|
After seeing the replies, I think it would be better to post this somewhere else than the Lounge in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, as a gun owner with a "scary black gun" that someone in an email insulted (no offense taken), I can tell you that the boy did not have a "toy". He either had an airsoft rifle OR a pellet rifle made to look like the real thing.
Again, it's not a toy. It fires projectiles and as such, no orange tip. I can understand the officers' concern. Score 1 for them.
HOWEVER, they seriously f'd up. They took cover behind their car. They had cover. The individual was turning around. What would YOU do if you heard someone yelling at you? It's a natural human reaction. Plus there are insufficient details in the police report - how long between him starting to turn around in response to the "drop it" and when the police opened fire? But, this I find telling:
""The deputy's mindset was that he was fearful that he was going to be shot," said Santa Rosa police Lt. Paul Henry..."
They are already trying to justify the shooting.
Score -3 for them. They overreacted.
-----
The fact is, I can LEGALLY walk down the street in broad daylight with my firearm, just like this kid was doing.
Charlie Gilley
<italic>You're going to tell me what I want to know, or I'm going to beat you to death in your own house.
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
charlieg wrote: The fact is, I can LEGALLY walk down the street in broad daylight with my firearm, just like this kid was doing.
Yes. But if a cop yells at you, twice, to put the weapon down, and you don't - you know how that is going to turn out. If you start to turn, and raise your weapon they are going to fire. To protect themselves. To protect the public. Because they are scared. Maybe all three. Whatever, it's not going to end well for you, and you know that.
If it happened the way the cops describe (and these are cops, so I'd want video to prove it rather than trust their word) then the outcome was pretty much the only one that could happen in modern America.
The only instant messaging I do involves my middle finger.
English doesn't borrow from other languages.
English follows other languages down dark alleys, knocks them over and goes through their pockets for loose grammar.
|
|
|
|
|
To a degree, I agree. Goodness, did I just say that?
Just the way the police statement was phrased is all I need to know. They are in CYA mode.
Here is a 13 yo kid. His *back* was turned to them. He hears someone yell, "put the gun down" and all he does is turn around to see who is yelling at him... Smart? No. Natural reaction? Yes. Did he raise the gun? very debatable. If he's walking along, it's likely not even to his shoulder. Sorry, the entire point of TRAINING is to be able to discern the real situation.
The fact is that a good majority of the police in this country are on a power trip. It's not about protecting the public. I'm sure that there are good ones. We also have issues with late night police invasions. If some dark cladded figures were outside my door then kicked it in, the LAST thing I would do is drop my weapon.
It should be interesting as more facts come out. I don't think we have the entire story.
Charlie Gilley
<italic>You're going to tell me what I want to know, or I'm going to beat you to death in your own house.
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
Not going to argue about the rest, but:charlieg wrote: They took cover behind their car. They had cover
Yes against a pellet gun a car is a cover, but if it had been the AK-47 that the policemen allegedly believed it was, a car would have been marginally better than a cardboard box. Unless the police is equipped with armoured cars nowadays.
Be excellent to each other. And... PARTY ON, DUDES!
Abraham Lincoln
|
|
|
|
|
I agree. But it should have given them a few more seconds to consider the situation.
Time will tell as more statements are made...
Charlie Gilley
<italic>You're going to tell me what I want to know, or I'm going to beat you to death in your own house.
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
charlieg wrote: HOWEVER, they seriously f'd up. They took cover behind their car. They had cover. The individual was turning around. What would YOU do if you heard someone yelling at you? It's a natural human reaction. Plus there are insufficient details in the police report - how long between him starting to turn around in response to the "drop it" and when the police opened fire?
Err...have you ever been shot at? Or thought that you would be shot at? You don't get to sit down in a conference room for several hours to decide the best action.
Police are not trained to wait to see if someone is going to shoot. There is no mandate that they must wait to be shot before returning fire. They actually do get to shoot first. They don't have to wait to see if someone heard the instruction nor even if they understood it. It isn't an all or nothing situation. They, per the report, gave a warning. If the person had been 25 and high on PCP this would have never been seen anywhere except in the local paper.
charlieg wrote: They overreacted.
They reacted just like trained officers do.
charlieg wrote: The fact is, I can LEGALLY walk down the street in broad daylight with my firearm, just like this kid was doing.
The fact is that if you walk down the street with a drawn weapon and when the police order you to put it down (which is going to happen if you walk around like that for very long) you turn on them then you are going to get shot. And it will be ruled justified.
And even if you walk down the street with a holstered weapon they you are probably going to be approached by the police at some point.
|
|
|
|
|
"The fact is that if you walk down the street with a drawn weapon and when the police order you to put it down (which is going to happen if you walk around like that for very long) you turn on them then you are going to get shot. And it will be ruled justified."
Drawn? All we know is he was carrying it. I've ready everything I can find, nothing suggests this kid pointed the weapon in any sort of threatening manner. He didn't "turn on them" - he may have turned around. That is all we know.
I hope you never are waved over by a police officer on the side of the road. These days, If you don't stop fast enough, he might conclude that "he is fearing for his life because you aren't slowing down fast enough...." and he fires into your vehicle. Happens way too much.
Or yet, maybe you live next door to someone wanted by the police and they go to the wrong house - your house. You get shot because at 3am, you're not thinking clearly and cannot respond to commands fast enough for the assault team....
Charlie Gilley
<italic>You're going to tell me what I want to know, or I'm going to beat you to death in your own house.
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
charlieg wrote: Drawn? All we know is he was carrying it.
From the article that was posted "but he instead raised it in the deputy's direction".
And given that it was described as "The gun looked just like an AK-47 assault rifle, with a black body and ammunition magazine," then he was probably carrying it in exactly the way that one would carry it to shoot it.
charlieg wrote: I hope you never are waved over by a police officer on the side of the road.
These days, If you don't stop fast enough, he might conclude that "he is fearing
for his life because you aren't slowing down fast enough...." and he fires into
your vehicle. Happens way too much.
Nonsense. Police fire at vehicles for several reasons but it has NOTHING to do with routine traffic stops nor if someone attempts to evade a stop. Matter of FACT a common scenario with an attempt to evade on a routine stop is that the police let the car go - because they recognize that a high speed chase with no other extenuating circumstances is too dangerous for everyone. (Matter of fact I have seen comments from motorcyclists that cite this policy explicitly in terms of them speeding away due to their perception that they are being targeted for stops.)
The most common scenarios for shooting at a car are because the suspect is SHOOTING at the police from inside the car or because the suspect is trying to run down the police officer with the car.
charlieg wrote: You get shot because at 3am, you're not thinking clearly and cannot respond to
commands fast enough for the assault team....
Yes that is tragic. However it has nothing to do with this situation. And it also ignores the reality that the legal system is human just like everyone else and so mistakes happen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carefully.... is how they are supposed to react. It's still legal to walk around with any weapon like that.
We still don't know exactly how the 13 yo "threatened" the police. All we know is that he *may* have turned around when they yelled at him. Autopsy will reveal more.
Still leaning toward the trigger happy opinion. As for the guy you cite, he was a WANTED felon. Not even a reasonable comparison, but it does lead to the question - if the police are now scared all of the time because of how whacky society is, then is it reasonable for them to shoot if they get nervous?
If so, it's going to get messy.
Charlie Gilley
<italic>You're going to tell me what I want to know, or I'm going to beat you to death in your own house.
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
Good Morning CodeProject ![Java | [Coffee]](https://codeproject.freetls.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/coffee.gif)
Hello World!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1:40AM.
Yeah - I guess this counts as morning. Sorta.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
This thread reminds me of this joke now
Musharraf calls Bush on 11th sept:
Musharraf: Mr President, I would like to express my condolences to you. It is a real tragedy. So many people, such great buildings. I would like to ensure that we had nothing in connection with that.
Bush: What buildings? What people??
Musharraf: Oh, and what time is it in America now?
Bush: It's eight in the morning.
Musharraf: Oops...Will call you back in an hour!
thatrajaNobody remains a virgin, Life screws everyone 
|
|
|
|
|
I think they both were good friends. 
|
|
|
|
|
I think your local setting for the codeproject is wrong for my country, it clams that I will write this 6:57, while it is actually 7:57 here. Perhaps you have fed the servers some coffee after all 
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: I guess this counts as morning
Close enough eh?
Hello World!
|
|
|
|
|
What's wrong with you guys? It's 10 PM and it has been a looooooooooooooong week. I am ready for some 
Soren Madsen
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
|
|
|
|
|
You americans, you just have to be special, with your own time zone
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, well it keeps the hamsters busy. 
Soren Madsen
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
|
|
|
|
|
Gooooooooood Niiiiiiiiight to you SM
Hello World!
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you very much and please take it easy with the caffeeeeeiiiiiine. 
BTW, your profile says you are in the US, but based on this thread, I suspect that is not the case.
Soren Madsen
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
|
|
|
|
|
I need to updated it its on my To Do List if you know what I mean 
Hello World!
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
