Red Mosquito

I mean, loot Target if you want, but do it because you love their products and want them for yourself!

His Just Do It sweatshirt though, it's like he was asking for it.

It does look like he has his hands in his pocket here after tossing it but before being shot. Maybe the cop thought it was a false surrender. Like the Rittenhouse guy.

Bi_3 wrote:

spike wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

McParadigm wrote:So you’re saying that andy took a video snippet which misrepresented the circumstances of the shooting by not including key moments, and promoted that? Unheard of. He wouldn’t.

No one here was saying that until you did. The two tweets show different frames from two distinct moments in the same widely circulating video and describe the frames individually without claim to describing the whole event.

In watching the video it appears he tossed the gun to surrender. He should not have been shot. But that doesn't mean he didnt have a gun a second or two before the shot was fired. Not sure why this is so confusing to for you.

I was saying that. At what point is he no longer armed?

In the vimeo the Ngo linked he clearly has the gun at 2:38:39 timestamp and does not at 2:38:40 (when he is shot).

Armed or unarmed?

verb_to_trust wrote:His Just Do It sweatshirt though, it's like he was asking for it.

A 13 year old. Hilarious stuff, man.

spike wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

spike wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

McParadigm wrote:So you’re saying that andy took a video snippet which misrepresented the circumstances of the shooting by not including key moments, and promoted that? Unheard of. He wouldn’t.

No one here was saying that until you did. The two tweets show different frames from two distinct moments in the same widely circulating video and describe the frames individually without claim to describing the whole event.

In watching the video it appears he tossed the gun to surrender. He should not have been shot. But that doesn't mean he didnt have a gun a second or two before the shot was fired. Not sure why this is so confusing to for you.

I was saying that. At what point is he no longer armed?

In the vimeo the Ngo linked he clearly has the gun at 2:38:39 timestamp and does not at 2:38:40 (when he is shot).

Armed or unarmed?

Wait... are you trying to use the fraction of a second between the time he tosses the gun and he is shot to prove Ngo was misrepresenting what happened?

Bi_3 wrote:

spike wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

spike wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

McParadigm wrote:So you’re saying that andy took a video snippet which misrepresented the circumstances of the shooting by not including key moments, and promoted that? Unheard of. He wouldn’t.

No one here was saying that until you did. The two tweets show different frames from two distinct moments in the same widely circulating video and describe the frames individually without claim to describing the whole event.

In watching the video it appears he tossed the gun to surrender. He should not have been shot. But that doesn't mean he didnt have a gun a second or two before the shot was fired. Not sure why this is so confusing to for you.

I was saying that. At what point is he no longer armed?

In the vimeo the Ngo linked he clearly has the gun at 2:38:39 timestamp and does not at 2:38:40 (when he is shot).

Armed or unarmed?

Wait... are you trying to use the fraction of a second between the time he tosses the gun and he is shot to prove Ngo was misrepresenting what happened?

He states armed in his tweet, just curious if we all agree.

spike wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:His Just Do It sweatshirt though, it's like he was asking for it.

A 13 year old with a semiautomatic firearm.

Fixed that for ya!

It appears that multiple people in this thread should think long and hard about schmilling themselves

spike wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

spike wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

spike wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:

McParadigm wrote:So you’re saying that andy took a video snippet which misrepresented the circumstances of the shooting by not including key moments, and promoted that? Unheard of. He wouldn’t.

No one here was saying that until you did. The two tweets show different frames from two distinct moments in the same widely circulating video and describe the frames individually without claim to describing the whole event.

In watching the video it appears he tossed the gun to surrender. He should not have been shot. But that doesn't mean he didnt have a gun a second or two before the shot was fired. Not sure why this is so confusing to for you.

I was saying that. At what point is he no longer armed?

In the vimeo the Ngo linked he clearly has the gun at 2:38:39 timestamp and does not at 2:38:40 (when he is shot).

Armed or unarmed?

Wait... are you trying to use the fraction of a second between the time he tosses the gun and he is shot to prove Ngo was misrepresenting what happened?

He states armed in his tweet, just curious if we all agree.

Christ dude, get some perspective. Here’s the cnn article if you want someone else to describe a sub second nuance: https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/15/us/adam- ... index.html

Mickey wrote:It appears that multiple people in this thread should think long and hard about schmilling themselves

I don't know if I have the guts. Maybe I'll take a gun from my LK gang friend and run from the police, stop at a fence, dump the gun on the other side of said fence out of police sight line, and then abruptly turn around. The cop shouldn't take me out in that scenario but maybe I will get lucky because it would be a pretty fucked up situation Ive created for myself. Dangerous even.

Cops got off for the longest time mistaking ballcaps or cellphones for guns in shootings that didn't involve the decedent having a gun at any point, so if this level of scrutiny is consistent, then great. Some of them were Tamir Rice level except that the decedent had a ballcap in his hand and the cop shot him without any verbal commands.

That said, watching the footage I thought I saw a dark shadow next to his right hand when he turned around. Should the cop have to wait to see the gun in the next strobe when he saw it 2 seconds ago in the same hand? I dunno, this seems very much an edge case.

It's not an edge case. The cop will get off and the city will burn.

The real villain here is the 21 year old gang banger who used this kid. He's been charged with child endangerment.

verb_to_trust wrote:It's not an edge case. The cop will get off and the city will burn.

The real villain here is the 21 year old gang banger who used this kid. He's been charged with child endangerment.

This case should be closer to the threshold of what gets a cop off than, "I perceived the hat of a guy minding his own business on a transit platform as a gun and had to engage the threat."

Just so we’re clear: Now we don’t want cops to go after people just randomly firing off guns in the neighborhood? That’s the desired solution?

Bammer wrote:Just so we’re clear: Now we don’t want cops to go after people just randomly firing off guns in the neighborhood? That’s the desired solution?

Depends on many socio economic factors. Please be more specific.

Bammer wrote:Just so we’re clear: Now we don’t want cops to go after people just randomly firing off guns in the neighborhood? That’s the desired solution?

Its often 2-3 hours after shots are reported in my area, unless someone gets hit. Maybe thats the compromise they want.

Hey Mickey get your wint quote ready:

No wait I take that back. What Ngo tweeted wasn't nearly as bad as that. They aren't the same. Your friendly national propaganda outlet is far worse.

BurtReynolds wrote:No wait I take that back. What Ngo tweeted wasn't nearly as bad as that. They aren't the same. Your friendly national propaganda outlet is far worse.

Wait... that was real and not a random twitter accusation? They actually intentionally dropped the frames showing the gun or were they just lost in compression/re-encode?