It's always sad when someone dies, but from what I've read about the story I would say the police are justified. But in the end none of us know. We weren't there.
I agree, normally with these sorts of the stories (like the unarmed kid who got shot when he jumped out of a shed at an officer) I'm against the use of guns, but in this case for all the officers knew the 15 year old could well have been holding a real gun. I'd prefer it if he hadn't died but in the circumstance considering there were many other children's lives at risk, they had no choice.Corporal Yakob said:It sucks but I'm with the cops on this one: the kid shouldn't have been waving an pellet gun that looks indistinguishable from the real thing in front of cops, and he definitely shouldn't have been waving it about after being warned to drop it.
Because that is what they are trained to do. Hell, its what I'd do in a situation where someone was pointing a gun at me. I'm shooting to kill, not to wound and give them a chance to return fire.manic_depressive13 said:"Why was so much excess force used on a minor?" he asked. "Three shots. Why not one that would bring him down?"
He has a point there. This story is pretty fucked. Yes, the police had reason to feel threatened, but he was just a kid. He obviously snapped over something but he didn't deserve to die. Why did they shoot him three times? Why won't they release what the kid said before he died? Do we have anything other than their word that the gun "closely resembled the real thing"? It just kind of stinks.
Because one bullet isn't necessarily going to take someone down, and the last thing you want is a pissed-off injured person with a gun. They probably won't release what he said because they're being investigated, and it's somehow relevant to that.manic_depressive13 said:"Why was so much excess force used on a minor?" he asked. "Three shots. Why not one that would bring him down?"
He has a point there. This story is pretty fucked. Yes, the police had reason to feel threatened, but he was just a kid. He obviously snapped over something but he didn't deserve to die. Why did they shoot him three times? Why won't they release what the kid said before he died? Do we have anything other than their word that the gun "closely resembled the real thing"? It just kind of stinks.
Far as I understand it, police shootings normally go down at less than eight meters distance between the officers and the suspects, which is why they tend to favour hollow-point/fragmenting rounds and shotguns.manic_depressive13 said:"Why was so much excess force used on a minor?" he asked. "Three shots. Why not one that would bring him down?"
He has a point there.
i have an old BB gun, and if you didn't look closely at it, it could easily be mistaken for a real gun; and considering the fact that, if someone, even a belligerent middleschooler, points a weapon at you, a moment of hesitation could mean life or death.Cazza said:"closely resembled the real thing." How far away was the cop. Well far enough to believe it was a real gun. Cops don't just shoot people with pellet guns. If you had a gun pointed at you and you had a gun. I beat your going to shoot them.
I guess its an excellent argument for issuing tasors to police, to avoid these misunderstandings.JoJoDeathunter said:I agree, normally with these sorts of the stories (like the unarmed kid who got shot when he jumped out of a shed at an officer) I'm against the use of guns, but in this case for all the officers knew the 15 year old could well have been holding a real gun. I'd prefer it if he hadn't died but in the circumstance considering there were many other children's lives at risk, they had no choice.Corporal Yakob said:It sucks but I'm with the cops on this one: the kid shouldn't have been waving an pellet gun that looks indistinguishable from the real thing in front of cops, and he definitely shouldn't have been waving it about after being warned to drop it.
And the father's comment: "Why was so much excess force used on a minor?" he asked. "Three shots. Why not one that would bring him down?"Kenbo Slice said:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/04/police-kill-armed-8thgrad_n_1183517.html?icid=maing-grid7|aim|dl1|sec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D124955
I put quotations on the word armed because the kid only had a pellet gun.
What are your guys's take on this?
I think it's excessive, I understand the cops were just doing their jobs but Jesus there had to have been another way.
This.Samurai Silhouette said:8th grade, should have known by then. How is the justification even up for debate?
I'd be fine with taser use over the use of guns where possible personally, so long as police treat them as the potentially lethal weapons they are which many sadly don't. They're seen as non-lethal, but the reality is, police can't know if a person has an underlying medical condition where taser use may kill them, and too many who have them simply jump to that as their first option when dealing with an unruly suspect. If police were held to the same standard every time they fired a taser as they are supposed to be every time they fire their gun I'd be less put off by their use.Redlin5 said:Incidents like these always make me feel angry when people campaign against tasers. If a cop feels threatened, he will pull a weapon. However, if tasers have been banned the only choice is to shoot the person in the chest. Tasers may not be perfect but in incidents like these it is preferable to killing the youngster.
My thoughts exactly. Somebody who points a fake gun at police and declines to drop it when asked multiple times WANTS to be shot.Zack Alklazaris said:I'm on the cops side on this. I'm also wondering if this was a suicide by cop.