BREAKING: Grand jury declines to indict Cleveland policemen in fatal shooting of 12-year-old Tamir R

originally posted by: roadgravel
If the man is crying on the gun range, and it's not about shooting his foot, I would question whether he should be carrying a firearm in public as an officer. Did he adopt a shot first and cry later attitude. Too bad the current force didn't ask the previous one about his training and service. Although, I will admit, it may not have mattered.

Im gopin gto make a variation on a quoe from predatore. Jessie venture:I dont got time to cry.

See sometimes adrenaline will make it so your emotions are dulled so you can get through certain situations. A few hours later after they fully come down off of it then emotions will kick back in.

a reply to: ReadLeader

I am so glad my kids are growing up in the UK.

originally posted by: Whodathunkdatcheese
a reply to: ReadLeader

I am so glad my kids are growing up in the UK.

Just teach them to not attack or make threatening motions toward the cops and they will be fine.

a reply to: yuppa

The issue is that "exiting your car after being told to" can sometimes be considered a threatening motion.

Ugh this is so awful. And honestly the cops really need to pull up their big boy panties. Are cop lives the only ones that matter to the law now? I'm assuming when someone joins the force they are made aware that its a dangerous job.

Like "hey Fred you do know that as a police officer there is a strong possibility you might get hurt. But as a good man that possibility is worth the opportunity to "protect and serve".

But somehow in the last few years the officer's life has become paramount. Shoot first ask questions later! Because that kid is dead but at least the cop prevented himself from being hurt!

a reply to: Malynn
I don't mean this rude. I am just confused.
So because they want to be a cop they should stand there and get shot? I'm sure we will have lots of upstanding men and women signing up for the job.

a reply to: Martin75

Probably more "duck for cover and assess situation" rather than "stand there and get shot."

The Police are capable of doing more than just standing still and shooting people, you know. At least, they should be, and I think that's part of the issue. They mostly just... Aren't.

a reply to: Martin75

That is an interesting thought process you have there. But no I never suggested they stand there and "get shot".

My thought process is maybe they need to hire smarter cops. Or train them more thoroughly. Teach them to use reason and logic instead of shooting to kill a 12 year old kid because the cop was scared.

a reply to: Malynn

That is quite a dumbed down version of the scenario. Let's just use logical fallacies to promote our viewpoint shall we?

a reply to: raymundoko

And which logical fallacy would that be oh wise one? Please do enlighten me.

a reply to: yuppa

NO, his kids are much better off..period

a reply to: Malynn
Gotcha, thanks for clarification. That does sound better than your other post.

a reply to: Malynn

Your not going to get enlightened, a cop could shoot a baby in the face and he will rationale it.

a reply to: Malynn

Affirming the Consequent, Cum Hoc, Bifurcation, Hasty Generalisation, Post Hoc, Sweeping...should I go on?

1) Your argument is poorly formed in that you think they need to hire smarter cops when you don't even know how smart the cops in the situation are or how any "smarter" person would react in a similar situation. This leads to:

2) You said the officer only shot the child because he was "scared", which dumbs down the type of "scared". Not a "BOO I GOT YOU" scared but a "I'm about to f'ing die" scared. This leads to:

3) You think cops should know they are going to be scared at some point so they shouldn't be scared. What? I could add circular logic to that as well. Then on to

4) You think the kid only got shot because the officer was scared. You've removed all blame from the 200lb person who modified an air pistol to look real and was threatening people as they walked by with it as the video clearly shows. The officers had no idea this was a replica pistol with the orange markings removed.

5) You then broad brush cops in that apparently they don't know how to use reason and logic.

All of the above are Presumptive Fallacies. The fact I even had to point these out to you after you could have easily and honestly reviewed your own post shows you have no intention of viewing this from an objective stance.

It's clear you think: Cops are scaredy cats, they lack reason and logic and aren't smart. Your words.

a reply to: vonclod

Possibly the dumbest thing ever posted on the internet and the greatest logical fallacy of them all.

a reply to: Whodathunkdatcheese

Just in the UK? I grew up in Cork and later Derry so for a bit I was "In the UK". Be proud of the part of the UK you are from and sound like a local England? Scotland? Wales? Northern Ireland? You still sound like an American

But yes, be glad they are growing up in a very racist country. Good on you. I lived their with my ex and she was discriminated against at every turn. (This was in London) She never went through anything like what she endured in London while she grew up in Southern GA.

i wonder what unarmed police officers in the UK or other countries in Europe would have responded to this call. presumably they wouldnt be speeding and skidding almost out of control and put by standers lives at risk or immediately kill the person within seconds.

next time i see a kid playing with what looks like a weapon, im grabbing my gun, shoot, then get the facts. the cops have the rights to protect their lives if they feel threatened, so do I. historically, i wouldnt go to jail. in fact i should get paid leave by my job until the case is resolved.

i hope that cop's kids are safe.

originally posted by: odzeandennzi hope that cop's kids are safe.

What are you implying?

a national law should be passed immediately upon the return of congress and the president.......ALL toys guns sold in the US must be entirely bright fluorescent pink, no exceptions.....maybe then LEO's might come upon someone with one of those, and actually take cover for a few seconds to assess the situation.

originally posted by: jimmyx
a national law should be passed immediately upon the return of congress and the president.......ALL toys guns sold in the US must be entirely bright fluorescent pink, no exceptions.....maybe then LEO's might come upon someone with one of those, and actually take cover for a few seconds to assess the situation.

But that might violate the 1st Amendment !!!

And what if somebody is color blind?