346
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2024
346 points (98.9% liked)
News
21707 readers
3677 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Outcome is unfortunate but pointing a gun, replica or not, at an officer has always been a very bad idea. Nothing is different now vs 30 years ago.
Do we as a society really need reminding don't point weapons at police? Don't do it folks.
Your flaw is that you're taking the police at their word. Why the fuck would a 13 year old point a pellet gun at the cops?
If I see footage that corroborates their story I'll believe it. Until then, I'm assuming the murderer is also a liar. ACAB
I haven't heard a statement from the other side of the story, but it seems you have. So please, inform us all. Otherwise, your speculation based in distrust and hate is moot.
We only have one source of facts at the moment, with a promise for a more detailed followup so, yeah, it carries weight.
I don't know why a 13yo would do such a thing, or why they even had a replica gun. I'm not them. I feel sorry for them, but according to the facts I know right now, it was a bad choice. I am especially interested if the red tip were removed designating a toy. As the article references a replica, not a toy, I wonder if that had some influence in the outcome.
I am fully prepared to change my view if new evidence persuades me.
If you'd read the article, the police admitted that they are lying about it:
When the police say 'believe us not the evidence', that means they're lying.
WOW do you like your own narrative.
That's not an admission to lying whatsoever.
That is literally what it says it is: that the video circulating online does not portray the entire incident.
Any armchair editor knows how to add start/stop points to a clip. It could be to emphasize a point, exclude content, or simply meet time constraints.
People these days... so easily radicalized. Take a breather and wait for more info.
When the police kill an unarmed child and then try to justify their actions, they're going to have to lie because there's no justifiable reason to kill an unarmed child. Hence claiming that the dead child both fled and menanced them and pre-discrediting the evidence against them.
There's an ocean of examples of police lying to cover up their killings. They lie so often that they got the courts to confirm they have no duty to tell the truth.
Your radical denial of where all the evidence points is not as moderate as you seem to believe.
Unarmed?
Literally armed with a pellet gun. It's in the title!
I'm just curious, does it ever get tiring? I imagine doing anything 24/7 must be, but licking that many boots just sounds exhausting.
Do you realize there's a reason you're being consistently downvoted? Do you care to understand why your opinions are so frowned upon? Or do you simply conclude, in your tiny obedient mind, that the "radicals" dislike the police because we're all thugs?
This is a trend decades (if not centuries or millennia) in the making, of people in power abusing said power and lying about it. You defending them is a pathetic waste of your time.
Honestly, the downvotes don't bother me as much as the gossip and unchecked hysteria in some Lemmy communities. This is a controversial topic and this is a discussion.
But some take differing viewpoints as a personal attack and double down.
I have my own biases, I recognize that, but I try to stick with facts like I have in this thread. But I've been on both sides of a police-focused argument before and also massively attacked for assuming police were out to get a company. I backed it up with facts too but that issue was hard to defend.
I may not agree with people here, and you may not agree with me, but votes don't make you right. You're free to present evidence the police in this article acted outside their authority anytime; all I hear are soapbox radicals with an axe to grind.
You love classifying differing opinions as those from "radicals". I hope to God you don't have any power over others in your life, because your mindset is dangerous.
So the "all police are lying murderers until they convince me they're not, but I won't let that happen" crowd sort of fit. Then there are the wannabees that try to fit in and fan the flames.
For all you know, we are both AI bots out to steer the course of dialogue and incite our respective groups.
Spooky fingers oooOOOOooooo
If there is anything to take away, talking to all of you in this thread now, is that I love debates and discord among strangers and while we don't see eye to eye, I'd have a beer with you folks and at the end of the day, wish you all well.
Let's keep the emotions in check.
Yes, unarmed. As in not bearing a weapon. A toy is not a weapon and poses no threat at all.
That's why toys have red tips. If there is no red tip, as in a replica, it looks and assumed to be real.
The other side is dead. And there's a video in this thread that shows one cop already in control of the kid and another just shooting him, this isn't cool no matter what happened before that.
Nobody will hear a statement from the other side of the story because the other side is a dead 13 year old.
According to the article there were 2 youths.
There is another side.
There also should be body-cam video that should portray a reasonable unbiased view of the situation.
Do we need a reminder that kids aren't mini-adults, and they do stupid things sometimes? In any case, I'll believe he pointed it at them when I see a video of it.
Certain stupid activities have immediately fatal consequences, that’s life bro. The gun was a replica of a Glock 17, made specifically to look like the genuine article. If someone pointed one at me they’d be well on their way to room temp, and I likely wouldn’t even be charged, because yeah, I would have had every reason to assume I was in imminent danger.
Teach your kids to not be this stupid. A 13 year old in the city shouldn’t have unrestricted access to pellet gun, or any other weapon.
Weird fantasy to kill kids. You might need some help.
I have no interest in harming anyone, ever. But I certainly won’t allow myself to be harmed. So whatever, stomp me with downvotes. I’m as ACAB as the next lefty, but when you grow up in a violent place you recognize certain realities that other people might not.
Yeah I can see that. I guess where I have an issue is that the old white guy who shot up a Planned Parenthood a few years back was taken alive (and he's far from the only example) and it's like, why is it that they can negotiate and talk guys like that down but don't bother to even attempt to de-escalate with brown kids? Or brown adults, really.
Kid was Asian. Police violence on Asians is comparable to caucasians
Police are allowed to point weapons at you and not expect return fire. It's not considered self defense if you return fire even if the police burst into your home in the middle of the night and don't announce themselves. 2nd amendment rights are simply an advertisement for the gun industry to sell more weapons and ammunition and has nothing to do with self defense especially from the state.
Actually Breonna Taylor's boyfriend was acquitted for firing at them as self-defense. In very specific situations and with suitably embarrassing incidents for the police you might be able to avoid having the entire weight of the justice system come down on you. Assuming you survive the encounter in the first place.
He was not acquitted.
The charges were dropped once the massive pile of police incompetence met the shitstorm of public scrutiny.
First the charges were dismissed without prejudice so the prosecutor could dig and see if he could find some way to make it Walker's fault that cops killed his girlfriend. Then, when he couldn't (because of the aforementioned appalling incompetence), and public scrutiny didn't decrease to a point where he could quietly pressure Walker into a cell anyway, they were dismissed with prejudice.
It is important to not make shit up about this. If the public scrutiny hadn't been as intense, it is entirely possible that they would have dragged him to trial and pressured him into a plea bargain. He was lucky that the public managed to continue giving a shit for more than their usual 30-second attention span.
I think most people would agree and understand but can't we expect a bit of common sense from the police.
This death was unnecessary but legal under our laws.
Yeah provoking law enforcement is just plain stupid.