Defensive Carry banner

1 - 20 of 37 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,048 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Brooklyn, NY police officers killed a teenager who pointed a gun. Do crazy stuff win crazy prizes.


Cops shoot teen gunman dead in Brooklyn - NYPOST.com

Undercover cops fatally shot a teenager in Brooklyn last night after he pointed a loaded gun at an officer, police sources and witnesses said.

Kimani Gray, 16, was shot in the leg and stomach when he whipped out a .38-caliber revolver after adjusting the waistband on his pants, said cops.

The two undercover officers, driving a red umarked car, had approached the group of teens because they were acting suspiciously on East 52nd Street near Snyder Street in East Flatbush just before 11:30 p.m.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,611 Posts
I hate to say but I have zero sympathy for the kid. If you want to act, at the age of a child, like an adult and take adult risks, then you will have to deal with adult consequences.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
17,029 Posts
Kimani Gray, 16, was shot in the leg and stomach when he whipped out a .38-caliber revolver after adjusting the waistband on his pants, said cops.
Ya whip it out expect to pay the consequences.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
50,585 Posts
Kamani made his own bed, and now he's going to sleep in it for long time.:goodnight:
He was being a 'tough guy' and pointed his gun at a cop...he paid the price...no sympathy here.:hand1:

I'll bet that starting tomorrow, he was going to start turning his life around...too late now.
Maybe his friends will learn something from this...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
278 Posts
The trial will not be lengthy.
saa.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,164 Posts
Please read the story. Of course the kid was in illegal possession, and of course he did something stupid,
and the killing was justified, but there is a significant BUT to the story: "the two undercover officers, driving a red umarked car, had approached the group of teens."

Are you so sure that you, even as an adult, would recognize, acknowledge, believe, two strangers
who popped out of an unmarked red car and demanded something of you? How many here
would have their hand on their CCW.

From this distance we have absolutely no way to know how this incident actually occurred. How, or even if,
the officers correctly identified themselves. On the surface the right thing appears to have been done.
A 16 year old in illegal possession certainly deserved to be arrested. What we don't know is the rest of
the story. Its the same deal as with that shooting in Austin we discussed in a different thread.

We know only half of the pertinent information and that only from the police side of the story.

How much older than that teen were the officers? How were they dressed--did they
look just like gang members? What were they required to do to unambiguously demonstrate they were
the real deal LEOs and not fakers?

Death of a teen who perhaps (wasn't there and don't know) could have been arrested without incident
if the game was played differently is nothing to celebrate.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
527 Posts
Please read the story. Of course the kid was in illegal possession, and of course he did something stupid,
and the killing was justified, but there is a significant BUT to the story: "the two undercover officers, driving a red umarked car, had approached the group of teens."

Are you so sure that you, even as an adult, would recognize, acknowledge, believe, two strangers
who popped out of an unmarked red car and demanded something of you? How many here
would have their hand on their CCW.

From this distance we have absolutely no way to know how this incident actually occurred. How, or even if,
the officers correctly identified themselves. On the surface the right thing appears to have been done.
A 16 year old in illegal possession certainly deserved to be arrested. What we don't know is the rest of
the story. Its the same deal as with that shooting in Austin we discussed in a different thread.

We know only half of the pertinent information and that only from the police side of the story.

How much older than that teen were the officers? How were they dressed--did they
look just like gang members? What were they required to do to unambiguously demonstrate they were
the real deal LEOs and not fakers?

Death of a teen who perhaps (wasn't there and don't know) could have been arrested without incident
if the game was played differently is nothing to celebrate.
Agreed. I think many police officers are woefully untrained in understanding the situations they can create by their own behavior, which is sometimes difficult to discern from that of random thugs if they aren't careful.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,326 Posts
Not much detail, in that news story. Not much known, given the other kids apparently aren't talking yet. With undercover folks, it's hard to know how the kids perceived them when they arrived, unknown what was said. All we've got is: waistband adjusted by the teen, then gun pulled out.

Of course, nothing justifies aggravated assault if unprovoked. Perhaps we'll know more, once the other kids start talking.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,251 Posts
Please read the story. Of course the kid was in illegal possession, and of course he did something stupid,
and the killing was justified, but there is a significant BUT to the story: "the two undercover officers, driving a red umarked car, had approached the group of teens."

Are you so sure that you, even as an adult, would recognize, acknowledge, believe, two strangers
who popped out of an unmarked red car and demanded something of you? How many here
would have their hand on their CCW.

From this distance we have absolutely no way to know how this incident actually occurred. How, or even if,
the officers correctly identified themselves. On the surface the right thing appears to have been done.
A 16 year old in illegal possession certainly deserved to be arrested. What we don't know is the rest of
the story. Its the same deal as with that shooting in Austin we discussed in a different thread.

We know only half of the pertinent information and that only from the police side of the story.

How much older than that teen were the officers? How were they dressed--did they
look just like gang members? What were they required to do to unambiguously demonstrate they were
the real deal LEOs and not fakers?

Death of a teen who perhaps (wasn't there and don't know) could have been arrested without incident
if the game was played differently is nothing to celebrate.
You bring up some possibilities, but unless there are witnesses...how do you know? About those witnesses...are they friends of the kid with the gun?...are they fellow cops?...can they be trusted?

I have known many LEOs...from Metro Police Department...small County Sheriff Department...State Highway Patrols...and many in between. From working with them at incident scenes, from parties, from conversations over coffee, kid's birthday parties, funerals and other contacts.

I say that, to say this...There ARE "bad cops"...I will even say I can see Department Corruption being a problem in some places (I haven't seen any in my experience, but I can see the possibility)...BUT the vast majority of people in Law Enforcement are good and honest people who really believe in helping the citizens and trying to make things better for them.

At what point do we trust what they say? It is a given with society as vast and diverse as ours there will be mistakes...there will be people killed when it might have been avoided...unjust legal outcomes. I believe when these mistakes are found they should be dealt with, but at some point some just have to "take one for the team". I also believe that this is a very, VERY small number of cases.

I have a question for you. Do you believe everything your doctor tells you? We know the incident of fatalities from "medical misadventures" is a larger body count than death from gun violence in this country. Do you get a second opinion? How can you trust that one? When does it stop? When you run out of doctors or money. Do you at one point (knowing the majority of doctors are competent) take what they say as fact.

This is true of all occupations and walks of life. I used these two because they are very visible in the public eye.

Until evidence is given that the LEOs lied...I will go with what they say. IF they are found to be lying...then throw the book at them. Weed out any bad ones that are found guilty by evidence (same goes for doctors).

I wrote this to you, but it pertains to several in here that won't believe what the LEOs say....no matter what. Not wanting to start a war....just trying to understand the viewpoint.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
12,069 Posts
  • Like
Reactions: latentcarry

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
527 Posts
You bring up some possibilities, but unless there are witnesses...how do you know? About those witnesses...are they friends of the kid with the gun?...are they fellow cops?...can they be trusted?

I have known many LEOs...from Metro Police Department...small County Sheriff Department...State Highway Patrols...and many in between. From working with them at incident scenes, from parties, from conversations over coffee, kid's birthday parties, funerals and other contacts.

I say that, to say this...There ARE "bad cops"...I will even say I can see Department Corruption being a problem in some places (I haven't seen any in my experience, but I can see the possibility)...BUT the vast majority of people in Law Enforcement are good and honest people who really believe in helping the citizens and trying to make things better for them.

At what point do we trust what they say? It is a given with society as vast and diverse as ours there will be mistakes...there will be people killed when it might have been avoided...unjust legal outcomes. I believe when these mistakes are found they should be dealt with, but at some point some just have to "take one for the team". I also believe that this is a very, VERY small number of cases.

I have a question for you. Do you believe everything your doctor tells you? We know the incident of fatalities from "medical misadventures" is a larger body count than death from gun violence in this country. Do you get a second opinion? How can you trust that one? When does it stop? When you run out of doctors or money. Do you at one point (knowing the majority of doctors are competent) take what they say as fact.

This is true of all occupations and walks of life. I used these two because they are very visible in the public eye.

Until evidence is given that the LEOs lied...I will go with what they say. IF they are found to be lying...then throw the book at them. Weed out any bad ones that are found guilty by evidence (same goes for doctors).

I wrote this to you, but it pertains to several in here that won't believe what the LEOs say....no matter what. Not wanting to start a war....just trying to understand the viewpoint.
I'm not replying in Hopyard's defense although I agree with him completely on this one. I don't think all police officers are bad and count a few of them among my friends. They do, however, have a tendency to uphold a code of silence when one of their own actually screws up and coupled with the fact that they are agents of the state with a right to exercise coercive force, leads me to think that everything they say and do should probably be held to a higher standard of inquiry than the average person on the street.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,813 Posts
The one thing that always raises eyebrows for me, and this being in NYC, is the phrase "acting suspiciously." Such a vague and non-definitive phrase.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,164 Posts
You bring up some possibilities, but unless there are witnesses...how do you know? About those witnesses...are they friends of the kid with the gun?...are they fellow cops?...can they be trusted?

I have known many LEOs...from Metro Police Department...small County Sheriff Department...State Highway Patrols...and many in between. From working with them at incident scenes, from parties, from conversations over coffee, kid's birthday parties, funerals and other contacts.

I say that, to say this...There ARE "bad cops"...I will even say I can see Department Corruption being a problem in some places (I haven't seen any in my experience, but I can see the possibility)...BUT the vast majority of people in Law Enforcement are good and honest people who really believe in helping the citizens and trying to make things better for them.

At what point do we trust what they say? It is a given with society as vast and diverse as ours there will be mistakes...there will be people killed when it might have been avoided...unjust legal outcomes. I believe when these mistakes are found they should be dealt with, but at some point some just have to "take one for the team". I also believe that this is a very, VERY small number of cases.

I have a question for you. Do you believe everything your doctor tells you? We know the incident of fatalities from "medical misadventures" is a larger body count than death from gun violence in this country. Do you get a second opinion? How can you trust that one? When does it stop? When you run out of doctors or money. Do you at one point (knowing the majority of doctors are competent) take what they say as fact.

This is true of all occupations and walks of life. I used these two because they are very visible in the public eye.

Until evidence is given that the LEOs lied...I will go with what they say. IF they are found to be lying...then throw the book at them. Weed out any bad ones that are found guilty by evidence (same goes for doctors).

I wrote this to you, but it pertains to several in here that won't believe what the LEOs say....no matter what. Not wanting to start a war....just trying to understand the viewpoint.
I didn't say they lied. I didn't even say they were bad cops. I said that there is no telling how
the teen being confronted perceived them as they emerged from an unmarked red car.

I can envision them doing all the right things--- yelling police and showing badges, and the kid
still thinking he was being attacked by a rival gang due to the way they were dressed, their youth (if they
were young officers), and other things such as dress/insignia, tattoos -fake or otherwise.

Take the "punk" aspect out of the pic for a moment and this is a scenario we have talked about
many times in a different context-- the faux police home invasion.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the guys on the spot did anything wrong. I've no clue what their
instructions and procedures are or whether they had an option of calling uniformed backup to the scene.
For all I know, once out of the car they were in full uniform and unmistakably officers; that is certainly possible.

But so too is what I suggested; that the teen didn't get it. And that is something that could happen to
almost any of us when others adrenalin is pumping.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,048 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Here we have an out of control kid running amuck with a gun in NY City. NY City is the epitome of draconian gun control. We can come up with all kinds of scenarios for this one.

1. Maybe the cops recognized the teenage gun packer and wanted to question him.

2. Maybe the teenage gun packer wanted to kill a cop and become the neighborhood hero.


The teenager had been in trouble with the law before, having been arrested three times since October and had previously been charged with grand larceny and inciting a riot.
Until i find evidence that those two cops over-reacted; i'm on the side of the police.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,164 Posts
Here we have an out of control kid running amuck with a gun in NY City. NY City is the epitome of draconian gun control. We can come up with all kinds of scenarios for this one.

1. Maybe the cops recognized the teenage gun packer and wanted to question him.

2. Maybe the teenage gun packer wanted to kill a cop and become the neighborhood hero.

Until i find evidence that those two cops over-reacted; i'm on the side of the police.
I'm on the side of the police too, because no teen should be in illegal possession. What I am
suggesting folks think about is how you as a CWP might respond to two men who jump out of
an unmarked car if they are not obviously police officers. (We don't know that from the story either way.)

It is certainly entirely possible that everyone involved already knew each other and recognized each other
on sight, and that the teen was looking to turn himself into some gang "hero." It is also equally possible
that a huge misunderstanding ended in a shooting that wasn't necessary. I'm not defending the teen and I'm
not bashing the police. I'm raising the issue of certitude in identification. Again, who here wouldn't
immediately put their hand on their weapon if two men jumped out of a car; and it would certainly take
some time to process what they were shouting and mentally confirm that they were legit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
278 Posts
Please read the story. Of course the kid was in illegal possession, and of course he did something stupid,
and the killing was justified, but there is a significant BUT to the story: "the two undercover officers, driving a red umarked car, had approached the group of teens."

Are you so sure that you, even as an adult, would recognize, acknowledge, believe, two strangers
who popped out of an unmarked red car and demanded something of you? How many here
would have their hand on their CCW.

From this distance we have absolutely no way to know how this incident actually occurred. How, or even if,
the officers correctly identified themselves. On the surface the right thing appears to have been done.
A 16 year old in illegal possession certainly deserved to be arrested. What we don't know is the rest of
the story. Its the same deal as with that shooting in Austin we discussed in a different thread.

We know only half of the pertinent information and that only from the police side of the story.

How much older than that teen were the officers? How were they dressed--did they
look just like gang members? What were they required to do to unambiguously demonstrate they were
the real deal LEOs and not fakers?

Death of a teen who perhaps (wasn't there and don't know) could have been arrested without incident
if the game was played differently is nothing to celebrate.
The police are afforded the benefit of reasonable doubt, just as you as a ccw'er are, due to their background, training, and credibility of past actions. If and when you, god forbid, ever were to have to draw and fire on a subject in a dark alley you are offered the same reasonable assumption that your testimony and witness will be true and correct based on your willingness to subject yourself to the background checks, training, and licensing that you go through. You have a reasonable assumption of integrity, as do these police officers.

There are, unfortunetely, bad police as there are bad everything. We don't judge based on the few who stray. Most of the LEO's, and I know many personally as friends and casually as aquaintances, risk their lives every day to secure our safety and that of our families.

We want, and deserve, the same respect as we offer them in their line of duty. One day, as a ccw'er, one of them may be sitting on a jury who is asked to start off with the reasonable assumption that you acted within the law, based on ONLY your testimony.

We should offer them the same, IMO. I do. As for the kid killed - it's a tradgedy, as all deaths are. However, his history tells a story.
saa.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spirit51 and Bark'n
1 - 20 of 37 Posts
Top