Officer’s Quick Thinking Averts Tragedy After Three STUPID Texas Teens Refuse to Comply

The title of this thread is from the story, not my own words (although I find it to be highly appropriate).

So, within this forum and as in the media, there is rarely an instance of a cop showing good training and restraint in the face of absolute idiocy by people. I would like to bring one to your attention:

Luna: “Hey! Get your hands up now! Get your hands up now! Get on the ground! Get on the ground now! Get on the ground!”

Teen wearing gray: [inaudible]

Luna: “No, I don’t care! Get on the ground!”

Teen wearing gray: “Look, it’s fake…[inaudible]”

Luna: “Get on the ground now! Don’t! Get on the ground now!”

The trio was not obeying commands.

“They’re fixing to either pull the gun out or they don’t really care what…what I’m saying,” Luna said he was thinking as the incident was happening.

Even though the teen said the gun was fake, Luna wondered if “he just trying to distract me looking at him, and these two could pull out a weapon. I’m not for sure.” …

Finally, the teen follows instructions and goes to the ground. …

For Officer Luna, it was a closer than close decision.

Apparently, Luna was responding to a man-with-a-gun call, and when he arrived on scene, one of the kids made a "furtive gesture" to his waistban, clueing the officer in to which one had the weapon.

The teen on the left simply refuses to listen, and keeps both hands in his jacket pockets, staring dumbly at the officer. His friend in the red jacket also acts as if the officer must be talking to someone else, and nonchalantly takes his time to sit on the curb, objects in his hands, one of which quickly disappears out of sight.

But as poorly as these two teens followed directions, raising the stakes of the call exponentially by hiding their hands in or near pockets where the officer can’t see what they’re doing, their seventeen-year-old buddy in the gray hoodie was even dumber.

Not only did he make what officers call a “furtive gesture”—a subconcious, reflexive touching of a concealed weapons to assure it really is concealed—but the suspected gunman raised his hands, but then advanced upon the officer.

I'm willing to bet that for nearly every one of the posts in this forum that has an LEO that someone thinks is overly trigger happy or using excessive force, there are instances like this in America where officer have wonderful patience in the face of a situation with obvious potential for serious harm to the officer or death.

We need to see more of these types of stories and not only the negative ones. As with anything in life--out of sight, out of mind. When we neglect to show the good, patient, not-prone-to-immediate-violence LEOs out there, we often convince ourselves that they just don't exist anymore.

Main Source

Other Source

And Another Source

ETA: I am in no way ignorant to the reality that there are bad cops out there, but I can't stand to see many of you always lumping all cops in with the bad. The good ones deserve call-outs, too.

That story is a perfect example of three stupid kids trying to get shot. One wrong flinch from one of those kids and he is dead.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

I agree with you. There are good cops and bad cops. My problem is that, in most cases, the good cops cover for the bad ones, so are they really "good"? The SYSTEM is the problem.

As an aside, I think it's a VERY sad statement that we feel the need to call to attention to and praise a cop that is simply doing the job he was trained and sworn to do.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Let's run through the logic here.

Someone calls in that they saw "three teens with a gun". I'm guessing the fact that they were black males raised the risks didn't it? I wonder if any additional information was provided? Like what are they doing? Standing on a sidewalk? Walking down the street? Threatening anyone? I would certainly want to know as much context as possible even though all the input is uncertain. Maybe that's not the preferred approach?

I'll never know the details, but I think the suspects actions are material to the danger level and what kind of crime we are talking about. The danger and the crime are very material to LEO safety and the LEO's responsibility under their oath.

Were the suspects observed prior to the confrontation to determine if they are truly threatening? Binoculars are a pretty cool new technology. Even a rifle scope will work. Is driving within range of a handgun and drawing a weapon the best way to keep the officer safe and prevent crime? Is yelling from a distance the best way to communicate potentially life saving information to the suspects? Bull horns are available. Why not declare a gun has been reported and police weapons are drawn?

The way it looks to me is that the LEO's came in like cowboys creating a dangerous, confusing and potentially illegal escalation of force. This is the same protocol that got Tamir Rice murdered. Let's compare the behavior with say, Sweden or Germany or France. Can't do it. US police act like IDF in the Gaza strip.

The whole transcript/video should be available from the 911 call before any safety awards are doled out. Let's make police training transparent so citizens understand it and can assert their safety and rights.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
a reply to: SlapMonkey
I agree with you. There are good cops and bad cops. My problem is that, in most cases, the good cops cover for the bad ones, so are they really "good"? The SYSTEM is the problem.

As an aside, I think it's a VERY sad statement that we feel the need to call to attention to and praise a cop that is simply doing the job he was trained and sworn to do.

I agree on both accounts--I think on another thread I mentioned that it's sad that, in most cases, the good apples don't remove the bad from the bunch, but the bad spoil the good (or intimidate them into staying and keeping their mouth shut). The system is the problem, and the good-ol'-boy network in many LEO offices purpetuates the bad in the system. How to fix that, I don't know, other than hitting the reset button, but then whomever does the new hiring has to be fully trusted--but they're a politician, so how can they be?

It's often a cycle that is tough to interrupt, but in the end, if we don't applaud the good and only bitch about the bad--but don't fix the system--then what good does that do? At least by lifting up the good ones, it helps keep the balance (or at least the perception of), and that does good things for the psychology involved.

originally posted by: InverseLookingGlass
a reply to: SlapMonkey
The way it looks to me is that the LEO's came in like cowboys creating a dangerous, confusing and potentially illegal escalation of force. This is the same protocol that got Tamir Rice murdered. Let's compare the behavior with say, Sweden or Germany or France. Can't do it. US police act like IDF in the Gaza strip.

The whole transcript/video should be available from the 911 call before any safety awards are doled out. Let's make police training transparent so citizens understand it and can assert their safety and rights.

The funny thing about perception is that it's often skewed by pre-conceived notions. You, from what I've gathered from this response and on other threads you commented in, seem to have a view of LEOs that start with the default that they're all bad, and then they have to prove their 'goodness' to you. If that's the case, then your perception is clouded from the start and really serves a disservice to this conversation.

Please elaborate on your claim of "illegal escalation of force." I'd really like to see some source documentation to verify that claim, because that sounds like a made-up, alarmist argument that has no legal bearing whatsoever.

You don't have all of the evidence in the Rice case, so to draw a parallel is ignorant at this point...especially since this "same protocol" ended with these three individuals not being charged with anything and being allowed to go home.

originally posted by: InverseLookingGlass
I'm guessing the fact that they were black males raised the risks didn't it?

What a pathetic, baseless, race-baiting comment to make. You just nullified your credibility and ability to use constructive thought with that statement.

Reverend Al, is that you?

This should not be a good cop,

This should be every cop.

Only in a world this screwed do we commend an officer for not killing three kids with a fake gun.

They are so slow to respond because in their mind they havent done anything wrong. They have no idea super trooper is considering executing them.

Sorry but I think this is an example of a bad cop. First, there was no crime reported. Carrying a firearm isn't a crime - it's a constitutional right. Second, no one was being hurt. These kids were just minding their own business, so I completely understand their dumbfounded reaction - I would be confused as hell too, if a cop charged out of a patrol car, pointed a gun in my face, and started screaming at me, when I wasn't doing a damn thing wrong.

This is just another case of cops going to overly violent insane extremes to subjugate "potential threats" instead of respecting the rights and freedoms of American citizens.

I also have to ask, what the hell is wrong with the person who made the phone call? If you are so terrified of guns that you call the police when you see someone carrying one walking down the street you don't belong in the United States of America. Go move to China or the UK or some other oppressed country where people can't own firearms.

originally posted by: IntastellaBurst


This should not be a good cop,

This should be every cop.

Only in a world this screwed do we commend an officer for not killing three kids with a fake gun.

They are so slow to respond because in their mind they havent done anything wrong. They have no idea super trooper is considering executing them.

My lord NO this should most definitely NOT be every cop! This cop belongs in a mental institution, not wearing a badge!

40 years ago a cop in my area would have stopped by and asked the kids if they had a gun, and if so would then have asked them if they had a license. If they did, he would have left them be. THAT is how cops should be!

Ya these kids didn't lick the boots and all the danger was the cop making stuff up in his head about what if this and what if that.

The facts were that one kid had a fake gun.
Hoorah for the cop for not shooting him, what a feat!

a reply to: SlapMonkey

A lot of teens today have no fear. They have no respect for authority and lack any king of logic, which I contribute to their apathetic attitude towards learning. It would surprise many how ignorant some teens really are! You can't expect to take common sense for granted when it comes to teens. I really think the amount of time they devote to playing video games and texting on their cell phones, isolates them from experiencing and understanding everyday life. Communicating and knowing how to listen to people face to face is a thing of the past. In this case, it almost cost them their life.

a reply to: IntastellaBurst

I agree with your first sentiment, but not really with your last.

I had plenty of misspent years as a teenager that found me or my car being searched. Confused or not (which I was more nervous than confused, even if I had done nothing wrong), I complied with what they asked me to do until they could do what needed to be done. I didn't act as these kids did. Maybe my mind just moves a bit more quickly than theirs, I don't know. Maybe I hold the children of today to standard that their intelligence capacity cannot meet. Or, maybe they're doing the wrong thing in the face of an officer.

This officer had every right to be concerned because of the body language of these people, especially the kid with the weapon. Are you telling me that you'd walk up to them, unprepared to return fire, if necessary, if you knew that someone had a conceiled weapon and you're responding to a call of someone walking down the street with a gun? I have my CCDW permit and I live in an open-carry state, but that still doesn't mean that I'm ignorant enough to think that, if I were open carrying my weapon down a street, that some idiot wouldn't be over-alarmist and call the police on me.

Note again that the kids were not charged with anything and wer able to go home after the confrontation. But, for the life of me, I can't understand why you think that older teenagers who respond this way to an officer deserve excuses, but the officer "in a world this screwed," as you put it, should be heralded for acting with extreme patience and reservation so that nobody got injured.

He served the call he was told to respond to and protected the lives of all involved. If that's not serving and protecting, then please tell me what is.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
Ya these kids didn't lick the boots and all the danger was the cop making stuff up in his head about what if this and what if that.

The facts were that one kid had a fake gun.
Hoorah for the cop for not shooting him, what a feat!

The fact is that the office didn't know anything upon arriving at the scene, but witnessed body language that told him the report of these kids having a gun was most likely correct. Then, couple that with their ignorant reactions and responses to law enforcement responding to a call, and you get a very volatile situation, one in which it's highly unlike that you've ever been in, considering the holier-than-thou theme of your response. Until you are, feel free to pretend you know how to react, but don't insist that this cop should have already known everything about the confrontation before he got there. That is the epitome of the definition of 'ignorant.'

There are enough logical fallicies contained within your three sentences to write a dissertation on the topic.

a reply to: WeRpeons

agreed, a lot of teens don`t even respect or listen to their parents so they darn sure aren`t going to listen to a cop even if he is pointing a gun at them so it`s no surprise that they end up getting shot.
The teens might know that they aren`t doing anything dangerous or illegal but obviously other people don`t know it that`s why someone called the police.

if they aren`t doing anything illegal they should just comply with the officers orders and everything will get straightened out and everyone can go on their way, no harm no foul.Doing things, like not complying, that make you look like you are doing something illegal or have something to hide might get you killed.
Being wrongfully killed by a LEO because you did something stupid might make you right but you`re still going to be dead.
What do you value more, being right or being alive?

a reply to: InverseLookingGlass

and while the police are sitting back and observing the suspects might kill someone, then everyone will be saying that the police acted irresponsibly by not intervening faster and preventing the murder.

we now know that it wasn`t a real gun but at the time it`s just as likely that it was a real gun and the teens were planning to rob or kill someone. Hindsight is 20/20.
It`s always better to err on the side of caution and go into a situation like that assuming that it is a real gun otherwise you might end up dead.
Just because there are some stupid people who like to endanger their lives,doesn`t mean the police should endanger their own lives by assuming all guns are fake.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Had they commited a crime?
If not why do they need to listen to the officer?

I know, cause he is pointing a gun at them....

And sorry no logical fallicies in my post, well maybe the boot licking comment.

His fears that he was making up dosen't change the facts of the matter.

I don't understand how anyone can excuse the behavior of the officer. There's a video of him in one of the links pointing a gun at one of the teens - teens who weren't commiting a crime, who were just minding their own business - and you expect applause for the officer for not shooting them?

The first thing you learn in gun safety is to never point a firearm at anything you do not intend to destroy. The officer has no business pointing a firearm at people who are not acting violent. Period. No excuses.

The officer is wrong, and everyone defending him is wrong. There is no gray area on this - he stepped over the line. This officer is a prime example of what is wrong with officers today, and the people defending him are a prime example of what is wrong with society today. Stop backing tyrannical authority figures and maybe things could be changed for the better!

originally posted by: InverseLookingGlass
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Let's run through the logic here.

Someone calls in that they saw "three teens with a gun". I'm guessing the fact that they were black males raised the risks didn't it? I wonder if any additional information was provided? Like what are they doing? Standing on a sidewalk? Walking down the street? Threatening anyone? I would certainly want to know as much context as possible even though all the input is uncertain. Maybe that's not the preferred approach?

I'll never know the details, but I think the suspects actions are material to the danger level and what kind of crime we are talking about. The danger and the crime are very material to LEO safety and the LEO's responsibility under their oath.

Were the suspects observed prior to the confrontation to determine if they are truly threatening? Binoculars are a pretty cool new technology. Even a rifle scope will work. Is driving within range of a handgun and drawing a weapon the best way to keep the officer safe and prevent crime? Is yelling from a distance the best way to communicate potentially life saving information to the suspects? Bull horns are available. Why not declare a gun has been reported and police weapons are drawn?

The way it looks to me is that the LEO's came in like cowboys creating a dangerous, confusing and potentially illegal escalation of force. This is the same protocol that got Tamir Rice murdered. Let's compare the behavior with say, Sweden or Germany or France. Can't do it. US police act like IDF in the Gaza strip.

The whole transcript/video should be available from the 911 call before any safety awards are doled out. Let's make police training transparent so citizens understand it and can assert their safety and rights.

Here try watching this video of the incident.



In this video, you hear the 911 call, and what prompted this whole incident.

You can also read this thread for a bit more info. ATS Thread

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: SlapMonkey
Had they commited a crime?
If not why do they need to listen to the officer?

I know, cause he is pointing a gun at them....

And sorry no logical fallicies in my post, well maybe the boot licking comment.

His fears that he was making up dosen't change the facts of the matter.

Hmmm...I think you don't understand what a logical fallacy is, but I guess that just reenforces my point.

If they were, at the time of the call to LEOs, carrying the weapon either in the open (open carrying) or handling the firearm in any way in public, then yes, they were breaking laws.

You seem have an inability to comprehend that this encounter was in response to a call--the officer was dispatched to investigate the situation. The officer had zero ability to read minds, so he was there to ascertain if a crime had been or was being committed (keep in mind, both open carrying AND carrying a concealed firearm without a license is a crime in TX). The officer had every right and, honestly, every duty to investigate the situation. The teens had every responsibility to respond to the officer's commands in this scenario.

He wasn't making up fears, he was cycling through very real possibilities that could happen when dealing with multiple people on a dispatch for someone carrying a weapon. Your inability to comprehend even the most basic of these realities is mind-boggling, but also consistent with people who always think the officer is in the wrong, so it's not a surprise. I'm just surprised by the adamancy with which you're arguing your illogical points.

a reply to: retiredTxn

Thanks for embedding that. I didn't think it would be necessary, but apparently people are either too lazy or just don't want to actually look at video evidence because they have opinions based on ideology.

I love the fact at the end where the newscaster makes it a point to mention that the parents were angry at the kids and grateful for police actions in this case.

If the parents can determine and see who was in the wrong, here, why can't people in this forum? It literally confounds me, especially in this scenario.