black father killed by police in a local walmart while holding a toy gun.

maldonado said:
letsgetit22 said:
That's the million dollar question... why are they the only one's who called the police if he was really pointing the gun at people? Or at least tell one of the employees.
Click to expand...

because more than likely he wasnt pointing the gun at anyone.

more than likely, their preconceived opinions about african americans prompted an unwarranted paranoia that led them to "seeing" him pointing it at all of these people, none of which it sounds like, thought much of it, other than these two.

they followed a supposed armed assailant around the store while he was pointing a gun at women and children? sounds exactly like what most people would do... :smh:
Click to expand...

Well said.

The notion that some random guy was pointing a rifle at people and nobody freaked out is laughable. Buddy probably wasn't even aware where that toy was aiming while he talked on the phone.

Damn shame.
 
DutchRoyalT said:
RetroSneaks26 said:
Too many people jump to conclusions with that lynch mob mentality. Unfortunately, if a citizen calls 911 and reports a man brandishing a weapon, they have to take it seriously. Video evidence should provide the facts needed to see who was at fault here.
Click to expand...
what conclusions....? It isnt unrealistic to think a confined place with several hundreds of ppl, including 24/7 video monitoring was unable to detect and notice a man casually walking around with a assault rifle threatening customers and children...yet a couple, a ex marine and a wheelchair bound lady were able to? Is it jumping to a conclusion to know that the average person in a imminent threat/hostile situation does NOT trail and follow a suspect and see what they are doing?

And are people jumping to a conclusion to think that this couple has never been to this walmart thus not knowing they do NOT sell firearms? Nah it isnt jumping to conclusions its called using common sense and being able to assess a situation by using such tools.
Click to expand...

Were you there? Have you seen the visual evidence? You're speaking from your own emotions. I'm not defending the cops nor saying the deceased man was at fault. Common sense is getting all the evidence and facts straight before you start making judgement. Not all cases are the same. Because you've seen other incidents end a certain way, you already assume this one has the same outcome?
 
RetroSneaks26 said:
Were you there? Have you seen the visual evidence? You're speaking from your own emotions. I'm not defending the cops nor saying the deceased man was at fault. Common sense is getting all the evidence and facts straight before you start making judgement. Not all cases are the same. Because you've seen other incidents end a certain way, you already assume this one has the same outcome?
Click to expand...
um ok based on that rationale i wasnt at the boston bombing..... so i guess i cant use common sense to know it was tragic, ppl were screaming and there was pandemonium. Wasnt at the columbine shooting either... but i guess i cant use common sense to know ppl were running, folks were scared... and folks were trying to do everything they can to get out of harms way.

The facts are the store doesnt sell firearms.... The facts and the tape shows that no one was screaming or no sounds of panic was heard in the audio.... I dont need to be physically there to know no one was scared/screaming if you couldnt here anyone in the background... Or are you suggesting they all screamed and everyone was frightened.... up until the couple made the phone call...then they (to respect their privacy and not to be rude) all became silent. 

You dont need to be at a place to no human reactions and circumstances. A guy wandering around in a place filled with ppl waving a gun and threatening them will cause a panic. Esp a black male with dreads at that. You dont have to be there to grasp understand that concept. 
 
RetroSneaks26 said:
DutchRoyalT said:
RetroSneaks26 said:
Too many people jump to conclusions with that lynch mob mentality. Unfortunately, if a citizen calls 911 and reports a man brandishing a weapon, they have to take it seriously. Video evidence should provide the facts needed to see who was at fault here.
Click to expand...
what conclusions....? It isnt unrealistic to think a confined place with several hundreds of ppl, including 24/7 video monitoring was unable to detect and notice a man casually walking around with a assault rifle threatening customers and children...yet a couple, a ex marine and a wheelchair bound lady were able to? Is it jumping to a conclusion to know that the average person in a imminent threat/hostile situation does NOT trail and follow a suspect and see what they are doing?

And are people jumping to a conclusion to think that this couple has never been to this walmart thus not knowing they do NOT sell firearms? Nah it isnt jumping to conclusions its called using common sense and being able to assess a situation by using such tools.
Click to expand...

Were you there? Have you seen the visual evidence? You're speaking from your own emotions. I'm not defending the cops nor saying the deceased man was at fault. Common sense is getting all the evidence and facts straight before you start making judgement. Not all cases are the same. Because you've seen other incidents end a certain way, you already assume this one has the same outcome?
Click to expand...

Listen to the 911 tape

911 audio: http://www.whio.com/audio/911-calls-of-beavercreek-walmart-shooting/
 
DutchRoyalT said:
RetroSneaks26 said:
Were you there? Have you seen the visual evidence? You're speaking from your own emotions. I'm not defending the cops nor saying the deceased man was at fault. Common sense is getting all the evidence and facts straight before you start making judgement. Not all cases are the same. Because you've seen other incidents end a certain way, you already assume this one has the same outcome?
Click to expand...
um ok based on that rationale i wasnt at the boston bombing..... so i guess i cant use common sense to know it was tragic, ppl were screaming and there was pandemonium. Wasnt at the columbine shooting either... but i guess i cant use common sense to know ppl were running, folks were scared... and folks were trying to do everything they can to get out of harms way.

The facts are the store doesnt sell firearms.... The facts and the tape shows that no one was screaming or no sounds of panic was heard in the audio.... I dont need to be physically there to know no one was scared/screaming if you couldnt here anyone in the background... Or are you suggesting they all screamed and everyone was frightened.... up until the couple made the phone call...then they (to respect their privacy and not to be rude) all became silent. 

You dont need to be at a place to no human reactions and circumstances. A guy wandering around in a place filled with ppl waving a gun and threatening them will cause a panic. Esp a black male with dreads at that. You dont have to be there to grasp understand that concept. 
Click to expand...

You're comparing a bombing to this? Yes, because people just set off bombs in a crowded area for the fun of it. You don't know the entire truth, so quit trying to the play the detective and speculating your own conclusions as facts.
 
Last edited:
RetroSneaks26 said:
You're comparing a bombing to this? Yes, because people just set off bombs for the fun of it. You don't know the entire truth, so quit trying to the play the detective and speculating your own conclusions as facts.
Click to expand...
im comparing the fact that i dont have to be at a particular place to know how a typical person reacted... not to mention this incident is on tape.... So no i dont have to be physically there to no no one was scared frightened etc.... if you cant hear them. If there is audio...and no one is screaming why do i have to physically be there to know no one was screaming?

Do you realize what you are even saying... i bet you havent even heard the tape...on some cant we all just get along lets not jump to conclusion, i dont wanna say this is about race unjust etc... cause it makes you feel uncomfortable.....
 
RetroSneaks26 said:
You're comparing a bombing to this? Yes, because people just set off bombs in a crowded area for the fun of it. You don't know the entire truth, so quit trying to the play the detective and speculating your own conclusions as facts.
Click to expand...
So let me get this str8 a ex-military member which he was... doesnt no the difference between a handgun, a shotgun and a assault rifle? Oh but i wasnt there so i couldnt possibly know thats bs. 
 
DutchRoyalT said:
RetroSneaks26 said:
You're comparing a bombing to this? Yes, because people just set off bombs for the fun of it. You don't know the entire truth, so quit trying to the play the detective and speculating your own conclusions as facts.
Click to expand...
im comparing the fact that i dont have to be at a particular place to know how a typical person reacted... not to mention this incident is on tape.... So no i dont have to be physically there to no no one was scared frightened etc.... if you cant hear them. If there is audio...and no one is screaming why do i have to physically be there to know no one was screaming?


Do you realize what you are even saying... i bet you havent even heard the tape...on some cant we all just get along lets not jump to conclusion, i dont wanna say this is about race unjust etc... cause it makes you feel uncomfortable.....
Click to expand...


DutchRoyalT said:
RetroSneaks26 said:
You're comparing a bombing to this? Yes, because people just set off bombs in a crowded area for the fun of it. You don't know the entire truth, so quit trying to the play the detective and speculating your own conclusions as facts.
Click to expand...
So let me get this str8 a ex-military member which he was... doesnt no the difference between a handgun, a shotgun and a assault rifle? Oh but i wasnt there so i couldnt possibly know thats bs. 
Click to expand...

You might as well get on a pedestal and tell everyone exactly what happened. Seems you got it all figured out boss!
 
Last edited:
RetroSneaks26 said:
You might as well get on a pedestal and tell everyone exactly what happened. Seems you got it all figured out boss!
Click to expand...
he said it on the 911 tape.... doesnt exactly take a genius or super sleuth to listen to what was said. Dont have to channel my inner sherlock holmes to hear that the man was talking in a even tone...and that ppl in the background were just casually talking etc... Its called listening... 

I mean its clear you didnt hear the tape... and iuno your defending cops. or prejudice/racist ppl or whatever thats cool do you. Just be upfront about it... no need for the rouse of yall dont know...you werent there etc.... and all these unlikely irrational rare case scenarios that couldve possibly happened. 
 
DutchRoyalT said:
RetroSneaks26 said:
You might as well get on a pedestal and tell everyone exactly what happened. Seems you got it all figured out boss!
Click to expand...
he said it on the 911 tape.... doesnt exactly take a genius or super sleuth to listen to what was said. Dont have to channel my inner sherlock holmes to hear that the man was talking in a even tone...and that ppl in the background were just casually talking etc... Its called listening... 

I mean its clear you didnt hear the tape... and iuno your defending cops. or prejudice/racist ppl or whatever thats cool do you. Just be upfront about it... no need for the rouse of yall dont know...you werent there etc.... and all these unlikely irrational rare case scenarios that couldve possibly happened. 
Click to expand...

I think it's clear you have tunnel vision. I don't make blind assessments nor make snap judgments such as yourself. What's the point of investigating anything, if people like you are just going to base it on one piece of evidence, like a phone call. That doesn't prove anything. Only if it were that easy. And to answer your question, no, I'm not prejudice. You obviously can only come to one conclusion and one possible outcome.
 
RetroSneaks26 said:
I think it's clear you have tunnel vision. I don't make blind assessments nor make snap judgments such as yourself. What's the point of investigating anything, if people like you are just going to base it on one piece of evidence, like a phone call. That doesn't prove anything. Only if it were that easy. And to answer your question, no, I'm not prejudice. You obviously can only come to one conclusion and one possible outcome.
Click to expand...
what snap judgement did i make.... because there was no screaming etc... in the background that i made an assumption there was no screaming going on in the background...lol

the fact the man was a military member.... it says it in the article. what part am i assuming. The fact he couldnt had trouble distinguishing a weapon.. you could hear it on the tape. I dont know if you know this but members of the military tend to have a grasp understanding or at the very least some basic knowledge of firearms.. and can easily tell the difference between a handgun, a hunting rifle, a shotgun, etc... Thats not my assumption thats having over 15 yrs in the military,

There is no assumption that all walmarts that carry and sell firearms have the section separate... and the items arent just randomly placed on shelves like a swiffer or light bulbs..... One its against the law, and two for more obvious not needed to be stated reasons. they are also required to make and display visual signage for customers to inform them that they carry firearms... No assumption in that. Its mandated by law. 

The store has greeters... so to say no one saw him enter is a lie isnt a assumption its a lie... you HAVE to enter the store through the doors or are you suggesting he came in ninja style through the roof? 

What your doing is trying to be again on some out there it could happen anything is possible scenario instead of looking at probable most likely scenario based on the facts that are there...

1: store doesnt sell firearms.

2: guy had to be seen by some sort of employee etc... if nothing else but entering the store.

3: The tape (audio) has the man walking around the store following the man, while talking in a calm even tone matter describing the gentlemen and checking out what he is doing and his whereabouts.

4: there is no sounds of panic/screams etc... that can be heard in the background during the audio...to which the man said the guy is going thru aisle and pointing and waving the gun at people. 

5: the fact the man is following and tailing said individual who as he calls says is a potential threat and is seen as dangerous.

6: the fact that 911 dispatchers in case of a danger/grace danger are instructed to tell callers not to persue/follow/confront alleged threat.

7: the fact that the dispatchers did not do this.

8: the fact the guy is screaming its not real its not real... and the cops shot him.... and then even after the fact the man is down continued to shoot the man (why shoot a man when he is down) 

these are all facts... now you wanna go on some fairytale least likely scenario out of the norm what couldve happen to defend this ok cool. But most ppl are going to take the facts, use common sense and most likely scenario and deduce the most probable and all likelihood scenario. 
 
This happened less than 2 miles from where I live..Ohio, and Dayton, takes yet another L..
 
RIP to the father and woman who died running away
tired.gif
.
 
WorldBreaker said:
 
But that's what display models are for. For people to get a feel for the product. Besides it's a toy gun. Who takes TOYS out of the package to get a feel? 

Also don't BB Guns have orange tips on the barrel to distinguish them from real weapons?
Click to expand...
Read what I wrote, I didn't condone him taking the gun out of the package at all..What I'm saying is the DVD example isn't a good one..
 
DutchRoyalT said:
RetroSneaks26 said:
I think it's clear you have tunnel vision. I don't make blind assessments nor make snap judgments such as yourself. What's the point of investigating anything, if people like you are just going to base it on one piece of evidence, like a phone call. That doesn't prove anything. Only if it were that easy. And to answer your question, no, I'm not prejudice. You obviously can only come to one conclusion and one possible outcome.
Click to expand...
what snap judgement did i make.... because there was no screaming etc... in the background that i made an assumption there was no screaming going on in the background...lol

the fact the man was a military member.... it says it in the article. what part am i assuming. The fact he couldnt had trouble distinguishing a weapon.. you could hear it on the tape. I dont know if you know this but members of the military tend to have a grasp understanding or at the very least some basic knowledge of firearms.. and can easily tell the difference between a handgun, a hunting rifle, a shotgun, etc... Thats not my assumption thats having over 15 yrs in the military,

There is no assumption that all walmarts that carry and sell firearms have the section separate... and the items arent just randomly placed on shelves like a swiffer or light bulbs..... One its against the law, and two for more obvious not needed to be stated reasons. they are also required to make and display visual signage for customers to inform them that they carry firearms... No assumption in that. Its mandated by law. 

The store has greeters... so to say no one saw him enter is a lie isnt a assumption its a lie... you HAVE to enter the store through the doors or are you suggesting he came in ninja style through the roof? 

What your doing is trying to be again on some out there it could happen anything is possible scenario instead of looking at probable most likely scenario based on the facts that are there...

1: store doesnt sell firearms.
2: guy had to be seen by some sort of employee etc... if nothing else but entering the store.
3: The tape (audio) has the man walking around the store following the man, while talking in a calm even tone matter describing the gentlemen and checking out what he is doing and his whereabouts.
4: there is no sounds of panic/screams etc... that can be heard in the background during the audio...to which the man said the guy is going thru aisle and pointing and waving the gun at people. 
5: the fact the man is following and tailing said individual who as he calls says is a potential threat and is seen as dangerous.
6: the fact that 911 dispatchers in case of a danger/grace danger are instructed to tell callers not to persue/follow/confront alleged threat.
7: the fact that the dispatchers did not do this.
8: the fact the guy is screaming its not real its not real... and the cops shot him.... and then even after the fact the man is down continued to shoot the man (why shoot a man when he is down) 

these are all facts... now you wanna go on some fairytale least likely scenario out of the norm what couldve happen to defend this ok cool. But most ppl are going to take the facts, use common sense and most likely scenario and deduce the most probable and all likelihood scenario. 
Click to expand...

What snap judgements did you make? Judging by your reactions, I can almost be certain you saw the title here or on any other report posted on the net and automatically assumed the guy was killed for no reason. Perhaps you should read my first post again and pay attention to the part where I stated nobody should be certain as to what exactly happened until the video evidence has been confirmed. There will always be conflicting eyewitness testimony that don't add up. I'm not ruling out that what you're saying is not true, but until the investigation is complete, nobody knows. Even you Sherlock!
 
RetroSneaks26 said:
What snap judgements did you make? Judging by your reactions, I can almost be certain you saw the title here or on any other report posted on the net and automatically assumed the guy was killed for no reason. Perhaps you should read my first post again and pay attention to the part where I stated nobody should be certain as to what exactly happened until the video evidence has been confirmed. There will always be conflicting eyewitness testimony that don't add up. I'm not ruling out that what you're saying is not true, but until the investigation is complete, nobody knows. Even you Sherlock!
Click to expand...
you're the type to take a police investigation as gospel, huh?

I'm reading the story like "lolwut."

Dude just pointing at people?

An ec military dude?

While on the phone?

Seems legit
 
Fontaine said:
RetroSneaks26 said:
What snap judgements did you make? Judging by your reactions, I can almost be certain you saw the title here or on any other report posted on the net and automatically assumed the guy was killed for no reason. Perhaps you should read my first post again and pay attention to the part where I stated nobody should be certain as to what exactly happened until the video evidence has been confirmed. There will always be conflicting eyewitness testimony that don't add up. I'm not ruling out that what you're saying is not true, but until the investigation is complete, nobody knows. Even you Sherlock!
Click to expand...
you're the type to take a police investigation as gospel, huh?

I'm reading the story like "lolwut."

Dude just pointing at people?

An ec military dude?

While on the phone?

Seems legit
Click to expand...

Please, point out the part where I said it's true? I, like most rational people, wait for clear evidence before I start accusing people. I know cops are guilty of doing shady business, but I also know people do stupid things and put themselves in a position where things like this could happen.
 
oidreez said:
Look at the title of this thread and read the article. The guy was walking up and down the aisles pointing it at people. I hate to say it but this is not another case of innocent black guy dying by hands of police. Once again misleading title
Click to expand...

:pimp:


Spiceman80 said:
Jesus christ, where is the training that these officers supposedly had. I need more detail, because their isn't enough information in this story. I'm not mad at the couple because they didn't know it was a toy gun. My issue is what dialogue was had between the cops and the victim :smh:

Are toy guns not sold in packages anymore? How is it possible for them to be sold without it?
Click to expand...

That's proper training. If I'm at risk of losing my life, I'm striking first.
 
DutchRoyalT said:
The store has greeters... so to say no one saw him enter is a lie isnt a assumption its a lie... you HAVE to enter the store through the doors or are you suggesting he came in ninja style through the roof? 
Click to expand...

Coming from someone who has frequented this WalMart for over a decade I can tell you first hand that there is rarely a greeter..And I can pretty much say with the utmost confidence that if you do see a greeter, it's not going to be past 5pm..Most Wally Worlds around here have greeters anymore..
 
zapatohead408 said:
oidreez said:
Look at the title of this thread and read the article. The guy was walking up and down the aisles pointing it at people. I hate to say it but this is not another case of innocent black guy dying by hands of police. Once again misleading title
Click to expand...

:pimp:


Spiceman80 said:
Jesus christ, where is the training that these officers supposedly had. I need more detail, because their isn't enough information in this story. I'm not mad at the couple because they didn't know it was a toy gun. My issue is what dialogue was had between the cops and the victim :smh:

Are toy guns not sold in packages anymore? How is it possible for them to be sold without it?
Click to expand...

That's proper training. If I'm at risk of losing my life, I'm striking first.
Click to expand...


:smh:


Listen to the tapes first. I know you really don't give 2 F_s about Black people but you stay in these threads.

If someone point a realistic gun at you would you stay calm and continue shopping like nothing happened?

You trying to tell me the couple that called 911(only one who called the cops) were the only people who are scared of people aiming guns at them?

:nerd:
 
ksteezy said:
I just thought of something...maybe they should be given 2 guns, one with live rounds, the other with rubber nonelethal ones, depending on the situation, they will held fully accountable for which they decide to use, use lethal rounds to subdue/murder an unarmed/fleeing civilian and get prosecuted as a murderer, they shouldn't use live rounds UNLESS shot at first.
Click to expand...
This + HD Cameras and HD Audio in all badges would eliminate a lot of problems.
 
silkboi said:
Officers definitely need better training and critical thinking skills.
Click to expand...

Strongly agree with this. Not only fortify the institutionalized training, but also boost initial qualifications/requirements to be accepted into the force.

Have no experience with this but apparently the entrance exams and aptitude tests are JOKES, pretty much anyone with half logic can pass. Result: barely any filter to the people that enter the force. Haven't had much interaction with police but I've met plenty that were far from the sharpest tools in the shed. Not to mention race and gender quotas have the potential to further dilute the force.

To me it's scary that we give some of these people the privilege to carry weapons and use deadly force, some have no business being in LE, IMO
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Black woman calls cops only to be killed by cops.
Replies
11
Views
2K
1995
1995

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom