if they were holding the gun and shooting it themselves - execution-style. This goes for any and all incidents such as this that might occur in the future.

The problems is that police violate a person's rights every day in this country. Instead of the people just being told or forced to allow it, we make the police quit doing it. That attitude is what leads to these events.

To often when a group of officers get together it becomes much like a feeding frenzy of sharks. A race to see who gets to inflict first damage to the suspect.

reply to post by Darkphoenix77


Well it's his own fault in some respect. I mean he goes and calls that number in that situation. Bad idea. He was asking for trouble for his son and he got what he asked for. I mean to look back after and blame anyone but himself is kinda dumb. The cops were just doing there job. It's like in future they shouldn't use deadly force against a criminal driving a stolen car. If that were the case we wouldn't need cops.They just do there job that's it. The real responsibility goes back to the father. he shouldn't have asked for trouble on his son. He planted that seed and it grew into a thorn bush. Thats' how life goes

spartacus699
reply to post by Darkphoenix77

 

Well it's his own fault in some respect. I mean he goes and calls that number in that situation. Bad idea. He was asking for trouble for his son and he got what he asked for. I mean to look back after and blame anyone but himself is kinda dumb. The cops were just doing there job. It's like in future they shouldn't use deadly force against a criminal driving a stolen car. If that were the case we wouldn't need cops.They just do there job that's it. The real responsibility goes back to the father. he shouldn't have asked for trouble on his son. He planted that seed and it grew into a thorn bush. Thats' how life goes

I agree, bad parenting and/or stupid behavior by the father contributed significantly to the outcome. All I am saying regarding the police is that they could have handled it differently from the start to arrive at a different outcome. In the very beginning of the dash cam video he was not driving recklessly, if they would have not initiated the chase and hung a few car lengths back and just tailed him and arrested when he exited the vehicle he most likely would still be alive. Instead they chose to initiate a chase and we have the ending that happened. Granted the 19 year old made colossally bad decisions that cost him his life in the end, but the police definitely could have handled it differently in my opinion.

In Addition: They knew who he was and where he lived so why initiate the chase to begin with?

Nm, Ill just keep my mouth shut.

We do not post peoples information on ATS.

Thanks Intrepid,

I don't know who's info was posted be it a member or a person directly involved but please do not break ATS rules when posting in this thread. I do not want the thread closed due to people doing stupid stuff and breaking ATS rules!

reply to post by XionZap

I do agree, that he should not have been killed, however there are a few things that are not considered.

He broke the law. He stole a truck. He drove recklessly. He ran red lights. He used a truck as a weapon ramming and hitting a police care 3 times. He drove down a wrong way street at a high rate of speed. He deliberately put people in danger. And yet you fail to see that all of this could have been avoided by him simply pulling over. He did not, he ran, and broke laws, used his truck as a weapon.

What should the police had done, as you believe that they are in the wrong? By the time that they had him at an end, he was still trying to run and hit the police cruiser twice in a park.

So lets just say that in the entire chase, he had hit someone and killed them, then what do you tell that family? There were, in the video, very close calls on his part. So should that not matter? And how did the police get involved, his father called them to teach his son a lesson. When did it become in the prevue of the police to teach anyone a lesson? What did his father think was going to happen, that they would arrest him, take him to jail, let him sit down there and then not press charges?

No, the police did what they thought was necessary to try to save more people, and prevent a far serious tragedy. This was not a kid that just made a mistake, this was a kid that was in trouble with the law, already having a rap sheet. Drugs and theft, in and out of trouble, and yet based off of this action, we can surmise that there would have been a good chance that if it was not him stealing his fathers truck, he would have probably done something else that would have gotten himself in trouble. Having anger issues like that takes years to get over.

He was not executed, and as sad as this incident is, the police are not at fault, they have their own job to do, they have to make split decisions, and be it if we agree with or not, they have to follow the law.

reply to post by sdcigarpig


Well, I will go as far as to agree that if not this he probably would have ran afoul of the law with something else....in that I agree with you just based on his actions during the chase. I do still feel though that with having knowledge of who he was and where he lived it would have been possible to not initiate the chase and still apprehend him later in a not so dangerous situation. If he were an unknown suspect then yes you would be 100% correct in the supposition that the officers 100% made all the correct calls.....but with them knowing who he was, where he lived and knowing he just could not drive forever I still think it would have been possible to apprehend him after he stopped and let his guard down with no loss of life.....when he either got where he was going with the vehicle or came back to the family home later on.