No kidding. Then why were the police called to the scene?
Because some jackass called 911, that's why. If he were "threatening" untold legions we'd expect more than one 911 call.
Last edited:
I, Racist
- Thread starter Buzzword
- Start date
Because some jackass called 911, that's why. If he were "threatening" untold legions we'd expect more than one 911 call.
No kidding. Then why were the police called to the scene?
Because Black + Gun = an automatic (e.g. racist/sterotypical) 911 response.
If this was a suburbanite white kid...his neighbors would be in awe over little Johnnie's active imagination.
Alright. I've reviewed the surveillance tape and the wikipedia article:
1. The surveillance video plainly shows the boy brandishing the toy gun. He was pointing it at something at least once in the video. At what? Who knows. Surveillance videos are limited like that.
2. The park didn't look that busy. Maybe there simply weren't that many people passing through. I never made the claim that he was threatening "untold legions." If he threatened even one person, that's one person too many, that constitutes assault (with what at least appears to be a deadly weapon) and that warrants a 911 call, and from that point on, his blood is on his own head; he is responsible for whatever happens after that.
3. The caller said that the gun was "probably" fake. "Probably" fake isn't the same thing as "definitely fake." Those are chances that I wouldn't want to take. The fact that the caller made the 911 call in the first place indicates that he isn't sure, and if it looks like a real gun, then a police officer doesn't necessarily have time to stop and ask questions. "Hello, young man, is that gun fake or..." -Blam.- And the police officer is dead. That's an on the spot life or death decision that the officer has to make. If the officer feels threatened, then he should shoot. Center of mass. Every round in his gun. Every time. Period. End of story.
4. Once again, I ask the question: Why was the 12 year old at the park unsupervised with a fake gun? You can't blame that on racism.
5. Regardless, even if the shooting was unjustified, it takes a racist worldview to turn this into a matter of race. This has nothing to do with race. This has everything to do with a single mentally unstable police officer who probably would have done what he did whether the boy in question was black, white, hispanic, jewish, asian or whatever else.
And again, what is the role of the boy's parents? Where were they?
Except, that's not what prompted the 911 call. What prompted the 911 call is that he was pointing the gun at people. That's assault. Assault (especially with a deadly weapon) is a crime.
Furthermore, especially in certain neighborhoods, there's a good reason that black + gun = automatic 911 response. There's a good chance that 1. the armed black person in question is involved with a gang and/or the drug trade and 2. the gun isn't even legally possessed by the black person in question.
Last edited:
You say "brandish," I say "a kid screwing around with a toy." As twelve-year-olds are wont to do.
Victim blaming claptrap. He wasn't "threatening" anyone. He. Had. A. Toy.
Your armchair fascism might make you feel snug but it's gruesome.
Why was a kid in a park with a toy? Gee, Trad. Search me. Back in the olden days they did that all the time. But whippersnappers today? You're right, usually they stay cooped inside, seated in front of a glowing screen of some kind or another.
Given the track record of the Cleveland PD I find this very unlikely. But let's be generous. Let's say race played no rule in this lunacy. Let's at least admit we have a serious cop problem in this country and move on from there. Your comfort with this manner of brutality and your flippancy towards use of force speaks to a greater issue: The increasing comfort Americans have in explaining away police abuse of power and their unwillingness to hold police accountable for their savagery.
The fact that the police repeatedly lied should say enough--beyond the obvious insanity of Rice's murder. Who exactly felt "threatened" here? Ultimately, it was the Rice family who were threatened, victimized, and shot. A twelve-year-old kid is dead because an idiot in a uniform killed him. What exactly do you think would've happened here without a video?
Living in a dream world where twelve-year-olds could play in a park without fear of a maniac murdering them for no reason.
Shows them. Doesn't it.
unions are protecting bad cops
That's what Kids + toy guns = do. (BANG BANG...at least traditionally.)
Reads like the: White Guy's Field Guide to Stereotypical Race-Hating.. What edition are they up to?
The conspicuous truncation of my quote illustrates your willfull ignorant take on the subject...you can do better than that.
Trad has shown himself only capable of stereotypical, knee-jerk, cowardly fear in the face of that which is different from him.
"Assault also is any intentional unlawful act or threat of action, such as raising a fist or brandishing a weapon. If the offender appears to have the ability to carry out the threat and the action reasonably causes a person to feel afraid of impending violence, the act is an assault" (link).
Let's go through the checklist:
1. Was there the intentional unlawful act or threat of action, e.g., by brandishing a weapon or raising a fist? Check. Pointing a gun at someone indicates a threat to fire the weapon.
2. Did the offender have the appearance of being able to carry out the threat? Check! The orange safety cap was removed and the toy gun looked real.
3. Did it reasonably cause someone to feel afraid of such a threat being carried out? Check! Thus the 911 call.
He was guilty of assault. The fact that the gun was a toy is irrelevent insofar as the definition of assault (i.e., the intentional threat of physical harm) is concerned. Had the little thug lived, he reasonably should have spent some time in juvenile detention. He committed a (more or less violent) crime against one or more complete strangers.
Furthermore, in case you are unaware of this, modifying/altering real guns so that they look like toys is a thing. So even if the policeman got there and was like: "Oh, well, that sure does look like a toy," it wouldn't matter. As far as the policeman knows, it looks like a toy...and fires real bullets.
"It was a toy," I am afraid, rings utterly hollow in this context. The passersby and the policemen had no way of knowing this, and the little thug should have known better.
What you are proposing is more dead cops. That's unacceptable. Forced to choose between dead cops and dead criminals, the latter is preferable.
That wasn't the emphasis of my question and you know it. My question concerns his lack of parental supervision. 12 year old boys and 14 year old girls shouldn't be out on their own without parental supervision. His parents have failed as parents.
You extrapolate this from a single possible instance? Anti-black racist stereotypes have better statistical support than that.
Show me a rash of cases in which policemen are breaking into the homes of innocent people and shooting them to death, even though the innocent people are neither fleeing nor resisting arrest, and I'll admit there's a problem.
As it stands, what we've been seeing are cases in which (more or less violent) criminals (who were also public nuissances) got on the wrong side of a policeman's gun. I'm cool with that. In fact, I think it would be better for society if it happened a whole lot more often. That would mean fewer violent criminals roaming the streets. :idunno:
He shouldn't have been pointing a realistic toy gun at people. His parents should have been keeping better watch of him. :idunno:
Oh, and Granite, now I see why you've been ignoring the question of supervision. I genuinely had no clue about this until I googled it a moment ago, but hey, that just goes to show...stereotypes are usually wrong, right? [/sarcasm]
Tamir Rice's mother was a violent criminal.'
"Here’s the “toy” gun Tamir Rice drew on the police.
The mother of Tamir Rice has a lengthy criminal background that sheds light on how she might have allowed her son to carry an air soft gun, Gotnews.com has learned.
Twelve-year-old Tamir Rice was killed by police earlier this week for drawing a realistic looking airsoft gun on police officers.
Rice was shot in an area well known for robberies and thefts. Air soft guns are often used by young criminals to hold up grocery stores because they are easier to obtain than handguns.
His mother, Samaria Rice, has a long history of crime that includes an illegal weapons charge and an armed robbery.
Rice’s repeated dealings with the criminal justice system didn’t set a good example for her now deceased son."
His mother was a violent criminal who was involved in drugs, and his father likewise has a criminal record, and you still think the little thug wasn't threatening people? Still think that the police officer didn't do society a favor?
If so, you're just deluded, just as all "limp-wristed liberals"* are.
It doesn't take a fortune teller to see how Tamir Rice probably would have turned out had he lived, and frankly, I'm not particularly envious of such a possible world. We're better off.
Once again, I renew my exhortation to the black community:
"You don't want to end up on the wrong side of a policeman's gun? Then stop breaking the law."
*Another judge dredd quote.
Tamir Rice's mother was a violent criminal.'
"Here’s the “toy” gun Tamir Rice drew on the police.
The mother of Tamir Rice has a lengthy criminal background that sheds light on how she might have allowed her son to carry an air soft gun, Gotnews.com has learned.
Twelve-year-old Tamir Rice was killed by police earlier this week for drawing a realistic looking airsoft gun on police officers.
Rice was shot in an area well known for robberies and thefts. Air soft guns are often used by young criminals to hold up grocery stores because they are easier to obtain than handguns.
His mother, Samaria Rice, has a long history of crime that includes an illegal weapons charge and an armed robbery.
Rice’s repeated dealings with the criminal justice system didn’t set a good example for her now deceased son."
His mother was a violent criminal who was involved in drugs, and his father likewise has a criminal record, and you still think the little thug wasn't threatening people? Still think that the police officer didn't do society a favor?
If so, you're just deluded, just as all "limp-wristed liberals"* are.
It doesn't take a fortune teller to see how Tamir Rice probably would have turned out had he lived, and frankly, I'm not particularly envious of such a possible world. We're better off.
Once again, I renew my exhortation to the black community:
"You don't want to end up on the wrong side of a policeman's gun? Then stop breaking the law."
*Another judge dredd quote.
oatmeal
Well-known member
Our Constitution's original Bill of Rights applies to anyone and everyone who wishes to make use of them.
We have been endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights including life, liberty (not licentiousness), and the pursuit of happiness.
That "we" is anyone of the human race, anywhere.
Not just in the United States, where we officially and governmently recognize that and protect it.
No one has to be living in the US to exercise those rights.
No one has to be of a certain color or nationality to exercise those rights.
As long as blacks or whites or anyone else blames others for their lack of effort to exercise those those inalienable rights they will always end up on the short end of realizing and enjoying those rights.
People want those rights?
They already have them
Why are they not exercising them?
Trust God to exercise them.
More and more to the end you live them fully.
Who should I blame if I do not exercise my rights?
Who should you blame if you do not fully exercise your rights?
We have been endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights including life, liberty (not licentiousness), and the pursuit of happiness.
That "we" is anyone of the human race, anywhere.
Not just in the United States, where we officially and governmently recognize that and protect it.
No one has to be living in the US to exercise those rights.
No one has to be of a certain color or nationality to exercise those rights.
As long as blacks or whites or anyone else blames others for their lack of effort to exercise those those inalienable rights they will always end up on the short end of realizing and enjoying those rights.
People want those rights?
They already have them
Why are they not exercising them?
Trust God to exercise them.
More and more to the end you live them fully.
Who should I blame if I do not exercise my rights?
Who should you blame if you do not fully exercise your rights?