Toronto Police Kill 18 Year Old Alone On Streetcar. Caught on Video. I Am Speechless.

reply to post by IvanAstikov


If you suggesting 911 they did not do it your own government did that. They did not spend billions to invade america to steal and plunder and rape and kill innocent people. They just defended their country from the terrorist regime called the usa. BTW if he had a bomb and wanted to use it it would have made a lot of sense to detonate it on the tram full of people not let everyone go duh

Originally posted by defcon5

Or he could have simply “hit the deck” when the officers opened up on him.


And what I am saying is that you can tell exactly jack crap from that video, all you can do is speculate. It can be difficult for an officer to tell if the man is alive, wounded, or just fell prone from feet way, looking between seats on a bus, in the dark.

I think that most officers, if they felt their actions were unjustified, would not have taken it to that point with the public standing behind them filming.

That was all AFTER the gunfire STOPPED. So he must have still been alive to some extent even after all those shots. You have no more idea than I do how many of those shots hit, nor how many caused any significant damage.

I believe this was “suicide by cop”, plain and simple.

Hit the deck is probably correct...permanently given the gunfire, I would allow the caveat that it was possibly one blind officer that did all the shooting.
It is in fact brightly lit inside and out. You presume that the filmer was observed at the time, (unless you know better of course)

After all that you revert to the police threat, "of one move forward and you're finished" Oh boy, I hope you don't have a badge.

Originally posted by ionwind
Looks like the public outrage is having an effect:

The Toronto police officer who shot a teenager on a downtown streetcar two days ago has been suspended from his job with pay, CBC News has learned.

That is standard OP anytime an officer is involved in any shooting.

Originally posted by ionwind
But since it's the police investigating the police, I'm dubious of any charges being laid.

The reason why that "seems" to happen is because the police understand the procedures of being a police officer. If the officers acted in accordance with their procedures, which is the case 99.9% of the time, they get cleared. Even in the Rodney King beating the police were initially exonerated, and only after a second trial were they found guilty of breaking the law, and even then it was just barely. That decision was more politically motivated then it was legally, just like the Zimmerman case, and the second judge even made remarks about the fact that the case should never been brought back to court. Most of the officers involved in that case were exonerated, with only one being charged with striking “six” unnecessary blows, and even that appears to have been politically motivated to appease the rioting masses.

The problem here is the public’s ideas on what the law says, and what the procedures and duties of the police are, as opposed to WHAT THEY REALLY ARE... There are too many folks whose only idea of what the law says is what they get from TV and movies. If you want to know what the law REALLY says, get a copy of your state statutes, or if you know any LEO's sit down and talk to them about it. You'd be surprised how many misconceptions there are about their rights and duties as opposed to your real actual rights.

Originally posted by luciddream
Wow i thought ATS members are above media brainwashing.

Ok got it, Arab, he must be setting a bomb.

I'm not saying that - I'm saying dont be naive - of course that plays a role and people dont take any risks nowadays. If you cant face that reality without crying "omg racial profiling!" what do you want me to say? of course its racial profiling, the thing is... why the indignation? People still have 911, london, spain etc and recently the boston marathon quite alive on their minds and dont take any risks, specially law enforcement - arab, unstable with a knife, unruly... "who knows what he has under that shirt" probably came to mind... like I said, they dont take any risks these days.

And yes, probably with a white kid it would have been different but thats how the world it is today... accept reality

Sorry for the small post but.....
This in my opinion was murder !

It seems there is only 2 rules nowadays.
1 and 2 he who have the biggest gun and most money rule.

reply to post by Stealthwatch

If you suggesting 911 they did not do it your own government did that.

I was referring more to the desire of the people to allow their govt to take such actions, regardless of such suspicions.

reply to post by Hefficide


I can ear also what seems to be a taser being used. I guess that after the first two shoots even if non critical the cop could easily have disarmed the kid...

reply to post by FraternitasSaturni


I will never ever accept anything just because some political ass decide that is how it will be never. Freedom come at a price. I fought for freedom in a apartheid war from age 14 and we won that war. Oh by now you all should know i am not from america.

reply to post by defcon5

If you want to know what the law REALLY says, get a copy of your state statutes, or if you know any LEO's sit down and talk to them about it. You'd be surprised how many misconceptions there are about their rights and duties as opposed to your real actual rights.

If they are anything like the cops in the UK, you'd be surprised how little law they actually know off by heart. Oh, they're smart as all hell, when they have a statute book to hand, but these people aren't legal eagles by any stretch of the imagination. "Do not question my authoritee!" is about the basic level of cop knowledge regarding the laws of the land.

Originally posted by smurfy
Hit the deck is probably correct...permanently given the gunfire, I would allow the caveat that it was possibly one blind officer that did all the shooting.

Think about how high up the “deck” on a bus is. Last time I got on a bus the “deck” was probably equal to the middle of my chest while standing on the ground next to the bus... And I'm taller than the average for a man. If you are shorter than me, and you're aiming up from the ground, you're going to be looking at someone legs through a bunch of poles, seat bottoms, and supports. It's hardly a “good line of fire”.

What is immediately to the left as you enter the bus?
A metal plate and pole to keep the first seat passengers from falling into the stairway.

What's on the front?
An engine block, metal dashboard, the folded up door, and a piece of very heavy duty glass. Most likely heavy enough to stop a round or two until it shatters.

Originally posted by smurfy
(unless you know better of course)

Everybody better immediately get right on the lynching wagon or they have an ulterior motive of course, right?

Originally posted by smurfy
After all that you revert to the police threat, "of one move forward and you're finished" Oh boy, I hope you don't have a badge.

Go back to the “21 foot rule”...

I found this article which pretty much confirms much of what we already know, and more. It goes without saying that the officer, (singular) involved has been suspended with pay, and is said to be devastated, although those reasons are not clear.

www.theglobeandmail.com...

Secondary article from the same paper here,

www.theglobeandmail.com...

Extract,
"Standard police protocol calls for shooting only when life or limb is on the line, said Matthew Light, an associate professor of criminology at the University of Toronto. One thing that’s universal to all [police] departments across Canada is you can only shoot to kill to protect life, not to prevent damage to property or prevent someone from fleeing,” Prof. Light said".
It also mentions that the streetcar is equipped with CCTV, as well as the youngster having some problems.

Broken down and simplified for all those the are stuck looking to hard or are not looking close enough.

Man with a gun kills Teenager with a knife.
Man with gun was obviously scared and in fear of his (own) well being,considering there were no hostages and Teenager with knife obviously was no threat to anyone but himself,and the Man with the gun that did the shooting.
Should a police officer be so scared of a teenager with a knife as to shoot him 9 times,i think not and this officer in question ether wasn't trained properly in the psychological aspect of situations of this nature allowing himself to be used for as some in this thread think [suicide by cop]=(most likely) or he just plain saw an opportunity to settle an old grudge,but i am sticking with ,he was of improper mental capacity to be behind the barrel of a weapon!

Any and all other conclusions have some other personal feelings or emotional response to such and effect that it has twisted your logical reasoning capabilities!!!

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
If they are anything like the cops in the UK, you'd be surprised how little law they actually know off by heart. Oh, they're smart as all hell, when they have a statute book to hand, but these people aren't legal eagles by any stretch of the imagination. "Do not question my authoritee!" is about the basic level of cop knowledge regarding the laws of the land.

They are not required too.
Again, as I mentioned before, a police officer only has to BELIEVE is is legally correct to affect an arrest. Once it gets to court it will be upheld or not based on the law.

Most police do know the statutes very well, but there is more to law than just that, and good lawyers can find creative means to justify doubt.

reply to post by smurfy
Police are always suspended with pay after a shooting pending an investigation.
That is just standard department MO, they don't want an officer to be back on the street until they know if they are suffering any psychological effects from the event.

Originally posted by Ghostcooler
Broken down and simplified for all those the are stuck looking to hard or are not looking close enough.

Man with a gun kills Teenager with a knife.
Man with gun was obviously scared and in fear of his (own) well being,considering there were no hostages and Teenager with knife obviously was no threat to anyone but himself,and the Man with the gun that did the shooting.
Should a police officer be so scared of a teenager with a knife as to shoot him 9 times,i think not and this officer in question ether wasn't trained properly in the psychological aspect of situations of this nature allowing himself to be used for as some in this thread think [suicide by cop]=(most likely) or he just plain saw an opportunity to settle an old grudge,but i am sticking with ,he was of improper mental capacity to be behind the barrel of a weapon!

Any and all other conclusions have some other personal feelings or emotional response to such and effect that it has twisted your logical reasoning capabilities!!!

No actually...
1) Man with knife hijacks public transportation. (terrorism)
2) Man with knife confronts police. (aggravated assault on law enforcement officers)
3) Man with knife repeatedly refuses to put the knife down. (aggravated resistance)
4) Man with knife breaks 21 foot rule for police to use lethal force.

Anything else is speculation based on emotion rather then the law.

Originally posted by defcon5
reply to post by smurfy

 

Police are always suspended with pay after a shooting pending an investigation.
That is just standard department MO, they don't want an officer to be back on the street until they know if they are suffering any psychological effects from the event.

The only time, (first sentence) you get back to me is to tell me something I already know, and said so.
Second sentence, is INVESTIGATION and if rightly done, is much more than an officer's after effects. Thanks a bunch.

Originally posted by Stealthwatch

I am all for that good for leaving. It is sad when you have to leave your country to live somewhere else to have peace.
Even worse if you think of it. To an usa you left a " apparent save democratic 1st world superpower" country for a " 3rd world drug smuggling, terror state" but it to find the peace and respect that you could not in the usa

I appreciate the sentiments but the assessment of a " 3rd world drug smuggling, terror state" has more than a modicum of political and media hype to it.

The reason police powers are in such a runaway state in the US has more that a little to do with America's insatiable taste for illicit substances - in no little part their "illicitness" being due to the economic incentives of wildly inflating the prices for said substances by creation of a black market, and the drug-running of "rogue" (or surreptitious) factions within US governmental agencies that literally dump these wares on US city streets.

The true global drug "kingpins" largely include American interests and are backed by American military muscle in order to control that underground and undocumented illicit global trade. The level of hidden corruption in the US regarding that trade quite literally has Mexican politicians and enterprisers green with envy. The vast majority of profits in that trade are made by American enterprisers north of the border.

The double-whammy of that trade is its ability to disrupt societal values and create violence - all of which would be proportionally miniscule if an open market existed - and this has the effect of leaving the American public crying out for more police protection and sterner measures which brings our current militarization of the police where it is today. A more insidious by-product of this is an erosion of respect for law and order - perhaps by virtue of the disorder such prohibition law creates.

The way out of this mess is not by implementing more draconic law enforcement measures and restrictive laws but by restoring liberties to the people to make their own personal decisions right or wrong. Take a lesson from what Alcohol Prohibition did to American society during that period.

And YES, it has been so stated earlier in this thread, our current runaway police powers and tactics are a direct product of our prohibition practices. The economic benefit going to those influencing power are too great to risk upsetting the status quo to ever resolve the problem, unfortunately.

Originally posted by Hefficide

I counted nine shots, in two clusters. It is glaringly obvious that the first cluster ( three shots ) was more than enough to deal with a knife wielding man who did not even appear to be attacking or trying to attack. The next six shots, I can only assume, were to make sure that he never got back up. I cannot imagine him being a threat after already being shot three times and put down.

IE the last six shots were murder. Plain and simple.

My uncle was murdered by police in a very similar manner. A few less shots (only a few) at very close range. Autopsy suggested he might have been on the ground, or falling when some of the shots were placed.

Police reports conflicted (including conflicts with witness testimony) as to whether or not he had something in his hand, and no weapon was found.

Those police apologists who try to dance around the issue and make excuses for actions like this disgust me.