17-year-old teenager fatally shot by East Pittsburgh police. UPDATES: OFFICER CHARGED WITH HOMICIDE

Smh...

Every brother aint Philando Castille or Tamir Rice.

Sean King needs to be taken down, he is obviously just using black grief as a way to make money, cause the mother fucker aint even checking if shits on the up and up anymore.


Since when we start trying to paint those that pull drive bys as angels?

Sean King = Agent Provocateur
 
I bet dey waz good boyz, just goin to church and shieeet. Damn racist ass cracka po-lice.
 
It's obvious you have it in your mind that I'm sitting here foaming at the mouth with anger at the cop. From my post that started the thread, I was trying to see the situation on both sides. I questioned why the cop didn't give chase before firing, but also mentioned the reason they were probably more quick to fire was because they pulled them over believing they just shot somebody. I even state in a later post that if it is these kids that were tied to the drive-by, which I've already stated is more than likely, than it makes it harder to sympathize with them. However, can't I find it unfortunate that a kid lost his life? Wouldn't you have rather seen him go to jail? Was the way it ended ultimately the way it had to end? We don't even know what his culpability is with the drive-by. Granted, innocent people usually don't try to run from the police.

From the onset, I've been trying to wrap my head around this whole situation. Can't I think it's sad that this kid ended up dead, but at the same time try to process why the cop shot him in the back? I feel that's what I've been doing this whole thread. Knowing the circumstances leading up to the teenagers' car being pulled over, the kid fleeing, and him being shot, I completely understand the argument in favor of the cop. But as I've said, can I still not feel the end result is unfortunate?
Try to process why the guy was shot him in the back? This has already been explained to you. The guy forced the cop to shoot him the back. Maybe that’s just hard for you to understand, but it shouldn’t be. No one is arguing that this unfortunate. Their criminal actions are 100% blame for the unfortunate situation. They just shot someone. Once again it’s bizarre that you even keep bringing up the fact he was shot in the back. You lack common sense if you can’t process that.

How about you explain how the cop should’ve handled this differently
 
Try to process why the guy was shot him in the back? This has already been explained to you. The guy forced the cop to shoot him the back. Maybe that’s just hard for you to understand, but it shouldn’t be. No one is arguing that this unfortunate. Their criminal actions are 100% blame for the unfortunate situation. They just shot someone. Once again it’s bizarre that you even keep bringing up the fact he was shot in the back. You lack common sense if you can’t process that.

How about you explain how the cop should’ve handled this differently

Yes, there are several reasons police might shoot a person with justification.

The most obvious and common is that person is a direct threat to the officers doing the shooting. In a case where the person who is shot is running away from the police, it becomes very difficult to argue that they posed a danger to the officers. I think that is where some people are being tripped up.

Another justification is that a person is a violent felon who poses a danger to society and is resisting arrest by the police. That seems to be what happened here. The police obviously shot these young men because they reasonably suspected that they had just shot someone. It was a shooting in defense of the black community and society at large. Based on the facts available, it seems probable that the police acted correctly in this case.
 
Yes, there are several reasons police might shoot a person with justification.

The most obvious and common is that person is a direct threat to the officers doing the shooting. In a case where the person who is shot is running away from the police, it becomes very difficult to argue that they posed a danger to the officers. I think that is where some people are being tripped up.

Another justification is that a person is a violent felon who poses a danger to society and is resisting arrest by the police. That seems to be what happened here. The police obviously shot these young men because they reasonably suspected that they had just shot someone. It was a shooting in defense of the black community and society at large. Based on the facts available, it seems probable that the police acted correctly in this case.
Go to YouTube & you’ll see several videos of police chasing suspects on foot instead of shooting them, only to have the suspect put a gun to a hostages head. People who blame the cop here would have to be a hostage with a gun to their head to finally understand why the cop had to shoot the suspect while he was running away. All this is easy to understand, some people are just so overwhelm with sympathy for the criminal, they can’t think about the situation rationally. Also people refuse to think about the events that led up to the suspect getting shot. The guys just did a drive by shooting. They shot someone. They tried to kill someone. They could’ve easily killed a child accidentally. One of the suspects surrendered & was arrested. The other one chose to run & was shot dead like he should’ve been.
 
The black child was shot because Obama smokes New Ports while funding ISIS and MS-13.
Are you talking about the black child the suspects shot in the drive by shooting?

Your trolling sucks today. Step it up
 
This what happens when police wait to shoot. The suspects still get killed, they just end up risking an innocent person getting killed as well.

 
I never once said “shitty cops I hate” in this thread, or have even suggested that I hate cops. From the get-go, I’ve merely just questioned why the cop would have to be so quick to shoot down a fleeing suspect in the back rather than say give chase first. I’m seeing the consensus as being the potential threat of the suspect outweighing everything else, which I’ve even made clear that I can understand that sentiment.

I get it, police shootings can be a hot topic, and I’m sure there have been a fair share of arguments on this forum regarding them. So people seem primed and ready to label somebody questioning the cop’s immediate actions as a cop hater. There’s no need to lump me in because of preconceived notions.
The problem is that you don't know if he was quick to shoot or not. You're making an assumption based on the fact that he didn't catch him after chasing him down. None of us has facts on whether or not the officer attempted to chase the suspect down on foot first, details about where the suspect was headed (if headed towards a crowded area, area where detaining the suspect becomes impractical or unsafe, etc.). Shooting may have been the last resort, but you seem to be assuming that it wasn't.

Let me clarify what I mean by saying "detaining the suspect becomes impractical or unsafe" because I know how people are going to take that. If the suspect is in an area where there are lots of people, bedroom windows, or dangerous items (pretty much anything involving gasoline, chemicals, electricity, etc), then it becomes unsafe to discharge your firearm under any circumstances. A missed shot could lead to a dead civilian or multiple victims. You have to look at what's between you and your target, what's to the left and right of your target, and what's behind your target. If any of those are things that you can't shoot, then you shouldn't be discharging your firearm. If you can't shoot, but the perp will be in a place where he will be able to discharge his firearm at you or a civilian, then you need to stop him before he gets to that point. Since we've established that the suspect was believed to have been part of a driveby shooting incident earlier that same day, then it is reasonable to believe that the suspect is armed and dangerous, meeting the above qualifications as soon as he runs towards an area where lots of civilians are present.
 
Clean shoot. Car with bullet holes, person shot earleir, and two fleeing from the car at the traffic stop.

Why should a cop chase them? At any moment they could turn and start shooting at the police if they are armed.

Look at the cop that was on foot telling the guy to stop and then the guy casually turned around and shot him.

You want to be a criminal expect consequences for your actions.
 
Yes, I understand this. I was more so questioning the law itself. It seems it grants an officer to resort to shooting quicker. I would hope it's not being used as a safeguard for unjustifiable circumstances where somebody running from an officer being deemed in the moment as part of that law's criteria can just get that officer excused. As you mentioned, hopefully they would be found negligent. As for this case, it just feels unfortunate that it ended the way it did, considering how quickly it resulted in the kid being shot. As I've stated earlier, maybe the cop could have given chase first, regardless of this law or not. However, at the same time, I can comprehend why he might be seen as an immediate threat, given the nature of why they were pulled over. I feel I've said a lot of this before. In this thread...which is all easily quotable...

You don't immediately chase when someone bails from a car. In this case they are already, per the article trying to detain the driver and 2 suspects are fleeing from a car with fucking bullet holes in it that just was involved in a gunfight with another gang member. You have no idea if that is all the suspects out of the car or if one is waiting inside armed.

We had an officer at my agency stop a car late night in an industrial area. Luckily he is a seasoned dude with time on and put it out and was letting others know the car was not yielding and instead pulling around a business, away from the street. He asked for additional units code 3 because he thought the driver was going to bail.

We all watched his dash cam after which showed this:
Car stops driver foot bails
Officer jumps out, yells police and takes off after him
Officer passes door of suspect car and 2nd occupant, who you could not see prior gets out
2nd occupant pulls hand gun from his waistband, steps around to try and get a clear shot at officer in foot pursuit
Can't get shot cause they were too far away and you can hear sirens of other approaching officers on the video
2nd occupant gets in driver seat of suspect car and drives away just prior to follow officer arrival

Now none of this shit was known until we watched his dash cam. Had he not been running so fast and had he not requested other units code 3, we would have had the passenger shoot him as he was chasing the first dude.

I also went to Ryan Bonamino's funeral. He got in a foot pursuit in the dark, of a stolen vehicle suspect. As he came around a corner, suspect ambushed him, bashed him in the face with a tire iron/tire checker bat, then picked up his gun while Ryan laid on the floor with his face bashed in and proceeded to execute him.

So all you armchair quarterbacks who have zero police training or military background need to realize how little you actually know.
 
Try to process why the guy was shot him in the back? This has already been explained to you. The guy forced the cop to shoot him the back. Maybe that’s just hard for you to understand, but it shouldn’t be. No one is arguing that this unfortunate. Their criminal actions are 100% blame for the unfortunate situation. They just shot someone. Once again it’s bizarre that you even keep bringing up the fact he was shot in the back. You lack common sense if you can’t process that.

How about you explain how the cop should’ve handled this differently

I lack common sense because I’m questioning why an altercation ended the way it did? Geez, so much for trying to have open civil discourse about the topic.

Also, not sure how it’s been “explained to me” when I had first brought forth the notion in my first post -
...I guess since they pulled over a car that was believed to be involved with a shooting that happened earlier, they were quicker to deem the runners as dangerous...

So yes, right out of the gate, I understood this. That doesn't mean that I can't have compassion for how things ended. Sorry if I'm not so quick to laud the death of someone.

And I've already stated how the cop might have handled it differently when I said he could have chased after him first. I'm noticing there's a steadfast argument among posters here that because the officer acted immediately and shot the kid, that squashed the altercation from potentially escalating to a shoot out, hostage situation, someone innocent getting shot, or something along these lines. I get that, and yes, those outcomes would be bad. I've also already stated that it wasn't smart for the kid to try and run away from the scene, especially considering the cops already have their guns drawn on them. I never claimed the kid was devoid of any fault with how it played out. All I suggested was that maybe the cop could have chased after him first before shooting him. Is that really so unreasonable?

Am I just being too alien for the war room that I'm somebody trying to see it from both sides? Should I be digging my heels into one side and being close-minded to any opinion opposite my own to feel welcomed here? I've been open for discussion, but instead I've been talked at or talked down to, rather than just talked to.
 
If it's proven that these kids were in fact that same car that tried to kill somebody earlier, obviously I'm not going to be upset to a level of, "Oh, those goddamn cops!" However, I'm still going to think it's unfortunate that this kid lost his life, when possibly there could have been a different outcome.
There could have been a lot of different outcomes. The cops did not know if this kid was
armed. What he tried to carjack someone to get away, ran into a house and took hostages, turned around and shot at the cops? We don’t know what could have happened but the criminals need to stop.
 
I lack common sense because I’m questioning why an altercation ended the way it did? Geez, so much for trying to have open civil discourse about the topic.

Also, not sure how it’s been “explained to me” when I had first brought forth the notion in my first post -


So yes, right out of the gate, I understood this. That doesn't mean that I can't have compassion for how things ended. Sorry if I'm not so quick to laud the death of someone.

And I've already stated how the cop might have handled it differently when I said he could have chased after him first. I'm noticing there's a steadfast argument among posters here that because the officer acted immediately and shot the kid, that squashed the altercation from potentially escalating to a shoot out, hostage situation, someone innocent getting shot, or something along these lines. I get that, and yes, those outcomes would be bad. I've also already stated that it wasn't smart for the kid to try and run away from the scene, especially considering the cops already have their guns drawn on them. I never claimed the kid was devoid of any fault with how it played out. All I suggested was that maybe the cop could have chased after him first before shooting him. Is that really so unreasonable?

Am I just being too alien for the war room that I'm somebody trying to see it from both sides? Should I be digging my heels into one side and being close-minded to any opinion opposite my own to feel welcomed here? I've been open for discussion, but instead I've been talked at or talked down to, rather than just talked to.
You say the cop should’ve chased first. I’ve explained to you over & over again why that’s not an option in this situation. If you still don’t understand that, then yes you lack common sense. You might not like to hear that, but it’s true.
 
You don't immediately chase when someone bails from a car. In this case they are already, per the article trying to detain the driver and 2 suspects are fleeing from a car with fucking bullet holes in it that just was involved in a gunfight with another gang member. You have no idea if that is all the suspects out of the car or if one is waiting inside armed.

We had an officer at my agency stop a car late night in an industrial area. Luckily he is a seasoned dude with time on and put it out and was letting others know the car was not yielding and instead pulling around a business, away from the street. He asked for additional units code 3 because he thought the driver was going to bail.

We all watched his dash cam after which showed this:
Car stops driver foot bails
Officer jumps out, yells police and takes off after him
Officer passes door of suspect car and 2nd occupant, who you could not see prior gets out
2nd occupant pulls hand gun from his waistband, steps around to try and get a clear shot at officer in foot pursuit
Can't get shot cause they were too far away and you can hear sirens of other approaching officers on the video
2nd occupant gets in driver seat of suspect car and drives away just prior to follow officer arrival

Now none of this shit was known until we watched his dash cam. Had he not been running so fast and had he not requested other units code 3, we would have had the passenger shoot him as he was chasing the first dude.

I also went to Ryan Bonamino's funeral. He got in a foot pursuit in the dark, of a stolen vehicle suspect. As he came around a corner, suspect ambushed him, bashed him in the face with a tire iron/tire checker bat, then picked up his gun while Ryan laid on the floor with his face bashed in and proceeded to execute him.

So all you armchair quarterbacks who have zero police training or military background need to realize how little you actually know.

Would you have shot that suspect 3 times in the back as well?

not a gotcha moment I think you know i respect your opinions as a police officer

Im pretty critical of police shootings but the driveby and bullet damage to the car and guns found in the car tells me these were some bad dudes not some kids stealing rillos or even a joy ride and it does seem reasonable to me for the police to open fire and expect fire .
 
The problem is that you don't know if he was quick to shoot or not. You're making an assumption based on the fact that he didn't catch him after chasing him down. None of us has facts on whether or not the officer attempted to chase the suspect down on foot first, details about where the suspect was headed (if headed towards a crowded area, area where detaining the suspect becomes impractical or unsafe, etc.). Shooting may have been the last resort, but you seem to be assuming that it wasn't.

From the video, it looked like as soon as the kid bailed from the car, the officer took the shot without giving any chase. That's where my assumption came from.

Let me clarify what I mean by saying "detaining the suspect becomes impractical or unsafe" because I know how people are going to take that. If the suspect is in an area where there are lots of people, bedroom windows, or dangerous items (pretty much anything involving gasoline, chemicals, electricity, etc), then it becomes unsafe to discharge your firearm under any circumstances. A missed shot could lead to a dead civilian or multiple victims. You have to look at what's between you and your target, what's to the left and right of your target, and what's behind your target. If any of those are things that you can't shoot, then you shouldn't be discharging your firearm. If you can't shoot, but the perp will be in a place where he will be able to discharge his firearm at you or a civilian, then you need to stop him before he gets to that point. Since we've established that the suspect was believed to have been part of a driveby shooting incident earlier that same day, then it is reasonable to believe that the suspect is armed and dangerous, meeting the above qualifications as soon as he runs towards an area where lots of civilians are present.

All good points. Thanks for your response.

You don't immediately chase when someone bails from a car. In this case they are already, per the article trying to detain the driver and 2 suspects are fleeing from a car with fucking bullet holes in it that just was involved in a gunfight with another gang member. You have no idea if that is all the suspects out of the car or if one is waiting inside armed.

We had an officer at my agency stop a car late night in an industrial area. Luckily he is a seasoned dude with time on and put it out and was letting others know the car was not yielding and instead pulling around a business, away from the street. He asked for additional units code 3 because he thought the driver was going to bail.

We all watched his dash cam after which showed this:
Car stops driver foot bails
Officer jumps out, yells police and takes off after him
Officer passes door of suspect car and 2nd occupant, who you could not see prior gets out
2nd occupant pulls hand gun from his waistband, steps around to try and get a clear shot at officer in foot pursuit
Can't get shot cause they were too far away and you can hear sirens of other approaching officers on the video
2nd occupant gets in driver seat of suspect car and drives away just prior to follow officer arrival

Now none of this shit was known until we watched his dash cam. Had he not been running so fast and had he not requested other units code 3, we would have had the passenger shoot him as he was chasing the first dude.

I also went to Ryan Bonamino's funeral. He got in a foot pursuit in the dark, of a stolen vehicle suspect. As he came around a corner, suspect ambushed him, bashed him in the face with a tire iron/tire checker bat, then picked up his gun while Ryan laid on the floor with his face bashed in and proceeded to execute him.

See, this is the kind of discourse I was looking for. Thank you for sharing this. It definitely shines new light on things.

So all you armchair quarterbacks who have zero police training or military background need to realize how little you actually know.

Was it wrong for me to question and ponder on the subject? Isn't being open to listening to others and being willing to have a thought be challenged the entire point of conversation?
 
From the video, it looked like as soon as the kid bailed from the car, the officer took the shot without giving any chase. That's where my assumption came from.



All good points. Thanks for your response.



See, this is the kind of discourse I was looking for. Thank you for sharing this. It definitely shines new light on things.



Was it wrong for me to question and ponder on the subject? Isn't being open to listening to others and being willing to have a thought be challenged the entire point of conversation?
Why don’t you explain exactly how you would’ve handled the situation
 
Back
Top