Teenager Shot Dead for Holding a Wii Remote

[ecoho]

ok honestly id blame the teen for this. Here's why;

A) the idiot violated his parole there by bringing the cop there.
B) he then proceeded to open the door to someone who did not identify themselves
C) he did this while holding an object that can be easily mistaken for a gun(whether a wii remote or a bb gun both look like guns in the right light)

So yeah I blame the teen for his own death and no I don't think the cop should be charged with anything, trust me when I say this taking a human life is not something you get over even when its not your fault or they deserved it.(not saying the kid deserved it just want to clarify that)

 

[WeepingAngels]

Back in my day we put things down before opening the door. Just another turn in the loop of societal degeneration.

Is this for real? I don't know how old you are but I am 40 and the only reason I didn't open the door with my Atari 2600 joystick was because the cord wouldn't reach. Back in my day nobody thought the cops would kill you for opening the door with something in your hand. Hell, back in my day I could have opened the door with a toy gun (before they put an orange end piece on them) I would never think I would get shot!

What really strikes my curiosity at this point is wondering how many death threats the officer and her family will get from our much beloved internet kin.

It's sad that you don't instead wonder about the lost future for this innocent teenager.

 

[lacktheknack]

Yes, she's a police officer. Police officers are allowed to aim loaded weapons at people. It's part of the job description.

Which is why we expect police to be held to a higher standards in regards to guns. Not being so damn reactive as seems to be the case here.

Well, she's out of the force now.

What more do you want, goat sacrifice?

If she didn't announce police presence (I doubt she didn't), then yeah, it's tragic that he was holding one. But if she DID announce her presence, then why would he hold onto a BB gun when answering the door like a total goddamned moron?

Why do you think she announced her presence? Do you have any information to suggest that she did? Why the bias?

Because there is a police policy to announce your presence, and she had no reason not to do so. None.

Why are you wanting to believe an unlikely story from a criminal on probation (the father)?

It's a non-issue, because in any other situation, presence would have been announced, and we have only unreliable witnesses saying she didn't (unless the neighbour said something about it that I missed).

Why the anti-cop bias?

Probably. Violating probation will make cops antsy like that.

They are just human right? Just like anyone else...it's just that they get to point their gun at whoever they like if they get scared. Should anyone else have a gun, well only the cops are allowed to shoot.

Yes.

Is this a problem?

I have no problem with this.

Should I have a problem that only the trained people with a very low error rate get to shoot in stressful standoff situations?

I don't see what that has to do with anything, unless you're implying she meant to shoot him all along. Which of course you wouldn't be implying, seeing how you're all unbiased and shit. -____-

No, I am sure it was an accident.

Just pointing out that SHE already had her gun out before she knew who was on the other side of that door. She was already in a paranoid state of mind. That Wii Mote threw her over the edge and this is a person who is supposed to be trained in the proper use of a firearm.

If she mistook the object to be a gun in his hand, well, she's trained to shoot first.

Which she did.

And tragically, it wasn't an actual threat. That's why she's now out of the force.

 

[lacktheknack]

Well Lack and Nero have basically said what I was gonna say so I'm just gonna ask what I always think when I see these threads: What exactly do the cop haters want? Because you obviously aren't real fond of the police, but your other options are robots or anarchy, and personally I prefer a statistically insignificant number of accidental fatalities to either of those options.

I'm increasingly sure they want goat sacrifices.

I'm going to bring those up in future threads.

 

[lacktheknack]

ok honestly id blame the teen for this. Here's why;

A) the idiot violated his parole there by bringing the cop there.
B) he then proceeded to open the door to someone who did not identify themselves
C) he did this while holding an object that can be easily mistaken for a gun(whether a wii remote or a bb gun both look like guns in the right light)

So yeah I blame the teen for his own death and no I don't think the cop should be charged with anything, trust me when I say this taking a human life is not something you get over even when its not your fault or they deserved it.(not saying the kid deserved it just want to clarify that)

To be fair, police are supposed to identify themselves. ("Open up! Police!")

Whether she identified herself or not will factor greatly into her reprimand.

 

[Saltyk]

Since when does opening a DOOR warrant being shot to death?It's not like the kid was a wanted criminal or anything.

He was violating probation, which instantly scares cops. You don't care about the law, or you wouldn't be violating probation. Plus, probation violators have a history of being violent, and the cops know it.

And if he answered the door with what looked like a gun, then yes, that's going to freak out the cop. Why would you answer the door with a pantomime gun?

If it wasn't actually a threatening object (less likely), then the cop has no excuse and will face legal action.

Does this look anything like a gun to you?

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcThf6j40IA6KoScPcHbrMA4zCSmHqRFzOwEMf5SCYHHIrGRGGJD:images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/G/01/videogames/detail-page/B0045FGET2.01.lg.jpg

No. Does this?

<img width=250>http://ep.yimg.com/ay/airgundepot/refurbished-umarex-sa177-bb-repeater-177-caliber-air-pistol-5.gif

Because that's what the neighbor, the most reliable witness, claimed he was holding.

Eye witnesses are notoriously unrealiable.Honestly at this point it sounds like you are just trying to find some way to blame the dead teen because the shooter was a cop.

Wait. Wait. Wait. Isn't that something Lacktheknack and several others have already stated when stating why they are not -I repeat NOT- taking sides in this story? That one reason they are iffy is the fact that there is no confirmed information. They are not saying that the kid deserved to die. They are not saying the cop was in the right. They are only saying that we shouldn't jump to conclusions.

Hell, I live in the state it happened and I'm further from this than some of you are. Able to step back and look at it. There is no reason to condemn the officer for this. Nor is there any reason to condemn the kid.

It could have been a Wiimote. It might have been a BB Gun. She might not have identified herself. She also might have and they could be lying about it or not have heard her do so. Let the police and the GBI investigate and see what they can come up with.

Do not jump to conclusions on partial, at best, information. All you'll do is leap off the edge.

 

[lacktheknack]

Normally, I don't involve myself in these kind of discussions, but when the result of this situation is civilian death, it can hardly be justified by anything. I don't believe the cop was bloodthirtsy, I don't believe she was a murderer, and she probably wasn't even a bad person. However, the death of an unarmed innocent is not "a simple misunderstanding". Parallels can be drawn, arguments made, excuses contrived, and metaphors created, but I feel like the result is what needs to be paid the attention: An unarmed teen was killed by a police officer without warning. I don't care what the situation is. That is unacceptable.

Well today's your lucky day: She's been thrown out of the force.

You know... as is protocol when this happens. Legal action will likely follow.

<awaits complaint that this somehow isn't enough>

 

[WeepingAngels]

Normally, I don't involve myself in these kind of discussions, but when the result of this situation is civilian death, it can hardly be justified by anything. I don't believe the cop was bloodthirtsy, I don't believe she was a murderer, and she probably wasn't even a bad person. However, the death of an unarmed innocent is not "a simple misunderstanding". Parallels can be drawn, arguments made, excuses contrived, and metaphors created, but I feel like the result is what needs to be paid the attention: An unarmed teen was killed by a police officer without warning. I don't care what the situation is. That is unacceptable.

Well today's your lucky day: She's been thrown out of the force.

You know... as is protocol when this happens. Legal action will likely follow.

<awaits complaint that this somehow isn't enough>

So, her being thrown out of the force suggests that she was indeed in the wrong?

Why wouldn't manslaughter charges apply? Does an ordinary citizen get off with a job loss over an accidental killing?

 

[bossfight1]

ok honestly id blame the teen for this. Here's why;

A) the idiot violated his parole there by bringing the cop there.
B) he then proceeded to open the door to someone who did not identify themselves
C) he did this while holding an object that can be easily mistaken for a gun(whether a wii remote or a bb gun both look like guns in the right light)

So yeah I blame the teen for his own death and no I don't think the cop should be charged with anything, trust me when I say this taking a human life is not something you get over even when its not your fault or they deserved it.(not saying the kid deserved it just want to clarify that)

Firstly: the person with the parole violation was his father, not him.
Second: Perhaps it MIGHT have been better to wait to open the door before the person knocking identified themselves. But, speaking only for myself, it seems common sense to answer a knock at the door.
Finally: Even if the thing Chris was holding WAS a gun, isn't a cop supposed to say something along the lines of "Sir, drop your weapon" or something like that? Not draw your gun before they answer the door and gun them down before they know what's happening?

 

[lacktheknack]

Normally, I don't involve myself in these kind of discussions, but when the result of this situation is civilian death, it can hardly be justified by anything. I don't believe the cop was bloodthirtsy, I don't believe she was a murderer, and she probably wasn't even a bad person. However, the death of an unarmed innocent is not "a simple misunderstanding". Parallels can be drawn, arguments made, excuses contrived, and metaphors created, but I feel like the result is what needs to be paid the attention: An unarmed teen was killed by a police officer without warning. I don't care what the situation is. That is unacceptable.

Well today's your lucky day: She's been thrown out of the force.

You know... as is protocol when this happens. Legal action will likely follow.

<awaits complaint that this somehow isn't enough>

So, her being thrown out of the force suggests that she was indeed in the wrong?

In the end, she shot someone who was not actually a threat.

That doesn't mean that she purposefully shot the kid, and it doesn't mean she accidentally did it either.

That's what the investigation's for.

The details of the investigation are the deciding factor in how she's reprimanded, and whether she'll go to court.

I've only said this multiple times. -___-

As I've asked, what do you WANT from the police? Goat blood?

EDIT:

Why wouldn't manslaughter charges apply?

Possibly. See above.

Does an ordinary citizen get off with a job loss over an accidental killing?

Yes. See: Industrial accidents due to human error.

 

[WeepingAngels]

Normally, I don't involve myself in these kind of discussions, but when the result of this situation is civilian death, it can hardly be justified by anything. I don't believe the cop was bloodthirtsy, I don't believe she was a murderer, and she probably wasn't even a bad person. However, the death of an unarmed innocent is not "a simple misunderstanding". Parallels can be drawn, arguments made, excuses contrived, and metaphors created, but I feel like the result is what needs to be paid the attention: An unarmed teen was killed by a police officer without warning. I don't care what the situation is. That is unacceptable.

Well today's your lucky day: She's been thrown out of the force.

You know... as is protocol when this happens. Legal action will likely follow.

<awaits complaint that this somehow isn't enough>

So, her being thrown out of the force suggests that she was indeed in the wrong?

In the end, she shot someone who was not actually a threat.

That doesn't mean that she purposefully shot the kid, and it doesn't mean she accidentally did it either.

That's what the investigation's for.

The details of the investigation are the deciding factor in how she's reprimanded, and whether she'll go to court.

I've only said this multiple times. -___-

So, an innocent person is dead and she was in the wrong. Isn't that manslaughter?

 

[lacktheknack]

snip

So, an innocent person is dead and she was in the wrong. Isn't that manslaughter?

I edited my above post.

 

[The_Amazing_G]

It appears we have gotten off topic.

The idea of "fault" often derails discussions such as this. This is just my perspective, but I feel like that is not the point here. A innocent teenager was killed without warning.

Think about that.

"But she deserves, he deserves, anarchy, bl.."

No. Don't dismiss this. Don't reason it away.

"But he was..."

No.

"It looked like a g..."

Nope.

Justifications do not lead us anywhere. Anyone can justify anything all day.
What if this had been your kid, or your friend, or you? Do you think it doesn't matter because it happens sometimes?

What do you think matters here? What are we really talking about?

AN INNOCENT PERSON DIED. "It happens now and then" is a pretty poor justification for that. Stop blaming him, her, they, etc, and think about what really matters.

Do you think this teenager deserved to die? Don't answer that. Just think about it. It's really easy to put our words before our thoughts, and I'd rather not have that happen here.

 

[WeepingAngels]

snip

So, an innocent person is dead and she was in the wrong. Isn't that manslaughter?

I edited my above post.

Yes, I seen that. I only want what an ordinary citizen would get for straight up shooting someone and killing them. Not interested in goats blood but manslaughter charges might apply here.

Well, we will see what happens next. For now, there is nothing more for me to say.

 

[lacktheknack]

What do you think matters here? What are we really talking about?

AN INNOCENT PERSON DIED. "It happens now and then" is a pretty poor justification for that. Stop blaming him, her, they, etc, and think about what really matters.

Do you think this teenager deserved to die? Don't answer that. Just think about it. It's really easy to put our words before our thoughts, and I'd rather not have that happen here.

Well, what do you want us to talk about?

"Oh no"?

 

[Roxas1359]

So, an innocent person is dead and she was in the wrong. Isn't that manslaughter?

Charge-wise, yes that is manslaughter in the first degree. They can't officially charge the officer with that yet though as an investigation has to be done first. Whenever an officer is being investigated they will be put on administrative leave until the investigation is finished, and after that if it goes to court they will more than likely be fired. It depends on what the investigation turns up. If in some way the investigation proves that she was in her right and she was terminated before the investigation was completed, then she could sue the department for wrongful termination if she wanted. Very rarely do officers fully fire a person before and investigation is completed for the simple fact that they could be sued in the event of them wrongfully terminating someone.

 

[lacktheknack]

snip

So, an innocent person is dead and she was in the wrong. Isn't that manslaughter?

I edited my above post.

Yes, I seen that. I only want what an ordinary citizen would get for straight up shooting someone and killing them. Not interested in goats blood but manslaughter charges might apply here.

Well, we will see what happens next. For now, there is nothing more for me to say.

The difference is, she's paid to carry a gun and shoot it in the right circumstances.

It's not much different than the aforementioned industrial accident. And that's why manslaughter charges may not apply, if they followed regulations (announced themselves, determined the held object to be actually threatening) before attacking.

 

[The_Amazing_G]

What do you think matters here? What are we really talking about?

AN INNOCENT PERSON DIED. "It happens now and then" is a pretty poor justification for that. Stop blaming him, her, they, etc, and think about what really matters.

Do you think this teenager deserved to die? Don't answer that. Just think about it. It's really easy to put our words before our thoughts, and I'd rather not have that happen here.

Well, what do you want us to talk about?

"Oh no"?

Well, what I want is for people to think about what motivates them to participate in this discussion, then talk about that. Not "fault".

Although I do appreciate your posts, lacktheknack. They appear to be coming from the right place.

 

[Roxas1359]

Yes, I seen that. I only want what an ordinary citizen would get for straight up shooting someone and killing them. Not interested in goats blood but manslaughter charges might apply here.

Well, we will see what happens next. For now, there is nothing more for me to say.

The charges will change depending on what the investigation brings up. At the least, it's first degree manslaughter; anything with a gun is automatically first degree, everything else is second degree, even cars make it second degree but they have their own classification as vehicular manslaughter; but if the investigation were to prove she did it on purpose then it becomes first degree murder. Either way she's getting charged and going to court for it, and I don't know why people would think that she wouldn't be going to court for it in all honesty.

 

[WeepingAngels]

snip

So, an innocent person is dead and she was in the wrong. Isn't that manslaughter?

I edited my above post.

Yes, I seen that. I only want what an ordinary citizen would get for straight up shooting someone and killing them. Not interested in goats blood but manslaughter charges might apply here.

Well, we will see what happens next. For now, there is nothing more for me to say.

The difference is, she's paid to carry a gun and shoot it in the right circumstances.

It's not much different than the aforementioned industrial accident. And that's why manslaughter charges may not apply, if they followed regulations (announced themselves, determined the held object to be actually threatening) before attacking.

Yeah, but being paid to carry a gun (I've been a soldier) and being trained to use it doesn't exempt you when you use it in the wrong circumstance. We'll see what happens next.