Chicago Police kill unarmed black teenager

[Cthulhu 2020]

Honestly, it's people like you is why I believe our police force should be largely replaced with drones and I hate drones but you put lives into constantly impossible situations out of some sort of sympathy for a criminal that endangered said lives. Again, they didn't know if he was armed or not with any real certainty. They didn't know what his game plan was. All they knew is what had happened minutes before and now they're chasing him through a residential area.

There are plenty of police that manage to chase people down without putting a bullet in their backs.

I really do admire able and competent police. Not ones that make up/hallucinate guns just as a way to get around the law that requires the other guy have a gun to be able to shoot them.

[Roose]

I do not approve of firearm use in highly-populated areas unless it is a matter of life and death.

This kid was stupid and wreckless, but paid way too high of a price for his behavior. Had they arrested and convicted him his sentence would have been no where near life.

At the very least the officer that shot the kid in the back should be terminated. If the kid was running away and did not attack the officer then they should face jail time. This is not how you maintain order and that needs to be clear, as I hope it is already.

These body cameras on police are great. They seem to be a benefit to both cops and the public. Nice to see them locally.

[May90]

I'd say they prevented a threat to the public from materializing any further than it already had.

That's vigilantism, mate. Police exists to prevent this kind of thing. You don't punish people for something they "could have done" and haven't in reality done.

[Polyxo]

So lemme get this straight.

Someone; whom happens to be black, steals a car, speeds on roads endangering other drivers and pedestrians, hit cop cars, nearly ran one over (intentional or not, is damn near cause for lethal force already), then runs away after having crashed the car into residential properties where he could arm himself; if not already, and potentially take hostages or harm those at large and people are trying to defend this degenerate?

People need to pick their battles, this is not one of them for the BLM movement. If this guy hadn't resisted or had not put others lives at risk; he would have been worth defending, but that is not the case here.

Really, anyone could have armed themselves at any time. They should just shoot black dudes on sight, right?

[Dextroden]

There are plenty of police that manage to chase people down without putting a bullet in their backs.

I really do admire able and competent police. Not ones that make up/hallucinate guns just as a way to get around the law that requires the other guy have a gun to be able to shoot them.

And plenty of criminals and non criminals have interactions with cops that don't end in sight shooting. OR an arrest.

Mindblowing, right?

[Rudol Von Stroheim]

There are plenty of police that manage to chase people down without putting a bullet in their backs.

I really do admire able and competent police. Not ones that make up/hallucinate guns just as a way to get around the law that requires the other guy have a gun to be able to shoot them.

Those same police are also probably the first ones to be killed in a situation gone bad or allow excess damage to occur from a given chase or conflict.

Again, back to why I believe our force should be replaced with drones. I do not feel good about limiting officers in such a ridiculous manner. We're talking about someone who endangered lives, was still actively an endangerment, an unknown element... but hey - the police officers are dicks for taking him out.

Drones equipped with non-lethal payloads and capabilities. I'm totally down for this. Then you can have your righteous, moral high-ground all day long and we'd also likely be able to respond to threats more effectively from the get-go anyway with such technology.

[sharpy]

So lemme get this straight.

Someone; whom happens to be black, steals a car, speeds on roads endangering other drivers and pedestrians, hit cop cars, nearly ran one over (intentional or not, is damn near cause for lethal force already), then runs away after having crashed the car into residential properties where he could arm himself; if not already, and potentially take hostages or harm those at large and people are trying to defend this degenerate?

People need to pick their battles, this is not one of them for the BLM movement. If this guy hadn't resisted or had not put others lives at risk; he would have been worth defending, but that is not the case here.

This is cause for deadly force with most police a car counts as a weapon if used as one.

[Rudol Von Stroheim]

That's vigilantism, mate. Police exists to prevent this kind of thing. You don't punish people for something they "could have done" and haven't in reality done.

It's not. Crimes committed, attempted murder of an officer committed.

[BreakerOfWills]

Wait, so theft is grounds for execution now? SO when do we execute the people that tanked the economy? What about all the money launderers? We dont get to murder them?

[Barnabas]

Apparently the police department stripped 3 guys of their badges so there must be some doubt even in the police departments mind that there were some ill intentions from the police officers involved.

[Dextroden]

Wait, so theft is grounds for execution now? SO when do we execute the people that tanked the economy? What about all the money launderers? We dont get to murder them?

We got another one.

[Tradewind]

Wait, so theft is grounds for execution now? SO when do we execute the people that tanked the economy? What about all the money launderers? We dont get to murder them?

You people keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

[May90]

It's not. Crimes committed, attempted murder of an officer committed.

Attempted murder of an officer in itself is not a reason for the officer to kill the suspect.

[Rudol Von Stroheim]

Attempted murder of an officer in itself is not a reason for the officer to kill the suspect.

...wait wut

[Jinpachi]

For starters, you don't know if he is armed. Secondly, he committed assault with a deadly weapon on police officers by using the car he had stolen to ram them. Thirdly, he can get another vehicle. He can get a hostage. He can do a myriad of things that by running are very much possibilities in the immediate scenario. If he hadn't already been a reckless endangerment to said public and officers, then him running on foot wouldn't seem like such a big deal because then you're simply dealing with a thief... not a lunatic.

The irony here is, if the cops didn't shoot him, the chase went on, and a civilian was hurt or killed as a result - they'd be bitched at and held out to dry anyway. I genuinely feel bad for officers. There is no winning in these scenarios. You're an asshole if you do, an asshole if you don't and all because we can't get around the idea that the dickhead who knowingly endangered the public isn't worth taking such a risk for in the first place. It really should be a case closed scenario but because he's fucking black, it's not.

Now according to his friends, family, etc... I'm sure the PD killed an "angel" of the community that shat out gold nuggets he handed out to the less fortunate and cured the cripple by sheer goodwill alone.

Exactly. And when its your word vs a dead man's, the living's word tends to carry more weight.

[Barnabas]

Attempted murder of an officer in itself is not a reason for the officer to kill the suspect.

Not according to police department rules and the training they received.

[Rudol Von Stroheim]

You people keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Nah, they had the poor bastard dropped to his knees with his hands cuffed behind him. Then put a round through his skull.

[Jinpachi]

Attempted murder of an officer in itself is not a reason for the officer to kill the suspect.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL attempted murder or rape of your child isnt a reason for you to kill the offender either

[papajohn4]

Death generally is not the punishment for theft, at least not in Western countries. Shooting when you do not see a gun is also not something I support. If he flashed a gun, etc, that's another story.

they shot him in the back.
regardless of the value of the car, unless they actually SEEN a gun, or came under fire from the accused, there is no justification on the planet for shooting someone in the back.

if you see the gun then it is probably too late for the policeman, unless he is the spiderman...of course I am not saying that police should just shoot everybody, but i also dont think that the other must pull the gun first...

In this situations, there is really not any rules that can guarantee a "correct" result...

[Themius]

He probably was reaching at his waistband.

- - - Updated - - -




it's the typical "Dindunism".

You might as well have said niggerism