I think you're way overestimating the difficulty for cops to contain a situation. Why do we live in a country of fear and what ifs? We can't justify this situation with what could have happened. The cops didn't even give the kid a chance. It wasn't like there was some big stand off or something. The cop just pulled up, hopped out and shot the kid...No one was in immediate danger, and even if they were, the cop should have still taken more time to assess the situation.

When there is a mass shooting, we don't question where the cops were or their actions. We don't blame them, we blame the shooter, the person that took lives.



This is true, but it still happens, and cops are still more humane.

ITT: left wing liberal douchebags who wouldn't give this issue a second look if the kid were not black or the cop was the one ending up being shot.

This post was edited by Lightman on Nov 27 2014 10:21am

lol this is what I was thinking.

What if the police officer did take his "time" and he was wrong, the gun was real and he died. Well then we probably wouldn't even know about it right now.

I didn't even know the kid was black, and if the cop was the one shot it wouldn't be the same story... when you decide to become a cop, you realize you're putting your life on the line to protect the public every day.



what is with all of these what if's? Yes, things can happen, but we don't shoot every person that has the capacity to take another life, the cop didn't even give him a chance.

What do you means what of these what ifs? Aren't u the one bringing them with the "what if" the cops took more time to assess things? Well more cops would be dead is your answer.

No, I'm saying that there is a better alternative to what the cop did. I'm not trying to guess what could have happened, i'm saying what should have happened and what should happen in the future.

Any law enforcement officer needs to operate in the line of duty and under the circumstances he/she was given. Sensing immediate danger, even if turned out false, is enough justification to act upon self preservation. 12 years of age might shock you, but there are 6 year old minorities who have already shot at armed forces and ran towards them with molotovs and bomb straps before.

Maybe in Afghanistan, that isn't a common occurrence here though.

It isn't even the age that is the biggest factor for me. It's the fact he just stepped out of the car and immediately shot him. Doesn't seem like a safe cop to me.

^

rather ignorant to think every police academy has access to more than the standard shit

[edit] especially when this nation's economy has been complete shit and every year the police forces are losing funding (at least here in MI)

This post was edited by MyAddiction on Nov 27 2014 02:45pm

I think that Ethan in this case you have no idea of the stress involved in a situation like this. The cop said three times while in the vehicle, and getting out to drop the fun and raise hands... It wasn't done. The cop took the next logical corse of action when a danger doesn't de-escalate... You take the target out. You are thinking far too passively along the lines of "protecting the public" and acting as if the boy was the pubic. At this particular time he was not the public, but the threat that the police were trained to protect the public from. You have two seconds to handle a situation like that, and he acted properly given what information he was told. Do I say that all situations are handled properly? No.. Do I think this one was? Yes. Simply put, he did his job, and there will always be someone complaining against that. You have all the time in the world to think of other ways around what happened, after the fact, and not faced with a possible gun being pointed in your direction. If you are ever placed in a situation like that, I think you will actually change your stance on that