Police Union Sues Toy Gun Maker For Not Doing Enough To Keep Cleveland Cops From Killing 12-Year-Old Boys
from the who-will-it-sue-now-that-it's-shot-itself-in-the-foot? dept
In the world of law enforcement, there's very little more ridiculous than police unions. That's the unfortunate side effect of feeling compelled to defend every "bad apple," no matter how rotten they are. The Cleveland police union has reached the apotheosis of law enforcement spin -- this time taking the form of a lawsuit that looks like a punchline.
First, some backstory. In 2014, 12-year-old Tamir Rice was killed by a Cleveland police officer as he played with a toy gun in the park. A caller reported Rice, saying he was waving around a gun. The caller also said it was likely the person they saw was a juvenile and the gun was likely a toy. This information was not passed on to the responding officers, who boldly/stupidly raced across the park lawn to within feet of where Rice was standing and shot him two seconds after exiting their vehicle. The "gun" Rice had was an Airsoft replica with the bright "not a gun" tip removed.
Had the dispatcher passed on the mitigating factors, Tamir Rice might still be alive. Had the officers decided to approach this tactically, rather than like an out-of-control half of a buddy-cop movie cliche, Tamir Rice might still be alive. But, as the Cleveland Patrolmen's Association sees it, the problem wasn't bad communication and worse tactics. The real problem here is toy gun makers.
The Cleveland Patrolmen's Association announced it will soon be filing a lawsuit against toy gun manufacturers in federal court.
CPPA attorney Henry Hilow told News 5 the civil lawsuit will not seek financial damages, but rather seek to restrict the design of toy guns, so they don't look so realistic.
"These fake weapons put the community at risk, puts law enforcement at risk, something has to be done," Hilow said. "The remedy that we'd be looking for is that that gun could not replicate. That that gun would be of such a color have such a tip."
Airsoft guns do look realistic, minus the bright orange tip that comes standard. Anyone can remove the tip… just like anyone can create a real gun that looks fake. None of that matters, though, as attempts to create vicarious liability tend to fall apart under judicial scrutiny. And, notably, the Cleveland Police Union has never attempted to sue the manufacturers of real guns, despite them being involved in almost every situation where officers have shot at people or been shot by them.
As Popehat pointed out on Twitter, this is likely only the first of many police union lawsuits:
Next to be sued by police: Coach for making wallets and God for making black people's hands and waistbands
So far, the CPPA stands alone in its jackassery. But it has hopes that others similarly situated will beclown themselves for the dismayed amusement of the nation:
He said the CPPA is looking for support from other police unions in major cities like Columbus and Dallas.
I applaud the union's willingness to take a stand in court against the maker of an item held by a person one of its members killed. Anything that draws more attention (albeit inadvertently) to the trigger-happy tendencies of Cleveland police officers and the increasing ridiculousness of police union statements and actions is fine by me.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: cleveland, police, police union, tamir rice, toy guns
Companies: cleveland patrolman's association
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
As long as we can blame someone else, we are never at fault.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hands in pocket:
He's got a gun!!! Shoot him!
Holding a toy car:
He's got a gun!!! Shoot him!
Holding a cell phone:
He's got a gun!!! Shoot him!
Standing around with hands raised:
He's got a gun!!! Shoot him!
I think the police need training on how to properly identify guns.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Training wouldn't matter
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Cleveland Patrolmen's Association announced it will soon be filing a lawsuit against toy gun manufacturers in federal court.
Of course.
Because teaching the officers to think critically is hard.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Police = Right
Well that and the standard position on every police union I've read about can be summed up as:
Police are never wrong. Ever. No matter what they do they are always in the right and their actions were justified.
It's not their fault they showed up and immediately gunned down a kid without so much as a simple check, clearly it's the fault of the kid for having something that forced them to murder him, and the toy manufacturer for making something that forced them to murder him.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Police = Right
Police are never wrong. Ever. No matter what they do they are always in the right and their actions were justified.
Even when video evidence proves they're wrong.
I wish there was a sad but true button.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Would you keep your distance because this child is a potential terrorist about to kill? I bet he was running about shooting his friends, and arguing about staying dead. The circumstances to make it 'dangerous' would be outrageous. Sitting alone sighting random people? What else could a twelve-year old do in a park?
Then the cops take 2 seconds to determine a threat and eliminate?
Human life is cheap.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Simple solution
The solution is reasonably simple, and countries like the Netherlands use this solution and are extremely strict with this: Ban all realistic-looking toy guns! Simply put, if you own something that could be mistaken for a real gun then you can be arrested and the toy will be confiscated as evidence and be destroyed. You will get a warning or fine. (Worst case? 9 months imprisonment or €20,900 fine if you have a collection or used it to commit a crime.) But possession of realistic-looking toy weapons is severely discouraged in the Netherlands. So ban the realistic-looking toy weapons and this mistake should never have to happen. The next time a 12-year old will be shot by the police will be because he had a real gun instead. Which is still no excuse to shoot immediately on sight!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Simple solution
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Simple solution
The only thing banning realistic toy guns would do is making the subsequent law-suits against the police only SLIGHTLY easier. Not much, either, given how much the courts side with the police these days.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Simple solution
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Simple solution
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Simple solution
Somehow I still think people are going to get shot. Where does it end? The police rush out with guns drawn and just start shooting and asking questions later. They know they can pretty much get away with anything. The Union protects them, the Blue Line protects them. First response is always the GUN.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Simple solution
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Simple solution
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/crime/article90905442.html
While I like to think that what you suggest would help, the problem is bigger than toy guns. It seems like you can get shot if you have a toy truck, by a "sharpshooter" no less who apparently can't, with his superior skills and equipment, tell a toy truck from a toy gun.
The problem isn't the toys. The problem is the police who, despite their cache of arms, are cowardly shitbags.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Simple solution
But, it started with a realistic-looking toy that this boy was playing with. A toy that some people thought was real! People would have been less suspicious if the whole thing was orange. It could have even been a real orange gun and people would be much less worried about it until they realize it is real. But people want to feel safe and a gun-wielding person in the streets seems very unsafe. People aren't paranoid enough to consider anything as a possible weapon. Well, not yet anyways...
In this case, the police has an excuse that they thought the weapon was real. It was a fake gun but the only way to know this was by an orange tip, which had been removed. So they shoot, as they have been trained to do! The boy dies but the "dangerous situation" has been resolved.
When you walk around with a gun, you could expect that someone will consider you hostile and they will shoot you before you can shoot them. Even if the gun is fake. By removing any fake weapons from the market that are too realistic, you can avoid this. You can make people less scared of a kid with a toy gun if the gun is bright orange and looks fake. (Yes, even if it is still real!) It is all about perceived threat.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Simple solution
We can see your angle, it just doesn't apply very well in the States.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Simple solution
A person of color, any color, will more likely be stopped and temporarily detained for questioning. It is also possible that he will be shot first by the police.
Race also matters! See this experiment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXv2Pjtc3Zk
I think this boy would have still been alive if he was white...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Simple solution
What's worse, they shoot the crap out of you, you're on the ground dying, or dead and then they go handcuff you like you're going to do something. It's just crazy. The police these days are just mostly thugs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Simple solution
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Simple solution
Don't touch my REAL guns though, that would be governmental overreach.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Simple solution
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Simple solution
The problem was caused by an overeager trigger happy cop who figured he would not be called to account. Given the number of police in the US with the same attitude, that's a big, big, big problem.
And BTW, FU.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Simple solution
First is the police issue. If it does not look like a gun then police are less likely to make a mistake.
Second you make toy guns a poor choice for criminals.
If every gun looks like a lime green buzz lightyear gun people won't use them for holdups or robbing stores.
There us plenty of upside and very little downsides. Kids will play with them no matter what they look like.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Simple solution
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Simple solution
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Simple solution
Try not to be such an obvious tool switching nicknames.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Simple solution
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Simple solution
1) 'Simple' solutions are very rarely effective solutions, as serious problems are rarely simple ones. A 'simple' solution might address the surface of the problem('the kid had a toy gun, he was shot, remove the gun and he surely wouldn't have been shot'), leaving behind the underlying issue('shoot first,investigate the corpse mindset that resulted in a cop pulling up right next to what they apparently thought was a kid armed with a deadly weapon, opening fire without bothering to check if that was the case') to fester and get worse.
2) Nice strawman, but no. Objections to responsibility being dumped on the wrong party is fairly common on TD, but if a company/individual screws up odds are good that the blame will be placed on their actions/inaction if it's reasonable to do so.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Simple solution
I know you have a vested interest in ensuring that your personal army of goons to protect your "feels" have as little cognitive ability to question your decisions as possible. But when they regularly mistake toys, video game controllers, mobile phones for loaded weaponry, enough is enough.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why is that not a premeditated murder charge?
Sorry but this is 1 time when the police did what they were supposed to do which was shut down an obvious and immediate threat of a person with a gun.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Why is that not a premeditated murder charge?
an obvious and immediate threat
To who? It was a kid in a park, they hadn't 'shot' anyone with the toy gun(the fact that such wasn't possible probably helped there), the person who called it in noted both of these facts, so exactly who was being 'protected' by showing up and immediately murdering the kid?
Even assuming the worst scenario, that it was someone with a real gun and possible deadly intentions, how hard would it have been to approach from a distance with someone else providing cover to ascertain their intentions and disarm without killing them if possible?
Not to mention, if they did think they were dealing with an armed individual, how colossally stupid do you have to be to think that driving up right next to them before getting out is a smart thing to do?
'An unknown person(kid or not) might be a threat' is hardly justification to execute them on the spot, so it's a little absurd that you seem to be arguing that they were justified here when that's all they had to go off of.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Why is that not a premeditated murder charge?
It doesn't matter how much hindsight crap you want to throw at the wall about driving too close blah blah if you wave a fake but realistic looking gun or a real gun at the police you are going to shot.
"when that's all they had to go off of." Right. See above. All they saw was a person with a gun. You don't get to wait and see if the gun is a 9mm, .45 or a bb gun. When the police roll up and see a person with a gun they have to act accordingly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Why is that not a premeditated murder charge?
The police did something incredibly stupid twice doesn't suddenly make it not a stupid action.
As for aiming a 'gun' at the police, it was their own damn fault they were in that position. They had options, they chose the one that would put them right next to who they thought was an armed individual. The 'threat' to the police that they were 'defending' themselves against only existed because of their actions.
You don't get to create a problem and then expect applause for 'solving' it, especially if the method used results in a kid murdered within seconds of you showing up on the scene.
If a given cop is too trigger happy and/or cowardly, and is willing to execute someone for merely possibly being a threat then they are more than welcome to look for safer jobs elsewhere and leave the job to people less likely to shoot first ask only if forced to later.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Why is that not a premeditated murder charge?
And driving right up to someone you suspect to be armed in an unarmored vehicle is not is not?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Why is that not a premeditated murder charge?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Why is that not a premeditated murder charge?
Deliberately putting yourself in a situation where shoot first looks reasonable, when alternative actions that would have likely resolves the situation without violence, is deliberate murder. A kid playing with what looks like a gun, but with no reports of shots fired, is not a situation that needs such a dramatic and quick resolution as that cop opted for.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Why is that not a premeditated murder charge?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Why is that not a premeditated murder charge?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I hate this stuff
A person that is a MINOR..
DONT ID the person, DONT stand around and ASK questions of people in the area..
DONT wait for 1 SHOT, to be FIRED by the PERSON/CHILD/TEEN..
A 10 year old firing a GOOD SIZED GUN, isnt going to hit much.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fake weapons...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Please file
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Curious
How, exactly ? Are cops likely to accidentally take their kid's toy gun to work instead of the their "work gun" ? Please tell me your cops are trained better than that...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Curious
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thanks Partner!
MAYBE the driver wanted his partner to get shot since he was going to tell about other "situations" back at the precinct.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Thanks Partner!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Statistically
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Statistically
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Largest "Gang" in America - The Cops
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Making kids toys look like toya causes no harm, and could help the situation. Why so negative?
TD is pretty good at bkami g everyone else but the responsible party. Its why pirates are never responsible for piracy, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
(the media) making leos look like real humans is bad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Search For Pink M16
So. If a real gun can look fake as hell, and a fake gun can look real, what is law enforcement supposed to gain by going after the toy companies?
This is idiotic. Guns in the hands of police are the problem. Take them away and we'd be a hell of a lot safer. Fire the police and we'd be better off still.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Search For Pink M16
But again, this situation had two problems, one of them being a very trigger-happy police who shot an armed child even though gun ownership in the USA is legal. This boy wasn't shot because he had a gun, but because they considered him dangerous.
So had his gun clearly looked like a fake then he would not be considered dangerous and still be alive. Many of those pink M16's and pink AR-15's still look realistic enough to confuse people. People feel less threatened if you point a Buzz Lightyear raygun at them, no matter if it is a real gun or not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Search For Pink M16
They look realistic because they are real.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Search For Pink M16
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not just "feel compelled"!
Police unions do not just feel compelled to defend everyone they represent; they are legally obligated to do so. That is enough of a problem when it happens, but suing a toy manufacturer goes beyond the call of duty.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not just "feel compelled"!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's incredible that people will go to such lengths to justify state sanctioned child killing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The police have issues, no doubt about it. Nobody is excusing them. But come on, let's not make things worse by making it harder for them to tell who does and does not actually have a real gun n their hands.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Nobody is excusing them
And yet here you are, sucking all the cock you can to explain away their failure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Just wondering
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The officers should be subjected to the following reviews:
Eyesight: Could not identify a child with toy at close range.
Situational awareness: Small person in a park with a suspicious object. No reports of gun shots. No reports of injuries. No one running away in terror. No screams of horror.
Tactical training: Had no plan other then charging in with shooting as only option.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: tom on May 6th, 2017 @ 4:01pm
Child was 12 and almost 1.6 meter tall. No easy way to know age for sure.
Gun had been modified to remove the orange tip to make it look more real
The area of that park has strong gang activity.
The police would be strung up if they let someone armed walk around a park they have to take it seriously.
This officer was trigger happy and nade a bad situstion much worse. But with an obviously fake gun the officer would never have been in that position to start with.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Smoke and...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For reference
Two officers killed in the past not 50 yards from the spot.
The more you know...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: For reference
Well no wonder Tamir Rice is dead: two dead officers justifies summary execution of everyone in the neighborhood!
...or it could be that each case should be judged on its own merits, without guilt-by-association hand-washes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: For reference
[ link to this | view in chronology ]