In unrelated law enforcement news, some of New Hampshire's finest, putting their lives on the line every single shift: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKzxvH6Czsg
they are claiming that the kid was attempting to stab the officer so the detective shot him. the only facts of such a claim that could negate the PBA's statement would be corroborating statements from the detective and officer that such actually occurred. is it your claim that the detective and the officer never made such statements that corroborate such a claim, and thus there are no facts to back up their narrative? that would be the only thing that you could be saying. or should we start from the more logical and reasonable perspective that the officer and detective made those claims, and simply making a statement about those claims has zero to do with "facts." you are so intent on disputing it that you are making an irrelevant argument against it because their statement isn't an issue of proving facts at this point. nobody is saying it was justified simply because of the PBA's statements.
I can't imagine any reasonable explanation for shooting the kid in this situation. Surely these police officers could have knocked him out with a few punches or even a pistol whip. Shooting him? What possible scenario is there that justifies shooting a 90 pound kid with a screwdriver when there are several cops already pinning him down? This cop should be in jail for murder.
JB-The officers who were exonerated didn't make any claims publicly and the officer who killed the kid is under suspension and is only talking through an attorney. I'm saying the PBA is making shit up because they want a narrative out. Stop with the claims when you have facts that dispute the families account let me know. The kid was tazed by officers who were inside, he was then shot dead by a third cop who came late to the party. There are no injured officers. Those are the only facts.
and therein lies the problem with your position -- you are arbitrarily accepting one side as true and arbitrarily dismissing the contrary narrative, without anything to validate either. the PBA is claiming he was stabbing at the officer with the screwdriver. if that is true, it doesn't sound like he is being pinned down at all, which your position is dependent upon. yes, if the narrative is true that he was being pinned down then you are right, there is no need to shoot him because it is unlikely he could be stabbing at the officer in a manner that would be a threat while pinned down by multiple officers. but if it is true that he was stabbing at the officer with a screwdriver that was a realistic threat then it is justified. you can believe they should be able to defend themselves without deadly force against a 90 lb kid, but the kids weight doesn't mean he couldn't stab somebody just because the other person is bigger. sure, maybe the officer could have subdued him even though he is stabbed, but the officer doesn't have to risk getting stabbed just because he is likely more powerful than the kid.
I have made no claims, try stopping being such a hysteric so you can comprehend positions when they dispute yours. the PBA may be making shit up. the facts will tell that. no, those are the only facts you know of so far, and because those validate your position you want to claim nothing else could have possibly occurred before all evidence is presented.
Nobody has suggested that the officer who shot the kid at point blank range was being stabbed by the kid. Nobody has claimed that. Stop making shit up.
I didn't make anything up. I was discussing a hypothetical situation in which an officer should have to risk being stabbed simply because he is likely more powerful than his assailant and should not have to use deadly force, which was what LTJF was advocating. of course you aren't bright enough to grasp what is actually occuring so you should probably simply avoid such conversations. stop being such an f'ing imbecile and hysteric and try to understand what is being said.
A kid who was completely out of control and is sick who weighs about 100 pounds had 2 cops on him and was tazed. A third cop shot him dead. Forget all the narrative. The police have a tough job everyone knows that. This is a family in need and the cops blew it. If they kid was that out of control why not call for backup? Why not go in with a shield and subdue him? They do it all the time in prisons across the country with grown men who are complete psychopaths. The facts are the kid had a screwdriver not a gun and the result is he was shot dead in his own house. You want to justify that on the technicality of the officer had the legal right to shoot him if he thought he or others were in danger fine. I disagree. They screwed up and killed a kid who needed help. The cops have a tough job but if they aren't man enough to take the risks without blowing a kids head off they should be culled out of the ranks. The facts are the shot a kid without a gun at point blank range in his own house. A kid who needed help.
Where am I missing the point. Your position is you don't know what happened but hypothetically "if" the cop was being stabbed he is justified in killing the kid. It's a position that rules out other options and on its own doesn't justify killing the kid.
no, it doesn't rule out the other options. it is simply discussing one specific option. how could something so simple and obvious be so confusing to you?
I find it amusing that you of all people, one who professes accountability, has consistently been making a defense for what at best was a completely blown operation by emergency responders. The obvious here is not your hypothetical defense of a legal technicality. The obvious in this situation, a family in need with a disturbed child called in for help to emergency responders. In their response they failed miserably. The didn't subdue the kid, they didn't call in backup, they didn't back out and call for medical backup. The got the worst possible result you could ever expect. We pay these guys through taxpayer dollars, pretty good salaries, pensions and medical to not just uphold the law but to defend and protect the community. The Department and possibly the individuals need to be held accountable for a failed response. Is accountability to hard for your Conservative principled mind to grasp?
Hold him accountable after all the evidence has been presented. Is not drawing a conclusion from one side of the story based on your first presentation of the situation too hard to grasp for your irrational, hysteric mind?
It just doesn't make sense. Three trained police officers couldn't subdue a 90 pound kid with nothing more than a screwdriver without lethal force from a gun? I mean, sure, I suppose it's POSSIBLE that the kid overpowered 3 cops and cornered one with a screwdriver but does that honestly seem like a realistic scenario to anyone? Give me a break. This cop is clearly a goon.
it very likely is he is a goon. but the point isn't whether they could have subdued him without lethal force, because in the course of subduing him the kid still could have stabbed one of the officers. just because the end result would have been the kid subdued without lethal force doesn't mean the officers are obligated to risk getting stabbed simply because it is possible. if someone if stabbing a screwdriver wildly, getting stabbed is extremely likely, even if you are able to overpower them. to believe the officer should be required to get stabbed simply because he could subdue the assailant without killing him, rather than use deadly force to prevent a possibly deadly attack (which a stab is), is ridiculous, and why the use of force is established by explicit criteria (not "technicality," which Biggs want to minimize it as because it is more of an emotional description).
I'm willing to sign up right now to get in the ring with any 90 pound dude you want to pick out and his screwdriver. The idea that 3 trained police officers couldn't figure out a way to stop a 90 pound kid with a screwdriver without getting stabbed seems a bit ridiculous to me. But maybe I'm just overly emotional or something. I don't believe I am, but maybe I'm just completely unaware of my strong emotions on this story.
The point is the risk exists, and the police aren't obligated or even expected to assume such a risk. But someone swinging or stabbing a weapon wildly is extremely likely to connect randomly.
I get your point I just think you're really over rating the threat of the screwdriver. I mean we're talking about probably the average weight of an 11 or 12 year old boy. We can agree to disagree.
Isn't that risk part of the job though? I work in a juvenile jail and have to deal with the possibility of getting stabbed on a daily basis and the only thing we are allowed to use to subdue them is our own physical force(no pepper spray/baton/etc) and training against such situations. I know they are juveniles so it is different but I would imagine police have to go through similar training. I mean police work is a hazardous job by its nature. You can't just shoot anything that could possibly be a danger.
