Teenager Shot Dead for Holding a Wii Remote

Recommended Videos

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,316
0
0
IQuarent said:
lacktheknack said:
IQuarent said:
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.
That's... completely and totally fair.

If I'm honest, I entered this thread because A. I'm tired of "POLICE ARE TEH EVULZ" sentiments, and B. I dislike instant finger-pointing. Not the best intentions, I'll admit.
 

the doom cannon

New member
Jun 28, 2012
434
0
0
man all the anti-cop anarchists come out of the woodwork whenever something like this happens. They'll go back into hiding in a few weeks as usual.
 

Reed Spacer

That guy with the thing.
Jan 11, 2011
841
0
0
Neronium said:
WeepingAngels said:
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.
I suppose the stupid yint never considered the prospect of using her taser?

That all officers are equipped with?

For non-lethal takedowns?
 

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,316
0
0
the hidden eagle said:
I've got something to ask those who think people who believe cops should'nt get special treatment are 'cop haters'...would you be trying to argue this hard if some random stranger shot the teen?Think about that for a second before answering.
No, I wouldn't.

Police on duty aren't treated like random strangers because they're not random strangers. They are treated differently because they have to approach situations they don't like and lay their lives on the line. Most people can recognize this as "freaking stressful" and understand why mistakes are made, even tragic ones.

And as Neuronium mentioned: She's in a ton of trouble. Probably court charges.

What more do you want? The only "special treatment" she's getting is that she's getting far more death threats than the random stranger.
 

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,316
0
0
Reed Spacer said:
Neronium said:
WeepingAngels said:
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.
I suppose the stupid yint never considered the prospect of using her taser?

That all officers are equipped with?

For non-lethal takedowns?
There's an investigation for that.

Also, if you're faced with a guy holding a gun, and you've only got a taser, you're going to lose every damn time.

Also, "stupid yint"? That wasn't necessary.
 

Roxas1359

Burn, Burn it All!
Aug 8, 2009
33,758
1
0
Reed Spacer said:
I suppose the stupid yint never considered the prospect of using her taser?

That all officers are equipped with?

For non-lethal takedowns?
While she should have used that, we don't fully know everything from it and what the victim's father was on probation for, and what he did to violate that probation in the first place. I'm not defending the officer's actions at all, she screwed up and is paying the price for it, but I also know that not everyone has all the information so jumping to conclusions doesn't exactly lead to the best conclusions. We need to wait for the investigation to be completed, and then we can draw conclusions from that because right now no one has the complete picture, especially not any of use who are posting on a forum.
This is indeed tragic and shouldn't have happened.
 

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,316
0
0
the hidden eagle said:
lacktheknack said:
the hidden eagle said:
I've got something to ask those who think people who believe cops should'nt get special treatment are 'cop haters'...would you be trying to argue this hard if some random stranger shot the teen?Think about that for a second before answering.
No, I wouldn't.

Police on duty aren't treated like random strangers because they're not random strangers. They are treated differently because they have to approach situations they don't like and lay their lives on the line.

And as Neuronium mentioned: She's in a ton of trouble. Probably court charges.

What more do you want? The only "special treatment" she's getting is that she's getting far more death threats than the random stranger.
What I want is for this case to be treated fairly,that means no special treatment from her fellow officers,and if the case goes to trial then her status should'nt matter.

In short I want police officers to be treated the same as everyone else in a court of law.If a non police officer killed the teen then everyone would be demanding them to be put on trial immediately and not trying to find justifications for what happened.
Well, that's what normally happens, despite the ever-anarchistic and paranoid internet insisting it doesn't.
 

Roxas1359

Burn, Burn it All!
Aug 8, 2009
33,758
1
0
the hidden eagle said:
What I want is for this case to be treated fairly,that means no special treatment from her fellow officers,and if the case goes to trial then her status should'nt matter.

In short I want police officers to be treated the same as everyone else in a court of law.If a non police officer killed the teen then everyone would be demanding them to be put on trial immediately and not trying to find justifications for what happened.
She shouldn't be getting special treatment at all, she's been put on administrative leave as the investigation is going on, she'll more than likely be going to court, and at the least it will be with first degree manslaughter charges when she's on trial. But not everything can be done until the investigation is completed. Anything different would be due to the way that particular state or county's laws are set up, and they should be changed.

Cops do not get special treatment in court, and I don't understand how people would think that. Juries are chosen and judges are chosen as well, and if the judge or any of the jurors know the victim's family or the person being charged then they will not be chosen to precede on the case due to bias. Also, no case goes before a trial before an investigation has been conducted (generally when complete, but there are times when a case goes to trial before an investigation is concluded), there are arraignments and there are pre-trials, but cases, both a police officer and a regualr citizen, are investigated before going to trial. Why do you think it takes so long for a trial to take place?
 

WeepingAngels

New member
May 18, 2013
1,722
0
0
lacktheknack said:
The only "special treatment" she's getting is that she's getting far more death threats than the random stranger.
Well now hold on a minute, if she weren't a cop, wouldn't she have been in jail right after the shooting?
 

Reed Spacer

That guy with the thing.
Jan 11, 2011
841
0
0
lacktheknack said:
Reed Spacer said:
Neronium said:
WeepingAngels said:
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.
I suppose the stupid yint never considered the prospect of using her taser?

That all officers are equipped with?

For non-lethal takedowns?
There's an investigation for that.

Also, if you're faced with a guy holding a gun, and you've only got a taser, you're going to lose every damn time.

Also, "stupid yint"? That wasn't necessary.
I tend to use my own terminology for expletives - sort of self-censoring. And if you can think of a more polite term for someone who upholds the law by shooting someone without warning I'm all for using that, instead.
 

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,316
0
0
WeepingAngels said:
lacktheknack said:
The only "special treatment" she's getting is that she's getting far more death threats than the random stranger.
Well now hold on a minute, if she weren't a cop, wouldn't she have been in jail right after the shooting?
Touche.

But it all ends up in court in the end anyhow. Immediate jail is to stop the person in question from making a break for it, and seeing how the police EMPLOY her and know her address, identification, passwords, SIN, etc, it's not necessary.

No cop, even the malicious ones, are stupid enough to run for it.
 

Saltyk

Sane among the insane.
Sep 12, 2010
16,755
0
0
WeepingAngels said:
lacktheknack said:
The only "special treatment" she's getting is that she's getting far more death threats than the random stranger.
Well now hold on a minute, if she weren't a cop, wouldn't she have been in jail right after the shooting?
A person can not be held in jail without charges being filed for more than 24 hours. Police officer or not. If she were not a police officer, they would no more be able to hold her then if she were.
 

Reed Spacer

That guy with the thing.
Jan 11, 2011
841
0
0
lacktheknack said:
WeepingAngels said:
lacktheknack said:
The only "special treatment" she's getting is that she's getting far more death threats than the random stranger.
Well now hold on a minute, if she weren't a cop, wouldn't she have been in jail right after the shooting?
Touche.

But it all ends up in court in the end anyhow. Immediate jail is to stop the person in question from making a break for it, and seeing how the police EMPLOY her and know her address, identification, passwords, SIN, etc, it's not necessary.

No cop, even the malicious ones, are stupid enough to run for it.
What if they're already stupid?

CAPTCHA: 'more cowbell'.

Because really, you can never have enough.
 

Roxas1359

Burn, Burn it All!
Aug 8, 2009
33,758
1
0
WeepingAngels said:
Well now hold on a minute, if she weren't a cop, wouldn't she have been in jail right after the shooting?
They technically can hold her in custody, but they'd have to let her go if no charges have been filed and as of right now no charges have been filed. Same goes for regular citizens, if there are no charges then police by law must let you go after a maximum of 24-hours, unless charges are placed within that time.

Reed Spacer said:
What if they're already stupi?
It would raise suspicion of her and would hurt her in the court of law, including a possible warrant for her arrest and anyone who goes through Police Academy only to do that would definitely be dumb. It'd be like a person on bail skipping town, being on bail doesn't mean that you can go where ever you want, when you're on bail that is a contract that you won't leave town, but you won't have to stay in jail before the time of trial.
 

WeepingAngels

New member
May 18, 2013
1,722
0
0
lacktheknack said:
WeepingAngels said:
lacktheknack said:
The only "special treatment" she's getting is that she's getting far more death threats than the random stranger.
Well now hold on a minute, if she weren't a cop, wouldn't she have been in jail right after the shooting?
Touche.

But it all ends up in court in the end anyhow. Immediate jail is to stop the person in question from making a break for it, and seeing how the police EMPLOY her and know her address, identification, passwords, SIN, etc, it's not necessary.

No cop, even the malicious ones, are stupid enough to run for it.
Saltyk said:
WeepingAngels said:
lacktheknack said:
The only "special treatment" she's getting is that she's getting far more death threats than the random stranger.
Well now hold on a minute, if she weren't a cop, wouldn't she have been in jail right after the shooting?
A person can not be held in jail without charges being filed for more than 24 hours. Police officer or not. If she were not a police officer, they would no more be able to hold her then if she were.
I think it's 48 hours not 24 (correct me if I am wrong) and you're missing the point. Jail sucks and no one wants to be there so I would call it special treatment if she didn't get her 48 hour pit stop in the can before charges were filed or she was set free.
 

Saltyk

Sane among the insane.
Sep 12, 2010
16,755
0
0
WeepingAngels said:
Saltyk said:
WeepingAngels said:
lacktheknack said:
The only "special treatment" she's getting is that she's getting far more death threats than the random stranger.
Well now hold on a minute, if she weren't a cop, wouldn't she have been in jail right after the shooting?
A person can not be held in jail without charges being filed for more than 24 hours. Police officer or not. If she were not a police officer, they would no more be able to hold her then if she were.
I think it's 48 hours not 24 and you're missing the point. Jail sucks and no one wants to be there so I would call it special treatment if she didn't get her 48 hour pit stop in the can before charges were filed or she was set free.
No, I believe it is 24. And you're missing the point. Placing her in jail without charges being filed for a period of time that exceeds that, would be biased against her. The police will not place you in jail unless they are planning to file charges. Even if they suspect you of a crime, they will wait until they have evidence. Otherwise that would be false imprisonment. Which she could actually sue for, much like you or I could.