Chicago Police kill unarmed black teenager

[Auxora]

This year 50% of the death by cops are whites, 25% are blacks, 25% includes all the others minorities.

Yes blacks are over represented (17% of the overall population), and whites under represented (71% of the overall population).

But its kinda hard to defend those poor car thiefs....

Well more accurately, Blacks are only 12.2% of the population (not 17%) and in the last 10-12 years - not just picking the last year...shootings of Blacks by police has been very disproportionate to population. In fact in 2004, 2006 , 2008, and 2010 there were actually *more* Blacks shot than Whites. And the other years were usually around the 60/40 range. So for only 12% of the population to lead in being shot and in all years be far above 12% shot, it does raise some flags. Plus, most shootings of Whites are pretty clear cut cases where there isn't much question on the use of force. I don't think anyone is going to argue against police shooting a disgruntled guy who goes in a workplace shooting people. I'm talking about people who have their hands up or that get shot reaching for id after being asked for it, and those are the things that are happening way more along racial lines.

And although most police by and large are amazing, the Chicago Police in particular have a well documented history both recent and in the past 50 years of abuse. Read up a bit on them and it's pretty staggering. Police definitely have a tough job, and especially tough in the worst areas like Baltimore and parts of Chicago, Atlanta, LA, etc. But there has also been enough happen that I'm not going to blindly put blue goggles on and say anything they do is ok, and anyone they shot deserved it. Because we've seen cases with our own eyes where the shootings weren't justified, and without civilian video like we have today it would definitely be a your word against the police thing. Also, it doesn't help police credibility when half the time in these shootings they say their dash or body cams were off or that they just happened to not record. In 1 recent Chicago shooting the police even went in right after and forced a business to hand over their surveillance camera recordings of the shootings too, which were then conveniently erased. Just way too much cumulative shadiness to not look at these things a bit closer.

[Jinpachi]

Of course it is not, and if I do so, I will be righteously imprisoned for a murder. That's what we have police for: to avoid vengeance and similar crap, under pretense of "justice".

This is not freaking Call of Duty, lol.

The kid tried to run the cops over as he was crashing through their vehicles. They were completely justified. end of story

- - - Updated - - -

Well more accurately, Blacks are only 12.2% of the population (not 17%) and in the last 10-12 years - not just picking the last year...shootings of Blacks by police has been very disproportionate to population. In fact in 2004, 2006 , 2008, and 2010 there were actually *more* Blacks shot than Whites. And the other years were usually around the 60/40 range. So for only 12% of the population to lead in being shot and in all years be far above 12% shot, it does raise some flags. Plus, most shootings of Whites are pretty clear cut cases where there isn't much question on the use of force. I don't think anyone is going to argue against police shooting a disgruntled guy who goes in a workplace shooting people. I'm talking about people who have their hands up or that get shot reaching for id after being asked for it, and those are the things that are happening way more along racial lines.

And although most police by and large are amazing, the Chicago Police in particular have a well documented history both recent and in the past 50 years of abuse. Read up a bit on them and it's pretty staggering. Police definitely have a tough job, and especially tough in the worst areas like Baltimore and parts of Chicago, Atlanta, LA, etc. But there has also been enough happen that I'm not going to blindly put blue goggles on and say anything they do is ok, and anyone they shot deserved it. Because we've seen cases with our own eyes where the shootings weren't justified, and without civilian video like we have today it would definitely be a your word against the police thing. Also, it doesn't help police credibility when half the time in these shootings they say their dash or body cams were off or that they just happened to not record. In 1 recent Chicago shooting the police even went in right after and forced a business to hand over their surveillance camera recordings of the shootings too, which were then conveniently erased. Just way too much cumulative shadiness to not look at these things a bit closer.

Go live in inner city chicago for a few years and tell me you wouldnt want to abuse the assholes living there. Being poor is no excuse for their behavior.

[Zeta333]

Hahah infracted for this... I honestly didn't know that dindonuffin is a racial slur nowadays. Kind of funny tbh.

So if it's an acknowledged racial slur, we can now break down the essence of a 'dindonuffin'. For science:
- black
- commit a crime
- get shot by a cop
- has a mama that sues the police department

Its not a racial slur and you were infracted wrongly. Dindonufin refers to a group of people that claim they didnt do nothing after committing obvious crimes. So mods need to calm thier tits.

[Merkava]

And although most police by and large are amazing, the Chicago Police in particular have a well documented history both recent and in the past 50 years of abuse. Read up a bit on them and it's pretty staggering.

John Kass (one of the more conservative columnists) of the Chicago Tribune wrote this

Given the history of the police and black Chicago, transparency is what's required. But the body camera of the officer who shot O'Neal wasn't functioning. And if you know Chicago, you're probably not surprised. Things happen that way.

[sweatshopkids]

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.

You gave me one reason. The word you're looking for is "saw" and not "seen" here.

[Endus]

So you can prove that the cop intended to kill him? Pretty sure he was trying to stop him not kill him.

If you've got cops shooting lethal ammunition at people because they think it'll just stop them, rather than kill them, well, that's a whole separate problem.

Yes, bullets are lethal force. You don't shoot at anything you don't intend and expect to kill.

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs...072000050K12-2

It's still aggravated assault.

Which is irrelevant, since we weren't talking about whether it was okay for the guy to do that with the stolen car, we were pointing out that it did not justify the use of lethal force in response.

It's specifically excluded as a valid justification, in the Chicago PD.

[Synadrasa]

If you've got cops shooting lethal ammunition at people because they think it'll just stop them, rather than kill them, well, that's a whole separate problem.

Yes, bullets are lethal force. You don't shoot at anything you don't intend and expect to kill.



Which is irrelevant, since we weren't talking about whether it was okay for the guy to do that with the stolen car, we were pointing out that it did not justify the use of lethal force in response.

It's specifically excluded as a valid justification, in the Chicago PD.

Bullets are not lethal force in every situation obviously.

[Endus]

Bullets are not lethal force in every situation obviously.

Uhh, yeah, they are.

That you might fail to successfully kill someone does not make the attempt non-lethal. Shooting at someone with a regular firearm and ammunition is always considered to be lethal force.

If they weren't, you'd see mass shooters use the "I wasn't trying to kill anyone, I was just trying to scare people by shooting a bunch, if they got in the way of the bullets, man, not my problem" defense. Which is a stupid-ass defense, obviously.

[Fencers]

I saw this video a couple of times and was totally shocked how careless the officers were. Not to mention how primed they were for violence.

That one officer shot clear across the street of a residential neighborhood at a fleeing vehicle. Are you kidding me? Real life is not like Lethal Weapon or Beverly Hills Cop. What in the actual fuck.

It reminds me of my coworker who lost her son while he was getting off the train and was struck by a stray bullet. A few years later, her daughter was awoken in the middle of the night by a stray bullet going through her window. It was only then that the family finally moved out of Park Manor.

To think that one's children can so easily be shot through no fault of their own because of gang violence, cowboy police officers and excused thuggery is absolute insanity to me personally.

Shocking video.

[Themius]

Are we still trying to blame this only on the crook stealing the car and ignore that he tried to use it as a deadly weapon?

Are we still ignoring that a fleeing unarmed person isn't a threat and that the CHICAGO PD disagreed with the police actions?

[Gangresnake]

First I think this circus of virtue signaling is pathetic, the situation in chicago isnt rocket science. Crime is high, city is poor as shit and end up with the police force they can afford, aka not a very good one. How much more money are people offended by this ready to provide ? Close to zero, they dont want the problem solved, they just want to hold the police to impossible standards from behind their desks, or even better in some cases, suck some of their money through juicy lawsuits.
The "unarmed black man" is a criminal trying to run over a police officier, how shocked should I be that he got shot.

Still, discharging his weapon toward a moving vehicle in a residential area, that's a mistake.
He got caught in the heat of the moment and If I read the thread correctly, admitted it, but nothing here is worth a media circus.

[RickJamesLich]

Are we still ignoring that a fleeing unarmed person isn't a threat and that the CHICAGO PD disagreed with the police actions?

The Chicago PD disagreeing with the actions shows that corruption comes from the top level lol.

As for him being unarmed, the cops had no information that was the case ahead of time and considering the suspect was going into people's backyards, where he could easily go into a house and get a weapon, leading to a hostage situation, or even get another car, I can understand why they wouldn't want to risk that type of situation happening. Never mind the fact that they were under the impression that he did have a weapon, and in this type of circumstance it makes sense why they would believe that.

As I mentioned numerous times before too, if the suspect was any other race, nobody would fault the cops here.

[Holofernes]

endus, u are really wrong in this. this guy was a harm to police and to every person around. he had to be taken down from his rampage, he was already cornered and still ran away. Even i , me european leftist-pacifistic guy, whos only ever use of firearms was while military service, see now wrongdoing in shooting this criminal. He assisted arrest. He threatened policemen, he threatened everybody in the sorrounding in how he was acting. Your own posted law clearly states, that every measure that stops threat to the police officer or other people is allowed. And no court in this whole world would comdemn a police officer that shot this son of a bitch from the video.

[draganid]

shooting at him while he was using the vehicle as a ram is ok, shooting at him when he is fleeing on foot is not ok

[Bapestar]

Its not a racial slur and you were infracted wrongly. Dindonufin refers to a group of people that claim they didnt do nothing after committing obvious crimes. So mods need to calm thier tits.

It is, now stop bitching about moderation.

[Holofernes]

shooting at him while he was using the vehicle as a ram is ok, shooting at him when he is fleeing on foot is not ok

why is shooting at a criminal that just tried to kill you and is fleeing not ok? i dont get this?

[Jinpachi]

Law and policies actually specifically prohibit them from shooting at moving vehicles.

you're fucking stupid. when the car runs at the cops when they are trying to detain the suspect they have every right to shoot to kill


[Infracted]

[Polyxo]

All the 'HE USED HIS CAR AS A RAM' people really make me worried that there are people with that little grasp of physics driving near me.

[Bapestar]

Another piss poor martyr for the BLM movement.

Yeah sure, shooting him in the back is wrong. But acting like he didn't do anything to deserve police attention is stupid as shit. Stop making martyrs out of criminals and am be we can all focus on positive change.

Edit: lol at the SJW mod up In here. Handing out penalties for not drinking the liberal koolaide

Show me one person saying that.

[billymayz]

Bullets are not lethal force in every situation obviously.

Per training of the Department of Defense, CCW permit, riot training, self defense laws....

A firearm is considered lethal force, or intent of lethal force.

Pretty much that.

Did the cop actually see a weapon? No.
Is the guy about to pose an iminent threat to a bystander's life? No.

No cause for lethal force. If the kid gets away because you couldn't shoot him, he gets away. That's the preferable outcome, when the alternative is shooting an unarmed man.

Hell, I wouldn't even care if the guy had a gun, if it were holstered and he made no attempt to draw it.

Edit: Pre-emptively, I'll note that I realize this will put more officers at greater risk, and likely lead to increased officer fatalities. But that's the price you pay for taking the high road. If you just want cops to be the legally entitled gang that rules the streets with the government's say-so, then by all means, lock and load.

In response to your edit, in this situation and ones like it, the "weapon" he had(car) was no longer a threat, he was running away(not a threat) at that point lethal force should no longer be on the table because the police are no longer worried about defending themselves or others from bodily harm. Theres one of him, several of them, they have radios, and more cop cars, route him to a spot for the take down.

- - - Updated - - -

why is shooting at a criminal that just tried to kill you and is fleeing not ok? i dont get this?

he's no longer a threat to them
think of the guy who shot up the movie theater, he lived for trial, because he was no longer a threat to the police and didn't kill himself
lethal force is OK if your life is in danger, someone else's life is in danger, or there is a very high chance of either. him running unarmed and getting shot in the back means he was no longer a threat

- - - Updated - - -

Another piss poor martyr for the BLM movement.

Yeah sure, shooting him in the back is wrong. But acting like he didn't do anything to deserve police attention is stupid as shit. Stop making martyrs out of criminals and am be we can all focus on positive change.

Edit: lol at the SJW mod up In here. Handing out penalties for not drinking the liberal koolaide

I am not a liberal, by a long shot. No one said he didn't deserve police attention. He wasn't a threat anymore, just an observed suspect. By your logic, if someone surrenders after shooting, and you shoot them, knowing they are no longer a threat, then its ok.
I have to sit in classes for that stuff every year, no longer a threat, the lethal force (firearms, knives, etc) go off the table, and non-lethal comes in(tasers, subduing)

and now, thanks to those police, the BLM will have another martyr, this one is pretty justified (unlike some of them) and now people are going to go block traffic and set fire to city blocks again. Should of used radios, other cops, their cars, tasers, you know all the other tools they had at their disposal