Topic: Cops immediately shot a 12 year old holding a toy gun without warning. (Read 6153 times)

Any potential bounty was put on his head only because the liberal media portrayed him as a racist to further their agenda advocating for gun control and because Martin's parents were trying to profit from their son's death and did so by portraying what happened as a murder

IIRC, George Zimmerman had an assassination bounty put on him by the lynch mob. I may have lost some friends for daring to suggest that only an omniscient being could know what happened that night other than GZ (since the rest of the neighborhood apparently rather hid than watch), and he deserved a fair trial by jury rather than a lynch mob execution.

Look at what happened to the guy who killed thug Travis Martin. He was only charged after the racest race baiters got involved and Martin's mother hired a PR firm to spread lies about the situation.

The overall public very much agreed with him being not guilty   

The really funny part about all this is, there are loads of average citizens (you can find some of them commenting right in this thread) who think that the cops were justified. They simply can't get it through their thick skulls that allowing and condoning this kind of activity by cops is going come down and bite them in the near future. And, that near future just might be way closer than anyone thinks, considering the way the Federal Government has been arming the police, lately, with all kinds of WAR gear.

This is rich.
The police can get away with murder; an ordinary citizen will have his ass fried.

Bovine feces. They would have been (and are) charged if they weren't murdered by a lynch mob first. Thanks for rejecting the reality of double standards and substituting your own.


Gambit.

Yeah. Rule of law until they get the wrong address, knock your door down, and shoot your buddy dead who you were playing cards with, because they though the royal flush he was holding was a threat to their safety.

I am no fan of law enforcement, however you need to use the rule of law, just like they do. IMO law enforcement needs to be held to certain standards, but I don't think this is an example of them acting improperly

People like TBZ have a preexisting anti-police agenda, which they spew the moment an opportunity arises, even/especially if created by a tragedy like the death of a child.  That's why such people are called "cranks."

The trenchcoat wearing Infowars kids make the rest of the liberty movement look bad, which is part of the reason they are encouraged by TPTB.

We should be protesting not because of dead thugs like Brown, but rather over events like this:

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/10/cops-kill-georgia-grandpa-in-no-knock-raid-triggered-by-burglary-suspects-tip/

Neither this incident nor the Michael Brown incident has anything to do with the police violating anyone's rights. In this case the police were called because someone was waiving what appeared to be a gun around. The child was acting in a threatening way. IMO if a private citizen has shot the kid instead of a police officer the private citizen would not have been charged

You try to cling to your Second Amendment right around a cop, and you're going to get shot. That's what they do, especially if you're not white. Your Second Amendment right is just an excuse for a cop to claim self-defense, and we've all seen that when they invoke self-defense, they're untouchable in the eyes of the law.

This whole incident is one of the latest efforts of politicians for disarming the nation.

Consider. Are you going to let your children - children who you love - go to the park and play cops and robbers, or cowboys and Indians anymore? No. You fear for their lives.

What is the result? Fewer toy guns among the kids... even if the States don't individually get rid of toy guns by law.

The politicians who don't restrain the police are pushing the anti-gun laws by making the people afraid for their lives... and now their kids' lives.

If the people want to retain the strength of guns to protect themselves from government, they will have to start suing murderous police, person to person, man to man, bypassing their police office. The more the police are sued for all kinds of infractions, man to man, the more the politicians will lose money (the police bond is often financed by the city). The more they lose money, the more they will finally reign in the police.

You hear, now and again, about police in an area or two who are disciplined for actions like this, even to the point of prison. This is only a deception, a camouflage, so that people think that something is being corrected among the police. Don't be deceived. Such corrections are few and far between. It is only getting worse. Cops are only getting worse. And city councils are only finding more deceptive ways to get cops to be worse, all the while promoting more and more enslavement of the people.

Think of all the military weaponry and armament government is selling to local police departments.

You cannot legitimately claim self defense if you start an encounter by violating civil rights under color of authority and implicit threat of death or great bodily harm. It's like charging your innocent victim with assault for bleeding on you as you tried to beat them to death - something only LEOs have ever been able to do without any real consequences.


Indeed. Unfortunately "a higher standard", when the hurdle for civil rights violations with impunity is currently set 1 nanometer off the ground, leaves light-years before we get to a reasonable standard, in innocent victims' eyes.

Cops need to be held to a higher standard people need to respect their authority.

When a police officer kills someone it is almost always going to be in self defense. The case of Michael Brown is a template as to the kind of reasons that police will kill someone - if they don't then the criminal is going to kill the officer. This is exactly the reason why we have the 2nd amendment

This discussion's context was about the longstanding precedent that police have no duty to protect any innocent from harm. While at the same time they can kill the slightest, victimless, non-violent "criminal" only moving his/her cardiopulmonary muscles, and suffer no real consequences. Having your employer use taxpayers' money to compensate your victim is not a real consequence, and neither is losing your job. Only losing your freedom and all assets is.

Cities have settled lawsuits in the past when shotty police work has resulted in death by criminals

We are not alone:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodman/black-men-openly-carrying_b_6313176.html

Cop Who Killed Tamir Rice Was Previously Kicked off Force for 'Dismal' Gun Performance, Emotional Instability
http://reason.com/blog/2014/12/03/cop-who-killed-tamir-rice-was-previously

I realise he was a stocky kid but I saw his photo, he looked his age
What were the cops thinking?