Boy killed for brandishing a pistol

[Lozart]

So the video has been released to the press (or at least an edited version of it).

 

I can fully understand why the police were called. The kid is wandering about in a public place waving a gun about and generally being kind of a dick. Obviously the family have told everyone what a little angel he is and I'm sure they believe that but to me he just looks like a bit of a wannabe gang member trying to look hard

 

On the matter of race the familys attorney said:

 

 

An attorney for the boy's family, Timothy Kucharski, said Tamir went to the park with friends on Saturday afternoon, but he did not know the details of what led to his shooting.

'This is not a black and white issue,' he said. 'This is a right and wrong issue. This is not a racial issue. This is about people doing their jobs the right way.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2850234/Video-released-showing-police-shooting-Tamir-Rice-12-carrying-BB-gun.html#ixzz3KGVYViCb
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

Again, given the situation I'm not sure I would have reacted any differently than the police officer that shot him. I certainly don't think this is a matter of "institutional racism". Relevant tale: a very good friend of mine is an officer in TSG 5, Met Police. The same TSG that got all the grief about the G8 riots a couple of years back. Anyway - their job is to do all the nasty bits that the rest of the Met don't like getting involved in (public order, crime swoops, drug busts, midnight door entrys that kind of thing). He got a load of grief from some local "people of colour" for "picking on all the black boys" and being racist and yes he was pretty much just arresting black people. Was he institutionally racist? No - he was working in Lewisham. As he said to the woman that was giving him grief "you find me a white guy doing something wrong and I'll nick him too". If you're working in a predominantly black area where crime is predominantly committed by young, black males - what else are you supposed to do but arrest young, black males?

[Chock]

Having seen the video of the shooting (and if you have not, note that it is not particularly graphic, it is from a security camera from quite some distance away, which is taking a still shot once every few seconds, so is in fact more like a sees of very grainy still shots than an actual video) a couple of things come to mind from seeing it.

 

First up, the police car doesn't really seem to be driven up to the scene in a particularly intelligent or tactically sensible fashion; it speeds onto the grass of a small park in front of a recreation centre, where the kid is standing under a small bandstand, comes to a halt, and one police officer is out of the car and firing a shot literally within two-three seconds of the car having stopped. So, full marks for rapid reactions, but no marks for giving yourself time to assess the threat from a safe distance. Arriving that close to the reported suspect is just asking for trouble in my opinion, and in fact it looks to me as though the officer riding in the front passenger seat simply gets out of the car as it halts, reacts to some movement from the child and fires instinctively. If they'd instead rolled up to the park a bit further away, staying on the road, they'd have probably been better able to judge matters and take things a bit more calmly, perhaps taking cover behind their vehicle and shouting at him to drop the weapon, kick it away and then lie on the ground. As it stands, it all happens too quickly and it looks doubtful that they did any of that.

 

Second, the young lad is definitely not helping himself by what he is doing, i.e. walking up and down the street in front of a recreation/community centre waving what does genuinely look like a real semi-automatic pistol. When we hear the 911 call from the old gentleman who reports the matter, he does say it might not be a real weapon, but of course it is intended to look like a real weapon - even upon fairly close inspection - so we can hardly be surprised that he is calling it in to the police, as I would hope any responsible citizen would do. I should think that most twelve year old kids, unless they are either retarded or extremely naive, would be aware that this could be a result of walking up and down the street with what really does look like a real semi-automatic pistol, in broad daylight. If not, then we have to conclude that the kid's parents bear some responsibility for the occurrence, in either allowing him to have the thing/buying the thing for him, and particularly for not having drilled some common sense into the kid with regard to not doing stupid stuff which could result in tragedies such as what happened.

 

In the days when I was a kid, it was absolutely fine to run around with toy guns playing in the street, because guns in the UK were a real rarity in crimes and so anyone seeing a kid with a 'gun' would have known for sure it was a toy cap gun. That and the fact that toy guns when I was a kid rarely looked like the real thing that often anyway. These days however, gun crime is far more prevalent, and we know kids as young as 12 can and do use them, particularly in gangs in inner city areas. So it is not a stretch at all for a passer-by - or indeed a police officer attending a call out - to be convinced that even a young kid could be carrying a real firearm. And that airsoft gun which Tamir Rice had when he was shot certainly does look very realistic indeed.

 

So, I'd say this is a deadly and tragic combination of not terrible, but certainly less than brilliant, policing and less than smart behaviour from the child who was shot, coupled with some less than brilliant parenting. I seriously doubt there was any racial motivation on the part of the police officer in what he did; he may be the most racist cop in the world for all I know, but what he did was clearly an instinctive reaction rather than a racially motivated action.

[cavninja]

There's been a lot of good comment on here and a small bit of hysteria. Ian, Lozart and Chock make some excellent points, Chock, "our hobby requires a great deal of responsibility" is absolutely right!

For my two pence worth, its all about context and there are many layers to the context.

In the UK we police by consent, proximity policing, in the US it is non-proximity policing, law enforcement. I.E. if you do not comply i will force you!

UK police officers would have reacted very differently, but if there was a credible threat, they would have reacted swiftly and effectively, the Lee Rigby murder is a case in point, swift use of potentially deadly force and then immediate follow up with life saving treatment.

 

In the US it is very very different. The spate of shootings, many involving schools mean police no longer contain and assess, they have to go in hard to deal with the threat. we may not like that or approve, it is easy to sit in judgment, but that is the tactic they have evolved through hard bitter experience. Just watch the Columbine footage as police assess outside while students are murdered inside.

 

Equally there are a large and worrying number of incidents in the US where police officers use deadly force, without apparent justification and then watch their victim bleed out. There are countless clips on YouTube of this, the most worrying is a deaf guy shot in the back for jay walking because he failed to stop when challenged. Even more worrying is the fact that there seems to be no legal redress against these "reckless" officers.

 

I thank god I live in Great Britain! it may not be perfect, but it is better than a great many places the world over. It allows me the freedom to practise my hobby in safe and fun conditions.

I in return act responsibly and educated my children to do the same.

 

Two words Troops

Responsibility

Consequence

[TheGrover]

Hear hear

[Ian_Gere]

At no point in that video did i see the child point the gun at the cops, raise it as if he was going to point it at the cops or, while the cops were there, point it at anyone else. In fact there did not appear to be anybody else around at all (although of course even 9mm shots can be lethal at considerable range, but you'd have to hope that for that to be the justification the gun would at least be in his hand). Difficult to be sure whether he had his hand on the 'gun' or was lifting his top out of the way so they could see it. I did see the cops pull up and pretty much immediately shoot him. Maybe they have decided that, due to other circumstances such as a crime wave etc, they are going to shoot first and ask questions later. That certainly appears to have been a good description of what happened. We will have to wait and see if the tactic gets the Chief of Police, or Mayor, or whomever, re-elected. The community at large may consider the odd 12 year old to be acceptable collateral damage. I wonder how many dead children it would take to become unacceptable, because one thing is for sure: for established criminals with lucrative business to lose, the answer will not be to quietly melt away, it will be to get better guns and shoot before the cops even get out of their cars...

 

Having seen that though, if he was my son, those cops would be dead men walking.

[Mike636]

I have to disagree with you Ian, unless you were there how can anyone possibly comment on the actions of the officers from grainy piss poor CCTV.

 

Maybe the two officers were sent to a call to a person armed with a firearm pointing at members of the public.

 

Maybe the officers saw a person who they were informed was armed reach behind him for what they belived and were informed was a lethal firearm.

 

Maybe just maybe those officers fired in defence of their own lives because they belived an armed person was reaching for a weapon.

 

Maybe those officers wanted to see their kids that evening, pay the mortgage that month, do that bit off painting in the garden.

 

Maybe they didn't want their wives to explain why Daddy wasn't coming home. To why Christmas would be full of awkward silences and red eyes.

 

Behind the body armour and cuffs and unform we are humans too, just as scared and vulnerable as every one else, yet coppers head towards the gunfire, the knifes, the casualties, because at the end of the day they care.

[Ian_Gere]

They just didn't care quite enough about Tamir Rice.

[Mike636]

Over themselves? Better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6

[Ian_Gere]

Protect And Serve

[Mike636]

Can't protect anyone if you're dead.

 

If we're honest if this kid had killed both officers the majority of people on this forum wouldn't know.

[Ian_Gere]

If. Massive little word that. Not surprising that the 'ifs' in question always illustrate a position the debater has already locked themselves into. But how about we stick to the known facts. The kids top is pale bodied and dark sleeved. Yes, it is a very grainy video, but not so grainy that we would have been unable to tell if he had raised an arm. He didn't. Whether he was touching the RIF at the time the cop's bullets struck him or not, he definitely did not have it anywhere near close to a position where, if he had fired it, the bullet would have posed a threat to anyone.

 

Nobody disputes that being a cop is a difficult and dangerous job. My point is that if you're not up to it, you should quit, not shoot a stupid child because you do not value his life sufficiently to take a fraction of a second's more risk.

[cavninja]

If you're gonna judge someone, walk a mile in their shoes,

 

That way, you're a mile away, and you've got their shoes!!

[Mike636]

If. Massive little word that. Not surprising that the 'ifs' in question always illustrate a position the debater has already locked themselves into. But how about we stick to the known facts. The kids top is pale bodied and dark sleeved. Yes, it is a very grainy video, but not so grainy that we would have been unable to tell if he had raised an arm. He didn't. Whether he was touching the RIF at the time the cop's bullets struck him or not, he definitely did not have it anywhere near close to a position where, if he had fired it, the bullet would have posed a threat to anyone.

 

Nobody disputes that being a cop is a difficult and dangerous job. My point is that if you're not up to it, you should quit, not shoot a stupid child because you do not value his life sufficiently to take a fraction of a second's more risk.

What position have I locked myself into? I agreed that the situation could of been handled better. Should they have stopped more than about a foot away from the lad definitely but to stand off an observe probably not as it limits your options if it goes tits up.

 

As for what the officer perceived to be a threat well unfortunately no amount of training or good will can change a decision made in a split second when exposed to a perceived threat.

 

If the officer honestly felt that if the kid drew that weapon he would kill someone then how could he not react the way he did?

[Del Monty]

What position have I locked myself into? I agreed that the situation could of been handled better. Should they have stopped more than about a foot away from the lad definitely but to stand off an observe probably not as it limits your options if it goes tits up.

 

As for what the officer perceived to be a threat well unfortunately no amount of training or good will can change a decision made in a split second when exposed to a perceived threat.

 

If the officer honestly felt that if the kid drew that weapon he would kill someone then how could he not react the way he did?

 

That is one thing that is worrying me when I become a Special Constable, reaction to perceived threats.

 

Admittedly the gun threat is less of a worry in the UK, but it's still that split second reaction that determines the outcome.

[Mike636]

Trust me if its a firearm s job in the UK you shouldn't be going near it until the ARVs have turned up in force, been rude to every one and left without doing any paperwork!

[Ian_Gere]

What position have I locked myself into?

Pro cop. Quite clearly...

I have to disagree with you Ian, unless you were there how can anyone possibly comment on the actions of the officers from grainy piss poor CCTV.

 

Maybe the two officers were sent to a call to a person armed with a firearm pointing at members of the public.

 

Maybe the officers saw a person who they were informed was armed reach behind him for what they belived and were informed was a lethal firearm.

 

Maybe just maybe those officers fired in defence of their own lives because they belived an armed person was reaching for a weapon.

 

Maybe those officers wanted to see their kids that evening, pay the mortgage that month, do that bit off painting in the garden.

 

Maybe they didn't want their wives to explain why Daddy wasn't coming home. To why Christmas would be full of awkward silences and red eyes.

 

Behind the body armour and cuffs and unform we are humans too, just as scared and vulnerable as every one else, yet coppers head towards the gunfire, the knifes, the casualties, because at the end of the day they care.

Over themselves? Better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6

Can't protect anyone if you're dead.

 

If we're honest if this kid had killed both officers the majority of people on this forum wouldn't know.

 

 

I agreed that the situation could of been handled better.

A child is dead, Mike. Child. Dead. I mean, yeah, "could of been handled better" is one way of describing it, but with the gravity of the outcome, I feel that "massive fuck up for which those involved must be held accountable" is better.

 

As for what the officer perceived to be a threat well unfortunately no amount of training or good will can change a decision made in a split second when exposed to a perceived threat.

 

If the officer honestly felt that if the kid drew that weapon he would kill someone then how could he not react the way he did?

And yet, when the boot is on the other foot, when John Q Public defends themselves against a perceived threat, the appropriateness of their response is exactly what the cops attempt to determine, in as much minutiae of detail as possible. Particularly when someone has been killed. Quite obviously if the child drew a weapon, he would be in a position to become a threat to life. However, simply holding what may be a gun. while enough to indicate that someone needs watching, is not actually a threat. It is not until the gun is raised that the threat exists.

 

Now sure, once the gun is pointed, it may be too late. But you can squeeze a trigger a lot faster than anyone can raise and point a pistol, so it is possible to wait until the threat is undeniable. My point is that when dealing with children, in general, cops should err on the side of caution*. Yes, it is not beyond the realms of possibility that a child may be a stone cold crack shot with lightning reflexes, who may be able to draw a pistol and accurately shoot a cop in the head, but it is unlikely. They have body armour. They have the option to be sure in their own minds that the 'gun' is being raised.

 

*And yes, that may occasionally cost cops their lives. That is the job. You really do have to be brave to do it. Would i do it? Not unless there was literally nobody else willing and even then, not as a full time job, because I know that I'm not mentally stable enough to be clear headed in the face of threats to my life day in day out and I have no wish to become trained for it.

 

In this situation, the cops knew that the child had been walking around pointing what appeared to be a gun in a playground. But no shots were fired. What was he doing? He had obviously not taken a gun out with the intention of killing random strangers, or he would already have done so. Maybe he intended to kill someone specific, but in that case why brandish the gun at all? The whole thing is clearly childish stupidity. Hence why the cops should have been even more cautious than when dealing with children per se.

 

You know why I get to judge? It's like this:

 

If I go to a game day and see a great paint job on a gun, I may ask the owner who did it. I may then come on here and tell you lot that IMO Dave Picasso does a great job of painting guns.

 

I am a citizen. I employ cops whether I want to or not. When I see the performance of cops, I have an opinion. There is nothing weird about me telling you that IMO Officer Triggerhappy does a poor job of protecting and serving the public.

 

I do not have to be any good at painting guns myself for my opinion of Dave's work to be valid. Nor do I have to be a cop to require high standards of policing.

[Lozart]

I don't think anyone involved with the case has said that the boy pointed the gun at the police. Even from the earliest reports it was that he was told to raise his hands and instead he pulled up his top and showed them the gun.

 

The officer in question was apparently new to the job (no excuse really but it's relevant) and by the sounds of things panicked and rushed into a situation. Certainly by all accounts in the media so far the dispatcher had not told them that the 911 call said that the gun was probably a fake so he's only going to go by what he sees in the moment.

 

I would suggest that yes, procedures have not been followed correctly (as mentioned earlier the squad car doesn't exactly approach at a safe distance and sensible speed) but again, I'm not sure I would have handled it any differently. I do not believe that all police should accept the risk of getting shot in the same way that I do not believe that all black kids are criminals. HOWEVER - the fact remains that the boy went out in public with a realistic imitation firearm and was seen waving it about IN PUBLIC causing sufficient concern that a member of the public call the police. In a state with a high incidence of gun crime and a growing problem with gang activity.

 

This is not a clear cut "the blame is all X" for me. If the cop got shot he would just become another statistic of gun crime in America (regardless of his ethnicity). If the gun had turned out to be real - likewise. The fact of the matter though is that the gun wasn't real but the kid was spectacularly stupid in what he was doing. Equally while the perceived threat was high the police did react too quickly. It's very easy for us all to sit in judgement on the other side of an ocean sat at our keyboards but the fact remains that this kind of incident happens all too often in the US. That kids family has been devastated and the police officer will have to live the rest of his days with what he has done playing on his conscience. The part that REALLY mystifies me is how the US public and government will still refuse to see that they HAVE to address the issue of gun ownership and the culture of guns and gangs in everyday life or this will continue to happen all over the country.

[Mike636]

I believe that Police Officers should definitely be accountable for when they use force. I think Police forces should definitely admit when they make mistakes.

 

All I wanted to do was put across what the Officers may of been faced with and how they may reacted and why. The fact a child has been killed is abhorrent but any human life wasted is.

 

What I don't understand is how you can say that if police officers have to die to save someone from being shot. Isn't all human life equal?

 

I was going to make another point but I've been sicked on and I've forgotten.

[Sitting Duck]

jeez - can we take a vote on this and ask this thread to close

we all have slightly different takes on this and none will bring kid back

 

really thought this was done by now

lets be a tiny bit thankful it was over there and not somebody we know/love

(still a sad loss but think you know what I mean)

 

understand if we can't close thread but it is almost going on as much as me when I get on a roll

[cavninja]

Second that!

[JB72510]

even then whats stopping someone buying a two tone then spraying it black in regards to the thread i thought all airsoft guns had to have a bright orange flash hider in the u.s also why shoot to kill instead of shoot to disable the threat.

In this country Police always shoot to kill because if it has got to the point where discharging a firearm is justified then firing a shot which doesnt guarantee to stop the threat, shooting a leg etc, could escalate the situation. If a shot is fired it is aimed in such a way to immediately take out the threat.

[armysurplusandtoys]

my thoughts are to the family for the loss.

 

the thing is that when someone points a gun at you to comply or else face the consequence.

 

In the situation the police would have no time to check the ukara or have that moment to check it was a bb gun (in this situation the use of airsoft gun would only discredit the sport).

 

point is especially in the current climate....would you shoot first?

[Ian_Gere]

I believe that Police Officers should definitely be accountable for when they use force. I think Police forces should definitely admit when they make mistakes.

 

All I wanted to do was put across what the Officers may of been faced with and how they may reacted and why. The fact a child has been killed is abhorrent but any human life wasted is.

I honestly do take your point and I'm not saying that what happened is not understandable from a LEO's perspective, because "gun=threat; I have a gun: shoot" is totally understandable, for the reasons you pointed out and more. But don't we expect more from those into whose hands we give the power to take life, along with the responsibility to guard us?

 

What I don't understand is how you can say that if police officers have to die to save someone from being shot. Isn't all human life equal?

All life is precious, but no all human life is not equal. Cops take an oath to put their lives at risk to protect and serve the public, they voluntarily make their lives less important than those of the public they swear to serve. Now what Tamir Rice did is without doubt extremely stupid, but he was a member of the community whom those cops swore to protect, even from his own stupidity - kids are stupid: the fact that they get themselves into dangerous situations because they do not fully understand the consequences of their actions is a known hazard. In fact it is enshrined in law - we have an "age of criminal responsibility" and although the US have this weird system where they sometimes decide to try minors as adults, and despite the fact that we, as adults, can see all sorts of reasons why this kid ought to have known better, he was by even the most punitive of judgement a child young enough that his actions can be reasonably expected to be irresponsible.

 

SD, if you don't want to read this debate any more, why not click "Unfollow" at the top of the page? Personally I find exploring what I think and how i feel about serious topics (and others to which they relate) stimulating. Listening/reading what others think/feel is how I challenge my beliefs and continue to update my world view. In this instance I find I do actually respect the dedication required to police properly a lot more than I thought I did (I have been on the receiving end of some dire policing, but in comparison to being shot for stupidity, that pales into if not insignificance, at least proper perspective). And it all makes me wonder again where I stand on gun ownership: I mean we know for a fact that prohibiting things does not make them disappear, nor does criminalising ownership of anything deter people from acquiring them, but unlike alcohol & drugs, guns are a serious danger to other people... I dunno. Loz is right, the USA has a major problem and I fear that our culture is heading in the same direction, so although we do not have the same prevalence of gun ownership, whatever it is which makes the USA different from Canada, where per capita gun ownership is actually higher than south of the border, may well rear its ugly head here, just in other ways.