An officer in upstate New York shot and killed a teen fleeing while pointing a replica gun, police said Saturday.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
7 points

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.

permalink
report
reply
58 points

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
-20 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

If you’d read the article, the police admitted that they are lying about it:

The department said it is also aware of a video circulating on social media of the incident but warned that it does not portray the incident in its entirety.

When the police say ‘believe us not the evidence’, that means they’re lying.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Nobody will hear a statement from the other side of the story because the other side is a dead 13 year old.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points
*

Do we as a society really need reminding don’t point weapons at police? Don’t do it folks.

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-11 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Weird fantasy to kill kids. You might need some help.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Kid was Asian. Police violence on Asians is comparable to caucasians

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

Yeah provoking law enforcement is just plain stupid.

permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


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.

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 8.9K

    Posts

  • 162K

    Comments