Police shoot 13 year old carrying fake rifle.

Xcathdra
reply to post by blackthorne

 

Guys you cannot judge this after the fact. What people fail to take into account is you are getting all of the facts presented in one cohesive flow.

Totality of circumstances

Put yourself in the Deputies position..

You are driving down the road and spot a person carrying a weapon. The deputies had no idea if the weapon was fake or real until after the shooting occurred.

The standard is:
What threat did the officer perceive when deadly force was used.

While people are spending hours / days discussing this incident, the 2 deputies had to make a split second decision.

People can try to monday morning quarterback this all they want by arguing what the deputies should or should not have done. Anyone can say how they would have acted in that situation. Truth is you will have no idea how you would react until you are facing the same situation.

The simple fact is we were not present for the situation. We dont know what the weapons looked like. We dont know how the 13 year old was acting towards the deputies (including body movement).

Food for thought.

No. Cops are TRAINED on how to react. Exactly the same as we were trained in the military.

I had to draw my weapon on a State Trooper of all people once while he had his hand on his pistol. Now if I had been one of these pigs I would have put two in his chest when he did not comply with my orders immediately. Thank god it didny come to that. But since he did not draw his weapon, he "got to go home that night." He was smarter than these idiots. And so was I.

Point is, you react the way you are TRAINED to react.

Also if anyone read any of the comments from people that live in Santa Rosa it appeared the "pellet" gun was painted all black to look as real as possible. The fake handgun in the victims waist was also painted all black. I stand by my previous statement that some of this blame falls on the victim.

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by benrl

 

If I'm not mistaken, we grew up in the same general area of the state, in fact. I hailed from Orange County and a humble home just South of the 91/55 interchange in Orange to be specific. It was a different state and different nation overall then too.

For instance, I took a .22 rifle into Junior High School for a show and tell. They simply asked my father, in his role as a Police Officer, to remove the firing pin and make it 100% inoperative. That was sufficient back then. Now? I'm not sure you'd get a gun into a class there if a cop was actually carrying it for something other than a response call. I'll also say this case:

The Mother Is 'Still Struggling' . . . . . . Ex-Officer Who Shot Boy Still 'Depressed' : 5-Year-Old's Life, Death Linked With TV, Litigation (1985)

....was formative in how I grew to see Police, their actions and the consequences of them. Through a whole series of events later, my father and stepmother came to have contact with the Officer who shot that boy. It damn near destroyed the Officer, utterly. Much the same as I suspect the Officers in the case this thread is about, will have major issues for life. Tragedy....for all around. (For anyone interested, Anthony Sperl managed to go on and help a good many other Cops who faced similar personal crisis)

Yep we did, same areas, and where you and I experience where probably in middle to upper middle class environments. The experience is not universal when dealing with the police in various areas, Look at some of the responses, already getting the hes Latino MS-13 likely hood member... (as if being Latino is enough to warrant death, because you know gangs...)

Than its clearly a training issue,

Cops go in gun ho, and than reality sets in and they see they murdered a child.

What ever the root cause it needs to stop, YOU should be messed up when you kill a child.

It damn well better haunt you for the rest of your days, They better go to sleep every night seeing his face.

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by JayinAR

 

I understand your position and how deep, pure and raw your hatred for Police is, on what would appear to be all levels and all situations. It's impossible to mistake. I can also appreciate your position while strongly disagreeing with it. If I claimed to not have seen abuse that made me want to go punch a cop in the nose, I'd be a liar and a hypocrite. I absolutely have ..and some of it right here by ATS stories.

However, you've spoken of this as if we've watched a video where the kid did not, at any time, point his 'weapon' at police? Now my whole attitude will change on a dime if I see that in full evidence and they had options other than shooting.

The problem is, as I've been hunting for more? I've found nothing to describe what events came between their first shouts, as reported, to drop his rifle ..and when they opened fire. Do you have a source I've not seen? I'm very curious to see more if there is more to see here.

Im willing to make this statement right here and now (some may know I have had to self defend against a bugler, and it messes with you).

That if I was faced with a child with a gun, and my life was at risk, I would take the chance of death to save the child.

My life is not so valuable that I can justify continuing it, by murdering a child, no mater the threat the child faced to me.

I guess that just makes me crazy in this world.

JayinAR
No. Cops are TRAINED on how to react. Exactly the same as we were trained in the military.

With some very major exceptions. For starters we dont use the term collateral damage.

As for training I agree.. Peple dont rise to the occasion, they fall back to their level of training.

JayinAR
I had to draw my weapon on a State Trooper of all people once while he had his hand on his pistol. Now if I had been one of these pigs I would have put two in his chest when he did not comply with my orders immediately. Thank god it didny come to that. But since he did not draw his weapon, he "got to go home that night." He was smarter than these idiots. And so was I.

How about some context for your story above? Why did u have contact with a state trooper? Why would you need to pull a gun when an officers gun is holstered? Basically what you are saying in your story is its ok for you to escalate the situation because you were involved and perceived a threat from the trooper yet you refuse to apply that same standard to law enforcement?

JayinAR
Point is, you react the way you are TRAINED to react.

Ive been a police officer for about 10 years now so I dont need the lecture on training standards.

Secondly I would wager there is a large group of people on this site who have no formal training at all. From weapons use to the law.

A 5 year old kid with a gun is as deadly as a 95 year old with a gun.

Ignoring a threat simply because the person is 5 or 95 is a good way to get kiled. Dont believe me? Check with the Michigan State Police. One of their officers stopped a vehicle for speeding. As he got to the drivers window the 85 year old lady who just got done killing her husband killed the officer.

Complaceny kills....

I try not to get too involved in stories like this because all too often both sides are right.....and wrong.

So I will just say that I hope this kid rests in peace. I hope god greeted you as a friend.

reply to post by Xcathdra


I had contact with the Statie in the weeks following 9-11 (can't remember exactly when it was, its all a blur now). Anyhow, we were on gate duty doing 12 hour shifts, 100% checks for bombs, terrorists, whatever and the gate was just off a main highway. The cop was tasked to direct traffic around the clog we were creating on the highway. The dude snapped and walked up to us shouting to hurry the hell up or else as he was reaching to unholster his pistol. He didn't get the chance to pull it. He had 4 M4s pointed at his chest with very clear orders to remove his hand from his holster.

The next day his superior matched him on post and made him issue an apology. The excuse was he was having domestic issues, but all I saw was a power hungry cop.

As for the rest, yes, complacency kills, but it is np excuse to just start sending bullets down range at the first sign of potential danger.

This is one of those no win situations that occur in life and sadly a young child has lost his life.

I guess it comes down to how realistic that weapon looked in his hand, did he making any threatening moves , did the police do everything they could until they felt they were at risk. I hope that I am never in nor is anyone I care about in a scenario like this where they have to make such a choice. It's easy for folks to sit behind a monitor and armchair quarterback something like this but until you are faced with it no one knows how they would respond. Anyone saying that they would let the kid shoot them vs taking him out first if they had the chance..good luck with that.

Looking at what has been presented I have to think their were other ways they could have disarmed him. The only way i could see that the police should have taken the steps they did was if they felt they were or others were threatened by what they thought was a real weapon. None of knows what transpired and what caused the LEOs to feel threatened.

Both parties are accountable it would seem and in the end it doesn't matter because multiple families have now been ruined and one young life was cut short.

As a side note age apparently makes a person no less dangerous... 14 Year Old Accused of Killing Teacher

JayinAR
I had contact with the Statie in the weeks following 9-11 (can't remember exactly when it was, its all a blur now). Anyhow, we were on gate duty doing 12 hour shifts, 100% checks for bombs, terrorists, whatever and the gate was just off a main highway. The cop was tasked to direct traffic around the clog we were creating on the highway. The dude snapped and walked up to us shouting to hurry the hell up or else as he was reaching to unholster his pistol. He didn't get the chance to pull it. He had 4 M4s pointed at his chest with very clear orders to remove his hand from his holster.

The next day his superior matched him on post and made him issue an apology. The excuse was he was having domestic issues, but all I saw was a power hungry cop.

While I can see, somewhat, justification to point guns at the trooper, that situation is unique.

TRying to use that story as a comparison to this one though is fundamentally flawed. A State of Emergency existed where as in the op case it did not.

As a side note I do not and will not support the use of the military in a law enforcement function (unless they are state guard units and not under orders).

JayinAR
As for the rest, yes, complacency kills, but it is np excuse to just start sending bullets down range at the first sign of potential danger.

They didnt... Lets review:
Deputies, in a marked patrol unit, observe a person with a weapon.
They stopped and while wearing their uniform made contact.

The person was ordered several times to drop the weapon and failed to comply - several times.

So no the deputies did not just start shooting. They progressed through their use of force continuum.


Instead of demoning all law enforcement for their actions how about we look at the entire picture?

Please tell me where personal accountability comes into play here. The kid is the one who went walking down the street and the kid is the one who refused to complay with commands.

Where is the personal accountability argument for the kid? The police are not responsible for other peoples actions.

reply to post by blackthorne


u know what...Its my personal opinion that posts like this should be removed with extreme prejudice. If i must explain why..then here it is. exploitation of trgedy.

reply to post by Xcathdra


No, but they are responsible for their own.

In my story, if the cop had pointed his weapon at me, I would have shot him. Simple as that.

In this story, the cops fired APPARENTLY without any threat of bodily harm to themselves. They skipped a couple of steps in the "use of force continuum". You don't go around shooting people like freakin' John Wayne simply because they aren't listening to you. Jesus!

Xcathdra


Please tell me where personal accountability comes into play here. The kid is the one who went walking down the street and the kid is the one who refused to complay with commands.

Where is the personal accountability argument for the kid? The police are not responsible for other peoples actions.

edit on 23-10-2013 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

Firstly the "kid" is a minor. He isnt fully responsible for his actions until hes an adult, for the very reason that this case highlights, his actions can be erroneous and misguided, thats why he cant join the army, thats why he cannot buy alcohol and thats why he cannot have sexual relations. He isnt mature enough to make a sensible decision.

The police are fully responsible for THEIR OWN ACTIONS, the police shot the boy, the boy didnt shoot the police with a toy, and being as the kid knew his toy gun WAS A TOY, I find it highly unlikely he used it with threatening behaviour, I know the schools are bad these days, but kids aint that stupid.

And when it comes to accountability the ADULT in the situation is accountable, let alone the high moral standing a police officer is duly required to exercise in his role as defender of justice and the rule of law.
Now I see a major breach in the rule of law, do you expect the police officer that shot the boy will be held to account for this breach in the rule of law? I personally expect not. But hey stranger things have happened.

OneManArmy

Firstly the "kid" is a minor. He isnt fully responsible for his actions until hes an adult, for the very reason that this case highlights, his actions can be erroneous and misguided, thats why he cant join the army, thats why he cannot buy alcohol and thats why he cannot have sexual relations. He isnt mature enough to make a sensible decision.

and if that was a real gun, is it any less dangerous because a kid has it in his hands?

Again I say..this is a no win situation that is easy to question from behind a monitor.

opethPA

OneManArmy

Firstly the "kid" is a minor. He isnt fully responsible for his actions until hes an adult, for the very reason that this case highlights, his actions can be erroneous and misguided, thats why he cant join the army, thats why he cannot buy alcohol and thats why he cannot have sexual relations. He isnt mature enough to make a sensible decision.

and if that was a real gun, is it any less dangerous because a kid has it in his hands?

The fact of which could be established within seconds if any sort of dialogue was allowed to take place before bullets left guns. It was a case of a boy not doing what he was told to do, and defying the orders of a police officer who took offense at not getting his way so in the increasingly popular police tactic of shoot if someone dares disobey their authority, the boy became the latest victim of a scarily increasing police trend.

OneManArmy

The fact of which could be established within seconds if any sort of dialogue was allowed to take place before bullets left guns. It was a case of a boy not doing what he was told to do, and defying the orders of a police officer who took offense at not getting his way so in the increasingly popular police tactic of shoot if someone dares disobey their authority, the boy became the latest victim of a scarily increasing police trend.

That doesn't answer my question.
You said that because he was a child he is not responsible for his actions and I asked would a real gun be any less dangerous because he is a child?

Why didn't you stop this from happening since you were there and you know what happened. How do you know the officers didn't feel threatened by someone with what they thought was a real gun. How do you know they shot him because he disobeyed their orders?

there is no draft for law enforcement , so when you here these little sissies talk about officer safety , they need to be reminded that they chose this proffesion , even if someone is armed with a real gun , as long as they are not menacing , or threating anyone, these cops have no right to even draw their weapons . so after they kill whomever their target at the time happens to be , they no longer have to worry about the victims intent . i agree that all public employees need to wear cameras at all times , even when doing desk duty . also isnt putting officer safety above the publics safety a violation of the equal protection laws?

It was a 13 year old, not some adult. He might not understand the seriousness at the time.

JayinAR
No, but they are responsible for their own.

As is the kid,

JayinAR
In my story, if the cop had pointed his weapon at me, I would have shot him. Simple as that.

Speaking of trigger happy... You do see the double standard you just made right?

JayinAR
In this story, the cops fired APPARENTLY without any threat of bodily harm to themselves.

Wrong.. You nor I get to decide if an officer perceives a threat or not. That falls to the officer and the subsequent inquiries.

Again you are ignoring the fact the kid had a weapon. While we can go back and forth, people have to accept the fact that we dont know what the weapons look like. To base your argument off of the no threat opinion does not hold up.

JayinAR
They skipped a couple of steps in the "use of force continuum".

And? Contrarty to popular belief and officer is not required to start at the bottom and work their way up. Confronting a person who is holding what looked like a real gun allows law enforcement to jump steps. We do not have to start at any particular "level".

Steps (in general)
* - Physical presence
* - Verbal Commands
* - Empty Hand
* - Intermediate weapons
* - Lethal force

Lets compare now -
Physical presence - Officers in a marked patrol unit while wearing offical uniforms - check

Verbal Commands - They gave multiple commands to drop the weapon - check.

Empty hand - Not applicable due to the weapon.
Intermediate - Not applicable due to the weapon.
Lethal force - Failure to drop the weapon = threat.

JayinAR
You don't go around shooting people like freakin' John Wayne simply because they aren't listening to you. Jesus!

Actually when a person is armed and refuses to put a weapon down, they are the ones responsible for the situation and aftermath.

I guess we could make the counter argument that the kid was john wayne'ing it when he failed to comply.

So yes the police used their force continuum correctly.

REsearch info for those who want to learn -

Reasonableness Standard[edit]The United States Supreme Court, in the case of Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, (1989), held that when engaged in situations where the use of force is necessary to effect an arrest, or to protect an officer's life or that of another, a law enforcement officer must act as other reasonable officers would have acted in a similar, tense, rapidly evolving situation.

These deputies did not have the luxery of reading a news story, nor the luxery of knowing if the guns are real or not. When its not discerable, its considered a weapon.

Is this a horrific siuation? Absolutely
Could it have been prevented? Absolutely

All that was needed was for the kid to put the weapon down.

reply to post by Xcathdra


OK. So the cop perceived a kid walking down aroad with two toys as an immediate and present danger and gunned the punk down.

And you are justifying it.

I feel like I am talking to a potential murderer here.

And no, I didn't offer a double standard. I said I would have shot IF HE POINTED HIS PISTOL AT ME, as that is an immediate danger that would have required lethal force.

A KID failing to comply with orders does not escalate the situation to bullets in my opinion.

I think we need more former military as cops.
You guys aren't trained worth a damn.
Clearly

reply to post by opethPA

This is one of those no win situations that occur in life and sadly a young child has lost his life.

I guess it comes down to how realistic that weapon looked....

NO IT DOES NOT! It comes down to a complete change in our law enforcement.

Militarized police overreach

...Cheye Calvo... was mayor of the small town of Berwyn Heights, Maryland.... next thing Calvo remembers is the sound of his mother-in-law screaming. He ran to the window and saw heavily armed men clad in black rushing his front door. Next came the explosion. He’d later learn that this was when the police blew open his front door. Then there was gunfire....

But the lies, obfuscations, and stonewalling were only beginning....

Calvo understood all of this almost immediately. Someone sent him a copy of “Overkill: The Rise of Paramilitary Police Raids in America,”...

As Calvo continued to advocate for reform, he started to hear from other victims of mistaken police raids, ...A series of police raid horror stories from Howard County, Maryland, also emerged....

Armed with these incidents, Calvo went to the Maryland legislature to push for reform. The bill he proposed was modest. It required every police agency in Maryland with a SWAT team to issue a quarterly report—later amended to twice yearly—on how many times the team was deployed, for what purpose, and whether any shots were fired during the raid. It was a simple transparency bill. It put no limits or restrictions on how often or under what circumstances SWAT teams could be used...

..Although I applaud lawmakers for passing this bill over the objections of law enforcement, I was disappointed that state law enforcement groups decided to oppose this measure rather than embrace it as an opportunity to restore the public trust....

By the following spring, the Maryland Governor’s Office of Crime Control and Prevention released the first batch of statistics. They were predictably unsettling. For the last half of 2009, SWAT teams were deployed 804 times in the state of Maryland, or about 4.5 times a day. In Prince George’s County alone, which has about 850,000 residents, a SWAT team was deployed about once a day. According to an analysis by the Baltimore Sun, 94 percent of the state’s SWAT deployments were to serve search or arrest warrants, leaving just 6 percent that were raids involving barricades, bank robberies, hostage takings, and other emergency situations.

What we now have are a bunch of bullies and cowboys with guns who believe they are above the law... And they are because they are NEVER BROUGHT TO COURT ON CHARGES!