To Protect and to Serve...

Status
Not open for further replies.
#276
#276
volmaverick said:
On October 22, a 13-year old boy was shot and killed by Santa Rosa, California Sheriff's deputies after they saw him walking down the street with what they thought to be an "assault rifle."

According to the Associated Press, the deputies ordered the boy to drop the weapon and eventually "fired several rounds." The boy fell to the ground and was handcuffed, after which the deputies "began administering first aid."

The 13-year old was pronounced dead at the scene. It turns out his "assault weapon" was only a replica. He also had a "plastic handgun in his waistband."

CA Deputies Shoot, Kill 13-Year-Old Carrying Fake 'Assault Weapon'
Click to expand...


Interesting that the link you gave omitted these rather important details:

"Two Sonoma County deputies on patrol saw the boy walking with what appeared to be a high-powered weapon Tuesday afternoon in Santa Rosa, sheriff's Lt. Dennis O'Leary said.

The replica gun resembled an AK-47 with a black magazine cartridge and brown butt, according to a photograph released by the sheriff's office. Deputies would only learn after the shooting that it wasn't an actual firearm, according to O'Leary."
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#277
#277
lawgator1 said:
Interesting that the link you gave omitted these rather important details:

"Two Sonoma County deputies on patrol saw the boy walking with what appeared to be a high-powered weapon Tuesday afternoon in Santa Rosa, sheriff's Lt. Dennis O'Leary said.

The replica gun resembled an AK-47 with a black magazine cartridge and brown butt, according to a photograph released by the sheriff's office. Deputies would only learn after the shooting that it wasn't an actual firearm, according to O'Leary."
Click to expand...

LOL, it described it as an "assault weapon" replica. Why the hell does it have to give the exact details? Good grief...
 
#278
#278
VOLinthaNATI said:
LOL, it described it as an "assault weapon" replica. Why the hell does it have to give the exact details? Good grief...
Click to expand...


I've actually defended lawsuits involving very similar scenarios. Toy guns are frequently given a red tip to the muzzle, indicating it is a toy. But kids sometimes either paint over it or break that off to make it look real.

If you want to blame someone for this, you might consider first looking in the mirror. The NRA and the gun-happy dementia they have spooled up are top of the blame list, here. They make kids want to have weapons, or look like they have weapons, and they have law enforcement on guard because they have to assume everyone is packing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#279
#279
lawgator1 said:
If you want to blame someone for this, you might consider first looking in the mirror. The NRA and the gun-happy dementia they have spooled up are top of the blame list, here. They make kids want to have weapons, or look like they have weapons, and they have law enforcement on guard because they have to assume everyone is packing.
Click to expand...

Wait, what?
 
#280
#280
lawgator1 said:
I've actually defended lawsuits involving very similar scenarios. Toy guns are frequently given a red tip to the muzzle, indicating it is a toy. But kids sometimes either paint over it or break that off to make it look real.

If you want to blame someone for this, you might consider first looking in the mirror. The NRA and the gun-happy dementia they have spooled up are top of the blame list, here. They make kids want to have weapons, or look like they have weapons, and they have law enforcement on guard because they have to assume everyone is packing.
Click to expand...

:post-4-1090547912::post-4-1090547912::post-4-1090547912::post-4-1090547912:

Do you own a TV? Do you ever watch it? How about an Xbox or a Playstation?
 
#286
#286
lawgator1 said:
I guess maybe the part where he pointed it at them.
Click to expand...

LOL, where exactly in the article you posted does it say that?

I'll give you a clue, it doesn't. It simply says the boy "turned towards the officers."

A 13-year-old boy carrying a pellet gun that resembled an assault rifle was fatally shot by a Sonoma County sheriff's deputy when the youth turned the barrel in his direction, police said Wednesday.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#287
#287
lawgator1 said:
I guess maybe the part where he pointed it at them.
Click to expand...

These can be complicated encounters. Here's a good baseline; if it had been a legally armed "regular" citizen that shot this person using, for all intents and purposes, the same reasoning set forth by the officer how much trouble would they be in?
 
#288
#288
hndog609 said:
These can be complicated encounters. Here's a good baseline; if it had been a legally armed "regular" citizen that shot this person using, for all intents and purposes, the same reasoning set forth by the officer how much trouble would they be in?
Click to expand...

GOOD ? waiting on LG answer

the cop used his gun to protect himself from what he "THOUGHT" was a deadly threat!

I guess LG thinks the cop has that right but not the "regular" citizen
 
Last edited:
#289
#289
volmaverick said:
GOOD ? waiting on LG answer

the cop used his gun to protect himself from what he "THOUGHT" was a deadly threat!

I guess LG thinks the cop has that right but not the "regular" citizen
Click to expand...

Regular citizens have that same right. If someone points the barrel of a gun at you, you're allowed to defend yourself.

I would expect any legally carrying citizen to be treated the same way.
 
#292
#292
volfanngaytorland said:
Yes they do.

Edit: I do. After seeing a few threads, I'm not quite sure if you have that right.
Click to expand...

So a regular citizen walking down the street in Chicago has the right to carry a gun and shoot at someone pointing a gun at him like these cops had?

Yes or no
 
Last edited:
#295
#295
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#296
#296
BigOrange15 said:
Have you ever posted a positive article in your life or are you just dead set on being a negative ******* all the time?
Click to expand...

You should read the thread title. Might help you understand this thread and all the other posts by various members
 
#297
#297
Obsessed said:
You should read the thread title. Might help you understand this thread and all the other posts by various members
Click to expand...

The thread title is "To Protect and Serve." That's what I try to do every ****ing day and I get sick of seeing story after story of the bad things that officers do. Officers do good deeds every day, they help people every day, they may save a life if they are very lucky. I realize I'm asking a lot from some people but *******, post some positive **** every once in a while and acknowledge when something good happens. The motto is what it is for a reason. Good officers try and LIVE it and are willing to take a bullet for people like volmaverick that hate or distrust them. We aren't all like these dickheads that people just LOVE to post about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#298
#298
BigOrange15 said:
The thread title is "To Protect and Serve." That's what I try to do every ****ing day and I get sick of seeing story after story of the bad things that officers do. Officers do good deeds every day, they help people every day, they may save a life if they are very lucky. I realize I'm asking a lot from some people but *******, post some positive **** every once in a while and acknowledge when something good happens. The motto is what it is for a reason. Good officers try and LIVE it and are willing to take a bullet for people like volmaverick that hate or distrust them. We aren't all like these dickheads that people just LOVE to post about.
Click to expand...

I understand my friend. I share your opinion. Just don't let it get to you too much The Leo's on this forum are stand up. ( except punkcat. He likes to gloat over his new toys :) )
 
#300
#300
VOLinthaNATI said:
LOL, where exactly in the article you posted does it say that?

I'll give you a clue, it doesn't. It simply says the boy "turned towards the officers."
Click to expand...

Here's the thing. Use of force for the majority of departments out there, whether they be federal, state or local depends on certain criteria for lethal use of force to be justified.

Intent
Ability-Capability
Opportunity

That's pretty much what FLETC teaches. Anyway, officer pulls up on someone carrying what appears to be a rifle. Individual already has ability-capability and opportunity. Swinging the muzzle towards the officer demonstrates likely intent. And use of force up to and including deadly force is justified in that situation. The situation must be judged from the officer on scene.

It's a crappy situation overall. Kid died and the officers have to live the rest of his life knowing they shot a kid with a toy gun even though the shoot was likely justified at the time.

You can blame the parents for not having that kid wrap up the toy in a blanket or put it in a bag instead of walking around with it.

You can blame the kid for not listening to the cops.

You can blame the cops for what was a split second moment in time they had to decide whether they were protecting their lives and the lives of the public.

You can blame the toy maker for making such a realistic looking weapon.

You can blame society for allowing crime to get out of control the way it is.

Lot's of blame to be passed around. But in the end we are faced with the facts of a family is mourning and two deputies have to face the the nightmares of ending a life based on what was later determined as a toy.
 
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement

Back
Top