APP - Let's discuss the known FACTS that led up to Timor Rice being shot.

Status
Not open for further replies.
U

USFREEDOM911

MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
I'm challenging Rune to a debate on this, seeing as how he has some very strong opinions.

What are the FACTS that were available, prior to Tamir Rice being shot?
 
Fact; 12 YEAR OLD BOY SITTING IN A PLAYGROUND SHOT AND KILLED IN LESS THAN A SECOND OF POLICE ARRIVAL.

Additional fact; dept. was apprised in advance that the gun was likely a toy.

Additional fact;
Cop who shot boy was fired for being a shitty cop by a previous dept.
 
Rune said:
Fact; 12 YEAR OLD BOY SITTING IN A PLAYGROUND SHOT AND KILLED IN LESS THAN A SECOND OF POLICE ARRIVAL.

Additional fact; dept. was apprised in advance that the gun was likely a toy.

Additional fact;
Cop who shot boy was fired for being a shitty cop by a previous dept.
Click to expand...

I take it that you're unable to support your opinion with facts that were known, prior to the Officers arriving.

For example:
1 - How did they know he was only 12?
2 - LIKELY a toy, doesn't mean it IS a toy.

So how do they determine that he had a toy?
 
Rune said:
Exactly, so why did the cop feel threatened?
Click to expand...

From what I understand; when they pulled up, he began to remove the weapon from his waist band.
With nothing to factually state that the weapon wasn't real, it stands to reason that it would be treated as being real.

wy9rq.jpg

Is there any other parts of your confusion, that you need assistance with?
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
From what I understand; when they pulled up, he began to remove the weapon from his waist band.
With nothing to factually state that the weapon wasn't real, it stands to reason that it would be treated as being real.

View attachment 2758

Is there any other parts of your confusion, that you need assistance with?
Click to expand...

Yes. Why did they kill him when he posed no threat?
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Now see, you've finally exposed at least one fallacy in your logic. :good4u:

Can you please show any law or Court ruling that says a person must WAIT until the weapon is pointed AT THEM?
Click to expand...

Sure.
Under the legal definition of threat a gun is not a threat unless pointed at the affeared subject.
There was no threat. No reason to shoot.
 
Rune said:
Sure.
Under the legal definition of threat a gun is not a threat unless pointed at the affeared subject.
There was no threat. No reason to shoot.
Click to expand...

You would have to post that "legal definition" for your comment to have any creditability; because I know of no law that says anyone has to wait UNTIL a weapon is pointed at them, but you could show me where I'm wrong.

Using your example: a person that hands a bank teller a note saying he has a gun and wants all the money, can't be charged with using a weapon when he's captured; because he never exhibited the weapon and never pointed it at the teller.

Decided to add the following:

Criminal Threats

1 - A criminal threat, sometimes known as the terrorist threat, malicious harassment, or by other terms, occurs when someone threatens to kill or physically harm someone else.

(drawing a gun can be considered a threat)

2 - The threat must be communicated in some way, though it doesn't necessarily have to be verbal. A person can make a threat through email, text message, or even through non-verbal body language such as gestures or movements.

(drawing a gun is non verbal and is a movement)

3 - The threat must be capable of making the people who hear it feel as if they might be hurt, and conclude that the threat is credible, real, and imminent

(drawing a gun on a Police Officer, is usually considered a threat)
 
Last edited:
Use of force should be an officer's last option, not his first.
Did the officers even ask the child to drop the toy gun before firing?
No they bypassed all all options.
Nuff said.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
You would have to post that "legal definition" for your comment to have any creditability; because I know of no law that says anyone has to wait UNTIL a weapon is pointed at them, but you could show me where I'm wrong.

Using your example: a person that hands a bank teller a note saying he has a gun and wants all the money, can't be charged with using a weapon when he's captured; because he never exhibited the weapon and never pointed it at the teller.
Click to expand...
No, this is just the nonsense in your head.
Decided to add the following:

Criminal Threats

1 - A criminal threat, sometimes known as the terrorist threat, malicious harassment, or by other terms, occurs when someone threatens to kill or physically harm someone else.

(drawing a gun can be considered a threat)
Click to expand...
In your opinion. Pointing a gun is indeed a threat.
2 - The threat must be communicated in some way, though it doesn't necessarily have to be verbal. A person can make a threat through email, text message, or even through non-verbal body language such as gestures or movements.

(drawing a gun is non verbal and is a movement)

3 - The threat must be capable of making the people who hear it feel as if they might be hurt, and conclude that the threat is credible, real, and imminent

(drawing a gun on a Police Officer, is usually considered a threat)
Click to expand...

He hardly drew his weapon on a cop.
 
Rune said:
Use of force should be an officer's last option, not his first.
Did the officers even ask the child to drop the toy gun before firing?
No they bypassed all all options.
Nuff said.
Click to expand...

You have failed to provide any supportive substance for your last presentation and I did ask for a legal definition that was in line of your assertion.

Rune said:
Sure.
Under the legal definition of threat a gun is not a threat unless pointed at the affeared subject.
There was no threat. No reason to shoot.
Click to expand...

Why would they ask him to "Drop the toy gun"; because that would imply that they KNEW it was a toy gun??
 
Rune said:
No, this is just the nonsense in your head.

In your opinion. Pointing a gun is indeed a threat.

He hardly drew his weapon on a cop.
Click to expand...

Pointing a gun at someone is a threat and he did draw the weapon on a cop, unless you have something that shows differently.
 
Rune said:
Yes pointing a gun is a threat. He didn't.
He also didn't draw down on a cop.
Prove he "drew on a cop"
Click to expand...

The cop pulled up, he started to remove it (draw it) from his waistband, and he became a threat.

You still haven't provided that legal definition where you said that someone isn't a threat, until they POINT the weapon.
Could you focus on posting that info, so we can move past your decleration?
Thanks
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top