Cleveland cop kills child

originally posted by: Greven

When is the last time a 12-year-old shot a police officer?

.

dont know, dont care....
gun looked pretty damn real.

article said the caller said the gun was 'probably' not real but that wasnt relayed to the cops...
cop didnt know the gun was fake....cop didnt know the kid was 12

after the kid put it in his waist the cop said to put hands up and he didnt.....

i dont see the cop as at fault but whatever.....i am very much over these arguments......

sometimes i think people here want there to be cops vs black # happening.....

oh well......

a reply to: Greven

Even Officer Winslow from Die Hard had an incident like this and everybody just felt sorry for him.

It sucks. It really does. It should have been handled better but, when there are children around and we are hearing of kids shooting other kids all the time, it's a bit hard to avoid something like this.

- Cops hear of a kid pointing a gun at other kids
- Dispatch didn't relay that the gun was "probably fake"
- They said get your hands up
- The kid reached for his air soft
- The air soft didn't even have the orange tip
- They fired

Now, if the gun had been real and the cops thought it was fake, that kid may have shot several innocent children. It's been happening a lot in our nation. If the account from the police is true, I can't be too angry at the cops for this one.

For all we know, that cop will go on living in regret and finally get to redeem himself during an attempted Euro-terrorist take-over of a large corporate high-rise in California, only to fire his gun again at the perfect moment, saving the life of Bruce Willis.

a reply to: Cuervo

He was shot reaching for said weapon, if it had a orange cover on the muzzle how would the cops ever see it if it was still in the kids pants?

originally posted by: Cuervo
a reply to: Greven

Even Officer Winslow from Die Hard had an incident like this and everybody just felt sorry for him.

It sucks. It really does. It should have been handled better but, when there are children around and we are hearing of kids shooting other kids all the time, it's a bit hard to avoid something like this.

- Cops hear of a kid pointing a gun at other kids
- Dispatch didn't relay that the gun was "probably fake"
- They said get your hands up
- The kid reached for his air soft
- The air soft didn't even have the orange tip
- They fired

Now, if the gun had been real and the cops thought it was fake, that kid may have shot several innocent children. It's been happening a lot in our nation. If the account from the police is true, I can't be too angry at the cops for this one.

For all we know, that cop will go on living in regret and finally get to redeem himself during an attempted Euro-terrorist take-over of a large corporate high-rise in California, only to fire his gun again at the perfect moment, saving the life of Bruce Willis.

The kid was only pointed out by a concerned drunk sitting in a pub. The kid was playing on a swing set, for all the time he was there, no one complained no #s were fired. Did the cop fire because he was in fear or did the cop fire because he was trained to shoot first without assessing a situation? Even in war unless told otherwise you can only kill when the weapon is pointed at you or your team or equipment etc. this dick messed up grossly.

a reply to: Greven

Yet another victim in the police war on civilians.

I have to disagree here.

This is an example of a stupid boy doing something stupid that got him killed.

You walk up on someone with what is reported to be a real gun and when you order the person to put his/her hands up they reach for the weapon instead. In that instance it is act or die. It's a very tough situation to be in and I can't really fault the officer to acting in the manner he did if the details are, in fact, accurate.

originally posted by: Grovit
dont know, dont care....
gun looked pretty damn real.

So you don't know or care if there was a prior case - which would justify an officer feeling threatened?

It wouldn't matter if, say, a kindergartener was the one with a gun?

originally posted by: Cuervo
Even Officer Winslow from Die Hard had an incident like this and everybody just felt sorry for him.
...
Now, if the gun had been real and the cops thought it was fake, that kid may have shot several innocent children. It's been happening a lot in our nation. If the account from the police is true, I can't be too angry at the cops for this one.

I really don't care about fictional events.

What basis do you have for conjuring this scenario?

a reply to: Greven

When an officer gives a command, we expect it to be followed," Tomba said. "The way it looks like right now, it wasn't followed, but we're going to continue our investigation."

This comment is very telling. Keep in mind, we are talking about a 12 yr old kid which, by their own admission, did NOT verbally or physically threaten the officer.

An order was not followed by this child, and the officer was not threatened by this child, but this child was shot in the stomach.

IDK/SMH

This very action is what initiated the revolution in V for Vendetta

a reply to: MarsKingAQuestion

No! The child was the victim of a case of poor management skills by his parent[s], who let him run around a park with a faulty toy gun [no orange tip!!!] possibly pointing it menacingly at anybody in the area.

now take into account how many hours this kids was playing with his toy gun...

then how many days and or weeks had this same kid been playing with this same toy gun in the same place....

when 12 year olds with toy guns become targets we should all be concerned....kids have been playing these games forever....cops really need to learn the difference between a kids game and a genuine threat

So why do cops have to kill shot when they fire? Legitimate question here, like why can't cops shoot a leg, an arm, hell even a strong taser. I was 12 years old once and if I was doing something with my buddies I wasn't supposed to I'd try and hide it at that age too. That's instinct being so young. There has to be a solution whether it be on either side.
a reply to: Grovit

originally posted by: Brotherman

originally posted by: Cuervo
a reply to: Greven

Even Officer Winslow from Die Hard had an incident like this and everybody just felt sorry for him.

It sucks. It really does. It should have been handled better but, when there are children around and we are hearing of kids shooting other kids all the time, it's a bit hard to avoid something like this.

- Cops hear of a kid pointing a gun at other kids
- Dispatch didn't relay that the gun was "probably fake"
- They said get your hands up
- The kid reached for his air soft
- The air soft didn't even have the orange tip
- They fired

Now, if the gun had been real and the cops thought it was fake, that kid may have shot several innocent children. It's been happening a lot in our nation. If the account from the police is true, I can't be too angry at the cops for this one.

For all we know, that cop will go on living in regret and finally get to redeem himself during an attempted Euro-terrorist take-over of a large corporate high-rise in California, only to fire his gun again at the perfect moment, saving the life of Bruce Willis.

The kid was only pointed out by a concerned drunk sitting in a pub. The kid was playing on a swing set, for all the time he was there, no one complained no #s were fired. Did the cop fire because he was in fear or did the cop fire because he was trained to shoot first without assessing a situation? Even in war unless told otherwise you can only kill when the weapon is pointed at you or your team or equipment etc. this dick messed up grossly.

Like I said, I can't be mad at the cops if it happened as the cops reported it. I also said it could have been handled better and that it totally sucks.

This is why we need safety ambassadors. In Seattle, we had those (I worked as one for a while) and they would go in first and would have been able to tell that kid to put the damn gun away before a cop shoots him. I diffused quite a few situations that would have otherwise probably resulted in somebody getting shot by a cop.

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: Grovit
dont know, dont care....
gun looked pretty damn real.

So you don't know or care if there was a prior case - which would justify an officer feeling threatened?

It wouldn't matter if, say, a kindergartener was the one with a gun?

originally posted by: Cuervo
Even Officer Winslow from Die Hard had an incident like this and everybody just felt sorry for him.
...
Now, if the gun had been real and the cops thought it was fake, that kid may have shot several innocent children. It's been happening a lot in our nation. If the account from the police is true, I can't be too angry at the cops for this one.

I really don't care about fictional events.

What basis do you have for conjuring this scenario?

Conjuring the scenario of a kid shooting a group of other kids? Are you kidding?

originally posted by: safetymeeting
So why do cops have to kill shot when they fire? Legitimate question here, like why can't cops shoot a leg, an arm, hell even a strong taser. I was 12 years old once and if I was doing something with my buddies I wasn't supposed to I'd try and hide it at that age too. That's instinct being so young. There has to be a solution whether it be on either side.
a reply to: Grovit

How many firefights have you been in?

This whole "shoot to wound" thing is not rooted in reality. A bullet is not absolute death. Sometimes it takes several shots to take someone down. That said, people act like shooting someone in the leg or arm is somehow "safer" it isn't. A person wielding a weapon getting shot in the arm or leg is still mostly combat effective. A person getting shot in the leg or arm might die anyway from severe blood loss depending on what artery the bullet destroys on its way in.

Shoot to stop. Not Shoot to kill, not shoot to wound, shoot to stop the threat.

originally posted by: projectvxn
I have to disagree here.

This is an example of a stupid boy doing something stupid that got him killed.

You walk up on someone with what is reported to be a real gun and when you order the person to put his/her hands up they reach for the weapon instead. In that instance it is act or die. It's a very tough situation to be in and I can't really fault the officer to acting in the manner he did if the details are, in fact, accurate.

You mean like this, where the victim was given maybe a second to respond before being shot to death by the police?

Not even that, really. He's told to 'put his hands up' as he's being shot.

a reply to: Greven

Clearly LEOs should be trained that they can only be killed by people of a certain age. Even if people outside that age range have what appears to be a lethal weapon, it's okay because they're not in the age range of people who kill LEOs.

Also, LEOs should be trained that because they have body armor, they should allow everybody to get the first shot in so they can be sure of that person's actual intent and ability to carry out their intent. I mean, you're a LEO, getting shot is just part of the job, and if you're not willing to get shot and have your life ended just to be sure somebody really, REALLY wants to end your life before trying to stop them, well you just shouldn't be a cop!

These are some of the most ludicrous comments I've ever read on here. Absolutely absurd.

Oh and whomever it was that said in the military you can't shoot unless you've been shot at (or whatever the phrasing was), that's completely misinformed. Rules of engagement spell out when lethal force can be used. Do ROE sometimes say you can only return fire after being fired upon? Yes, sometimes. But it's a far cry from "always" or "most of the time."

a reply to: Cuervo

The cop failed miserably at assessing the situation, the institution failed to report from dispatch on 3 occasions A GUY DRINKING in a pub was reporting the gun was probably fake. The cop is wrong, not only is the cop wrong I wouldn't be a damn bit surprised if they are skewing facts just to try and protect the police image.

a reply to: Greven

Yes! I am directly blaming the parent[s] for their lack of oversight and control of their child, who they are responsible for 24/7/365 for least 18yrs until the child becomes an adult and totally responsible for themselves!

The police officer was doing his job and following protocol and sometimes that protocol leads to people being shot to death.

In this case it was a case of mistaken identity of the faulty toy gun as a real gun that led to the child's demise.

The rookie cop can not be blamed for that as they HAVE to assume it was a real weapon and I am sure that they didn't go to work with the deliberate attitude of I am going to shoot and kill a black child today, because a situation presented itself to him randomly and he apparently dealt with it according to protocol.

The parents are to be blamed here for the following reasons ...

1] Where the hell where they?

2] Did they know what their son was up to?

3] Why did they allow their son to play with a faulty toy gun?

4] Did they ever train their son to immediately obey police officers commands and warn him he may be shot if he doesn't comply?

Or do we want to let the parents off the hook and blame societies hired goons

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: projectvxn
I have to disagree here.

This is an example of a stupid boy doing something stupid that got him killed.

You walk up on someone with what is reported to be a real gun and when you order the person to put his/her hands up they reach for the weapon instead. In that instance it is act or die. It's a very tough situation to be in and I can't really fault the officer to acting in the manner he did if the details are, in fact, accurate.

You mean like this, where the victim was given maybe two seconds to respond before being shot to death by the police?

No it isn't like that at all.

That man was obviously murdered by police using faulty information given by a lying sack of # anti gun prick.

Mr. Crawford NEVER acted in a threatening manner toward police, nor did he ever point his weapon at them.

This kid, according to the account, reached for the weapon that was seen holstered in his pants.

a reply to: Brotherman

Fortunately for the officer, he'll be judged on how things appeared to him at the moment, and not how things should've appeared to him had he been given all the information dispatch had but failed to relay to him, and all the other info that's come to light since.

originally posted by: Greven

It might not surprise you to hear that the boy was black.

Well that just explains everything doesn't it?

originally posted by: jaynkeel
My first thoughts are boy(12) told to raise hands in air officers saw gun and boy knew that. So boy went to take the gun out of his waist to lay t on the ground, see that in almost every movie, and officer panic shot.. Thats my take on it anyway.

People should ask themselves, what is the common denominator in this case along with the shooting of the man at Walmart along with shooting of the man at the gas station and many other examples?

No one would have been killed or hurt in these 3 instances alone if this common denominator was missing.

Ironic is it not that this common denominator is supposed to serve and protect society and instead we continue to see cases like this happening where it is the other way around.