Put another "X" on the cops' guns

[mtangelsfan]

You keep repeating the mantra that he wasn't complying as if it absolutely the truth.

 

I don't believe it has to be the truth. 

[Lifetime]

You keep repeating the mantra that he wasn't complying as if it absolutely the truth.

 

I don't believe it has to be the truth. 

And you can keep repeating that it isn't the truth as a self serving argument despite any shred of evidence to support it. I keep repeating the mantra because that's the only evidence we have and there's no reason to assume otherwise. 

[mtangelsfan]

Really, there is no evidence that police lie to protect themselves?  There is no evidence that police overreact and make mistakes? 

 

 

 

By the way, I just watched a documentary called The Central Park Five.  It's about the five kids who were railroaded by the police and wrongly convicted for the raping the central park jogger.

 

Shockingly, I know because they just don't lie, they have circled the wagons and admitted nothing.

[Blarg]

So I guess that proves all police are bad people.

[Lifetime]

Really, there is no evidence that police lie to protect themselves?  There is no evidence that police overreact and make mistakes? 

 

 

 

By the way, I just watched a documentary called The Central Park Five.  It's about the five kids who were railroaded by the police and wrongly convicted for the raping the central park jogger.

 

Shockingly, I know because they just don't lie, they have circled the wagons and admitted nothing.

That's not what I said MT. Nice strawman. The fact that some police lie to protect themselves or have overreacted and made mistakes in other situations has no relevance to this case. You bringing up a case of corruption, The Central Park Five, has no relevance to this either. The fact of the matter is, you're assuming they are lying and corrupt without any corroboration. It's your approach to any story involving the police or a police shooting. Yes, police corruption exists. Yes, some police lie. 

[mtangelsfan]

No, I'm just not assuming that since they get to tell the narrative that they are telling the truth.  They are the ones who killed a 13 year old kid who did not have a real weapon.  There will be no outside investigation.  They will basically investigate themselves so they will be just fine. 

 

So sorry, I am not just going to take their word for it.  What I see is another minority kid gunned down by the police.  He's dead.  His parents lost a child.  If he had siblings they lost him.  It's final, complete. 

[Lhalo]

It was a replica of a real gun, not a toy.

 

I don't think we can say that for a fact yet.

 

It was unclear Tuesday whether the weapon recovered at the scene was an operational pellet or BB gun. Lopez's family called the gun a “toy,” but the Sheriff's Department's news release called it only a “replica” of an assault rifle. 

There are dozens of Airsoft guns on the market designed to look like real assault rifles but are electric and fire plastic, nonlethal projectiles similar to BBs.

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20131022/articles/131029886#page=0

[mtangelsfan]

Had he threatened anyone with it?  Was he holding it down at his side?  Why didn't the police stay back and call for backup? 

 

Is it your argument that anyone carrying a weapon or anything looking like a weapon should immediately be gunned down by the police?

[Blarg]

It is illegal in California for a minor to carry a weapon without parental supervision. We start there and then you can speculate further.

[Blarg]

Lawrence, this is the "toy" in question. The report has been resubmitted and they are now calling it a pellet gun.

 

Edited October 24, 2013 by Eric Notti

[Blarg]

More innocent kids, this time an 11 year old.

 

http://news.msn.com/crime-justice/boy-11-accused-of-bringing-gun-ammo-to-school

[mtangelsfan]

It is illegal in California for a minor to carry a weapon without parental supervision. We start there and then you can speculate further.

 

and I guess the normal sentence for said crime is death?

[Lifetime]

No, I'm just not assuming that since they get to tell the narrative that they are telling the truth.  They are the ones who killed a 13 year old kid who did not have a real weapon.  There will be no outside investigation.  They will basically investigate themselves so they will be just fine. 

 

So sorry, I am not just going to take their word for it.  What I see is another minority kid gunned down by the police.  He's dead.  His parents lost a child.  If he had siblings they lost him.  It's final, complete. 

Nice spin. Yes, you are assuming they are lying and corrupt. You've claimed nothing less in your posts. It's how you approach any story like this. They are the ones who killed a teen who had a replica gun that was indistinguishable from a real gun, and refused to release the gun as ordered. Just because he's a teenager doesn't mean the police should assume it's not a real gun or that he poses no threat. They have to assume the threat is real and act accordingly to remove the threat.

 

Without question this is a tragedy MT. A minority kid was killed by police. He's dead. His parents lost a child. It's final, complete. And yet, none of that is justification for assuming the police acted improperly in this situation. 

[mtangelsfan]

More innocent kids, this time an 11 year old.

 

http://news.msn.com/crime-justice/boy-11-accused-of-bringing-gun-ammo-to-school

 

Oh, so you have information that the 13-year old was planning on a mass murder at his school with the pellet gun.  Congratulations Police, you saved the day!!!!!!!!!

[Lifetime]

and I guess the normal sentence for said crime is death?

That's the starting point. He's also carrying a lethal weapon (as far as anyone can tell) in plain site in public and therefore is assumed to be a threat on public safety. He refused to drop said lethal weapon when ordered. So yes, in this case, as tragic as it is, as a matter of preserving public safety and self preservation on the part of the cops, they lethally fired on him to eliminate the threat. 

[mtangelsfan]

Nice spin. Yes, you are assuming they are lying and corrupt. You've claimed nothing less in your posts. It's how you approach any story like this. They are the ones who killed a teen who had a replica gun that was indistinguishable from a real gun, and refused to release the gun as ordered. Just because he's a teenager doesn't mean the police should assume it's not a real gun or that he poses no threat. They have to assume the threat is real and act accordingly to remove the threat.

 

Without question this is a tragedy MT. A minority kid was killed by police. He's dead. His parents lost a child. It's final, complete. And yet, none of that is justification for assuming the police acted improperly in this situation. 

 

no matter how many times you repeat this ad naseum, it doesn't make it the truth LT.  You are making an assumption the same as I am.  I might also add that you also approach stories like this exactly the same way each time.  The police aren't wrong.  They almost never lie.  You first and foremost want to believe them and go out of your way to do so. 

 

It wasn't a replica gun by the way, it was a pellet gun.

[Lifetime]

Oh, so you have information that the 13-year old was planning on a mass murder at his school with the pellet gun.  Congratulations Police, you saved the day!!!!!!!!!

I think you're missing the irony in that comment MT

[mtangelsfan]

That's the starting point. He's also carrying a lethal weapon (as far as anyone can tell) in plain site in public and therefore is assumed to be a threat on public safety. He refused to drop said lethal weapon when ordered. So yes, in this case, as tragic as it is, as a matter of preserving public safety and self preservation on the part of the cops, they lethally fired on him to eliminate the threat. 

 

and again, and again....................................

[mtangelsfan]

I think you're missing the irony in that comment MT

 

No, I'm actually not LT.  I actually do understand things fairly well without your help.  But thanks anyways.

[Lifetime]

no matter how many times you repeat this ad naseum, it doesn't make it the truth LT.  You are making an assumption the same as I am.  I might also add that you also approach stories like this exactly the same way each time.  The police aren't wrong.  They almost never lie.  You first and foremost want to believe them and go out of your way to do so. 

 

It wasn't a replica gun by the way, it was a pellet gun.

No matter how many times you repeat this ad nauseum, it doesn't make it the truth MT. I am assuming based on the facts as we know them and on normal protocol and common sense for these kind of situations. And yes, I approach these stories the same way every time. I base my opinion on the facts at hand, the evidence, rather than jumping to an unwarranted conclusion. I have never claimed that police are never wrong. I have never claimed police almost never lie. I do believe them, unless there is evidence to show otherwise. 

 

Oh and by the way, it was a pellet (or airsoft gun) that was made to replicate a real AK 47 and is not distinguishable from a real gun from a distance.

[Lifetime]

No, I'm actually not LT.  I actually do understand things fairly well without your help.  But thanks anyways.

Oh, OK.

[Lifetime]

and again, and again....................................

hey pot!

[mtangelsfan]

What facts?   What we have are the words of the police.  That is it.  You have jumped to a conclusion.  That the police are telling the truth.

[Lifetime]

What facts?   What we have are the words of the police.  That is it.  You have jumped to a conclusion.  That the police are telling the truth.

The facts as we know it are all we have to go on. You choose to assume, out of the gate, with no supporting evidence, that they must be lying and can't be trusted. You're right MT, I won't assume they are lying unless there is reason for it. There is none here so that's the conclusion I jump to. 

[mtangelsfan]

There is plenty of reason to lie. 

 

Meh, this discussion is pointless.