Chicago Police kill unarmed black teenager

[RickJamesLich]

i just find it funny they are calling him a teenager..... he is legally a Adult at 18, he has all rights Adults have except drinking alcohol basically.....

but in the media saying BLACK TEENAGER SHOT BY COPS sounds better then Black man/adult shot by cops

No doubt the folks in the media have grins on their face as they get another race baiting story lol. It's a shame, if the guy was white, asian, hispanic or anything else the standard response would be "the asshole deserved what he got".

[Zelorra]

Lets count.

fifTEEN
sixTEEN
sevenTEEN

what comes next?

Linguistically you're right, but if he wouldn't have died and got to court he would have been prosecuted as an adult, not a little teenager. He was a adult criminal by the law. And I bet this was not his first crime, you don't start a career in crime by stealing a Jaguar. It's easy to comment on the internet that there was no danger for the officers, but being there is something else entirely. He transformed a quiet neighborhood into fucking Iraq, it's like one of those ISIS camera footage...

[Bapestar]

No doubt the folks in the media have grins on their face as they get another race baiting story lol. It's a shame, if the guy was white, asian, hispanic or anything else the standard response would be "the asshole deserved what he got".

The media plays on both sides of the fence. There are plenty of stories involving other races, that the media ignores.

[nanook12]

He dindu nuffin. He was a good boi

infracted - forbidden topics

[volkanik]

I feel bad for the cop that hurt his leg after that stupid thug tried to run him over. I wish him a speedy recovery. Hopefully the homeowner who's property this happened on can get the blood out of the cement. I know it can be hard to get out.

[Pruke]

Cannot say this specific case is justified since we do not have all of the videos.

But you armchair quarterbacks who are sitting here playing judge, jury and executioner of the police officers have no clue what that situation is like. What you think you would do and how you feel you would react or how a police officer should react is immaterial.

Let me explain something to you, Use-of-force (look it up): "Officer perception at the time of the incident dictates the use of force" 99% of use of force polices have a +1 rule. Which means, officers use of force at the time of the incident is authorized to be one level above the suspects level of force.

Level 1 - Verbal
Level 2 - Soft empty hands/handcuffs
Level 3 - Hard/Baton/Tazer
Level 4 - Deadly force

Now apply the +1 rule, if a suspect is at level 3, an officer can apply level 4 to restrain or stop the suspect.

No, it's not a hard fast rule, which is why "Officer perception at the time of the incident dictates the use of force". If an adequately trained, reasonable police officer believes there is an imminent threat to their safety, safety of the public or major properly loss, deadly force is authorized.

Again, maybe this young man was no longer an imminent threat to the safety of the officers or the public, but since no one here knows beyond a reasonable doubt that the suspect was gunned down without probable cause... how about you wait till all of the evidence is weighed or presented?

[Gabraham]

You fire until the threat is neutralized. The idea that the police should "destroy" anyone as the primary goal of employing force is troubling at best. Even during war killing neutralized combatants is frowned upon.

Idk. Worked pretty well in Ender's Game.

[Gob]

But that's the price you pay for taking the high road.

That's the price you pay for lax gun laws.

[Torais]

Since there is no way to ever know if anyone is armed, you are in favor of the police being able to shoot anyone at any time? Cause fear? Seems like a bad idea to me...

Expect the person in question wasn't walking down the street minding his own business...

I don't think ill ever understand the whole apologist mentality towards people that commit dangerous crimes. Even unarmed, car chases are extremely dangerous and pose countless risks to the public and the police themselves. I have no problem with police stopping such events in the most efficient way possible with the lowest risk to innocent bystanders or themselves.

The whole "death is not a penalty for theft!" stance is naive as hell when a suspect is leading reckless high speed chases, resisting arrest and acting in a way where police have legitimate fears for themselves and the pubic. Never mind the fact the whole ordeal could have been avoided if the person in question decided NOT to break the law in the first place. He has no one but himself to blame for the consequences of his actions.

[Deleted]

All I see is a thieving aggressive scumbag is removed from civilization. No great loss...

Shame we don't shoot more of them TBH. No sympathy for anyone who breaks the law and starts ramming police cars. Fuck em. He made his bed.

[Cizr]

He tried to kill the cops by running them over. I am glad this scum is dead.
Get ready for the BLM will hold demonstration and burn some properties and maybe attack some cops to let off some steam.

[Zeta333]

Because breaking the law gives the police cause to shoot at you, let alone endanger people who weren't even involved?

You mean stealing a car, ramming police cars and almost killing a cop isnt enough to warrant them getting shot at? The fuck do you think is an offence worthy of the police pulling thier sidearm?

[Endus]

Idk. Worked pretty well in Ender's Game.

Did you READ Ender's Game? Or any of the sequels?

Because the fact that it was a horrendously wrong decision, and represented humanity being the monsters of the story, is sort of central to the plot.

[Reverb256]

They kill with impunity.

[GrinningMan]

Stop breaking the law, assholes.

[Annoying]

Did you READ Ender's Game? Or any of the sequels?

Because the fact that it was a horrendously wrong decision, and represented humanity being the monsters of the story, is sort of central to the plot.

Literally arguing for the wrong side in that comment, wow. Not even the movie glossed over that part.

[Barnabas]

Did you READ Ender's Game? Or any of the sequels?

Because the fact that it was a horrendously wrong decision, and represented humanity being the monsters of the story, is sort of central to the plot.

That's every story.

[thealmightymoo]

Time to riot in the streets for this injustice!

or inconvenience some holiday makers in the UK.

in all seriousness, this is getting a tad out of control in the US

[sheggaro]

After he almost ran the cop over, he had to be stopped.

Pity he had to die, but who knows what that lunatic could have done.

[Gabraham]

Did you READ Ender's Game? Or any of the sequels?

Because the fact that it was a horrendously wrong decision, and represented humanity being the monsters of the story, is sort of central to the plot.

Oh my friend I am the wrong person to be questioning on anything regarding to Ender's Game.

I've read everything written by OSC at least twice.

Your lack of understanding of minute sarcasm dictates you are not educated enough to be commenting on any subject matter let alone the topic of this post.

Ultimately Ender decides that while he was horrendously wrong for not giving his enemy a chance to communicate, throughout the entire series he justifies every "kill" he took part in as a matter of "If I don't end them thoroughly they will end me". That's how he won every battle. If you allow your enemy to continue to exist they will always try to get you one way or another. Does he eventually vow never to raise a hand to any enemy ever again? Yes because he knows he will always win and winning means wiping the loser from existence. That's literally the only way he knows how to win. So he chooses to lose. He proves this in Ender in Exile. That being said the point is made that you can choose to win or you can choose to lose (at least in the Enderverse). And that winning has to be 100%. There is no 99%.

I claim to be an expert on next to nothing but if there is one series on this planet that I know inside and out it is the Ender series and the Shadow Quartet.

Back on topic. As far as police are concerned there is no statute of limitations once you threaten severe bodily harm to a police officer. You've proven you don't care for an officers life and are running amok in a residential neighborhood. This man would have been prone to taking a hostage had he been given enough time. Does the punishment fit the crime? Of course not that's absurd. But did the police use necessary force in the heat of the moment to an end which they believed prevented further undo harm to innocent lives? Yup.