Originally Posted by Sly

That's not really it. We are seeing a portion of a story and everyone here is suddenly an expert on the situation.

First off, South St. Louis is not an area I would want to be in (ranked one of the most dangerous areas in the country.) Second, we have no clue what the kid did, or her mother did. Third, we have no clue what else was going on in the store.

Now if this copper was an asshat after all the details come out, fire him, strip him of any medals and any pensions and any medical benefits.

I don't buy the "she was only 12 years old" argument. 12-year-olds kill. Was this 12-year-old going to kill the copper? Highly unlikely, but acting like a 12-year-old can not pose a threat in a volatile situation is extremely naïve. How would the story be reading if the 12-year-old distracted the copper while the mother pulled a gun on the copper and put a bullet in his head?