• Fired Florida officer defends use of 'Trayvon Martin' shooting targets; explains they were to teach
    39 replies, posted
[QUOTE=n0cturni;40290339]Genuinely confused; what would differentiate a "sandy hook" child from a regular child if you were to make targets of them (for whatever reason). Would they be holding books that say "sandy hook" on them?[/QUOTE] Sure, that's one way to do it. What I'm saying is that having a target that deliberately refers to some recently-killed kid while there are a million other ways you could've done it without referring specifically to Trayvon is just irresponsible.
[QUOTE=MightyLOLZOR;40290077]it wasn't that the target was racist, it's just that it obviously represents Trayvon Martin, and black people tend to get butthurt about that.[/QUOTE] Well, [URL="http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/crim38&div=21&id=&page="]black people do tend to receive a disproportionate[/URL] [URL="http://gelvers.hubpages.com/hub/Racial-Discrimination-A-Cause-Of-Police-Brutality"]amount of force from the police[/URL] and it's not hard to see why they'd be sensitive about that. I understand that the cut-out is not meant to be a target in this case but you can't just expect people to completely disregard the tone of the original cut-out's purpose (in which there could've very well been some racial animus).
[QUOTE=Harnbrand;40290416]Sure, that's one way to do it. What I'm saying is that having a target that deliberately refers to some recently-killed kid while there are a million other ways you could've done it without referring specifically to Trayvon is just irresponsible.[/QUOTE] I don't think they did refer to him though, but I could have missed it. I do agree that they didn't [i]have[/i] to have the silhouette hold the same items that he did though, down to the branded skittles.
Usually I'd be like "man this guy's a dumbass" but this time I am convinced he was actually right
[QUOTE=MR-X;40288807][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRXNNqNfQBs[/media][/QUOTE] Good god I need to see this movie again
Its of distaste to use that scenario, but really, we have targets of small children that we use for use-of-force training. And really, [quote]The paper targets show a faceless black hooded sweatshirt with a bull's-eye on the chest. In one hand is a can of iced tea and in the pocket is a pack of Skittles candy, the same items Martin was carrying when he was shot and killed last year in a case that has drawn national attention.[/quote] Nothing here is even saying that its [I]specifically[/I] Martin. Just because it looks the same, it doenst have his face on it or anything.
And it appears that the target in question was manufactured PRIOR to the Trayvon Martin shootings.
[QUOTE=Aetna;40294559]And it appears that the target in question was manufactured PRIOR to the Trayvon Martin shootings.[/QUOTE] Well someone needs to arrest whoever made it for violating the temporal prime directive then.
[QUOTE=Aetna;40294559]And it appears that the target in question was manufactured PRIOR to the Trayvon Martin shootings.[/QUOTE] Complete with Skittles and iced tea? Really? On-topic, I don't see a problem with using these for 'don't shoot' scenarios. Sure, he could have used ones that weren't based on the Martin case, but there's no guarantee that those were available, and these do the job just fine.
reminder that fuck the police [editline]16th April 2013[/editline] seriously. any excuse you can make for them using a representation of a real teenager who was shot to death in a shooting range is fucking stupid, even if you buy that "it's the target you're not supposed to shoot" bullshit. There is literally no excuse. Fuck the police.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.