It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Xcathdra
The "child" had an AK-47 in his possession... The Police told him to drop the gun and he refused to comply. When he turned, the gun was coming up.
XionZap
As for your bizarre comment - Why did you put quote handles around the word CHILD? Are your remarks an outright lie, or are you engaging in some sort of childish word-playing - as in hyperbole? If you are lying - and it looks as though you are - then its my opinion that none of your remarks in this thread have any credibility whatsoever, and my advice to the membership is to ignore your ill informed position on this matter.
XionZap
Tell you what - I'll give you a chance to defend your position.
You seem to be in accord with the usual 'defenders of the police' on this matter, so I will assume you are in agreement with the following statement by an "expert": I challenge you - if you have the courage - to answer a few simple questions.
XionZap
"An expert on police shootings said officers don't have time to determine whether a gun is real. As long as an armed person appears to be a threat, you don't have time to look to see if it's a toy, Alpert said. If it looks real, you've got to believe it's real. A perceived threat trumps age; it trumps mental abilities."
Tell me this then - suppose the child had been younger - say 7 years old? Would you still execute him because you didn't have enough time to perceive if the child was a threat to your life? Further - suppose the child was obviously mentally challenged, autistic or otherwise?
XionZap
Suppose it had been a 6 year old girl? According to your logic you would have have had her executed as well - right?
XionZap
Suppose it was your own child, and you were the cop on duty. Would you have carried through with your responsibilities as an agent of the POLICE STATE and have executed your own kid because of a perceived threat to your life and limb?
edit on 26-10-2013 by XionZap because: (no reason given)
spartacus699
Does anyone know if cops get a bonus at the end of the year based on how many people they've shot? I know that might sound strange but you never know right?
LurkingRelentlessly
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
the penalty is relevant in distinguishing a crime from a public offense.
you've continually lambasted users in this thread for saying the kid committed no crime, which is 100% true.
First off let me correct you - We don't execute - we shoot to stop the threat.. Another legal term you are willfully ignoring.
Second an Officer is not going to know if a child, let alone a person, is mentally challenged, autistic, otherwise unless they have had previous contact.
I don't understand why you and others assume a child cannot poses a deadly threat to others.
... ... ...one has to ask though, in your scenarios where are the children getting the guns? their parents, and if so don't you think they should be held accountable for failing to not only educate their children on safety, but to also recklessly allow access to firearms.
Xcathdra
...Or is your comment towards me simply based on the fact I am in law enforcement?
Xcathdra
...You are jumping to a conclusion without supporting facts.
Xcathdra
To answer your question - I cant tell you how I would react to that hypothetical. As I have explained time and time again, its totality of circumstances at the moment force is used. What I can tell you is I would approach the situation with extreme caution and proceed from there. As to whether I would shoot or not shoot again depends on what's going on. In a worst case scenario I would act to prevent harm.. If that means shooting a 7 year old who is armed and acting in a manner that poses a deadly threat, then yes, I would shoot.
Xcathdra
I don't understand why you and others assume a child cannot poses a deadly threat to others.
Xcathdra
I don't work for a police state... I work for the citizens who entrusted me with their authority to do my job.
Xcathdra
Again if the threat is present and deadly force poses a threat then yes I would act.. God will be the judge on my actions.
Xcathdra
...one has to ask though, in your scenarios where are the children getting the guns? their parents, and if so don't you think they should be held accountable for failing to not only educate their children on safety, but to also recklessly allow access to firearms.
Xcathdra
You guys are sidestepping the concept of personal responsibility.
Because people in this thread are using the term in an effort to demonize law enforcement while ignoring the facts. I quoted it to highlight that. At the time, law enforcement did not know the persons age nor did they know the gun was an air rifle.
The officers arrived outside her southeast Dallas home at about noon to find Mr Bennett sitting on a chair in the street holding a knife. At this point, accounts of the incident differ.
Officer Spencer wrote in a police report that Mr Bennett refused to drop the knife and moved towards him and another officer 'in a threatening manner'.
He said that was when he fired at Mr Bennett four times from about 20ft away, wounding him.
The police had no idea that they were being filmed by a neighbors surveillance camera and the footage tells a different story. Although the police report says Mr Bennett 'lunged' at the officers with a knife, in the video he stands up from the chair but then doesn't appear to move at all until the gun is fired and he falls to the ground.
Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...
And constantly ignoring the fact the age and status of the weapon was not known till after the fact.. While I get you have serious issues with the way use of force is reviewed, it doesnt mean you get to ignore it and apply your own moral standards to a situation you werent present for.
XionZap
Shooting a child w/toy gun is NOT the only solution to a threat (perceived or otherwise) - for the average officer on duty there are a myriad of means at their disposal to quell a 'perceived' threat, but this officer chose to execute instead.
XionZap
So, a child with a toy gun is "The Threat" you are stopping? What about using common sense laced with a little human compassion in situations such as these? How in God's name was that child a threat to you and your kind (ilk)? This is called Nazi styled street justice, and if you're in agreement with the manner in which said officer handled herself in the execution of that child (any child), then you are "The Threat," and you are a menace and a danger to society.
XionZap
You have a duty and a responsibility as a human person - let alone a lowly police officer to apply reasonable judgment and common sense to any and all situations where and when there's a potential for the loss of a human life. From all that I have determined about this situation your fellow officer was/is a coward as are so many others charged with similar responsibilities.
I don't understand why you and others assume a child cannot poses a deadly threat to others.
XionZap
Because you are of a closed and extremely narrow-minded mind-set that has been 'trained' into roboted-ness (read conditioned) to shoot first - ask questions later' as in "shoot on sight," therefore you haven't the ability to assess a given situation and to reason things through like a normal human being should. Mind you - the mere existence of a child w/toy gun in their own neighborhood is NOT posing a threat to anyone except weak, cowardly, Nazi styled American police officers - and they are rampant throughout the nation and it gets worse as each minute goes by.
XionZap
We are talking about children with toy guns.
XionZapWe are NOT discussing parents allowing their kids to run the streets 'armed and dangerous.'
XionZap
You're responses indicate that you've lost sight of the argument, or that perhaps you never had a handle on it to begin with.
XionZap
That's because of your intractable mind-set that causes you to be unable to distinguish between fact and fiction - right from wrong - common sense from no sense at all, and the list goes on.
Dav1d
If you are indeed in Law Enforcement, you are exactly the kind of thug I don't want in Law Enforcement! -
Dav1d
Exactly what these officers did! Exactly what you support.... When done by Law Enforcement, of course you object when we apply these rules to Law Enforcement. Can we say Hypocrisy?
Dav1d
One does NOT act to PREVENT HARM by choosing to EXECUTE a CHILD! Your choice, your support of an officer that chose to execute a child, an unarmed child, makes you unfit to be an officer of Law Enforcement. Your willingness to bend the truth, distort known facts to support your position makes your word questionable. This child was unarmed and was not a felon.
Dav1d
Any child can be a deadly threat, when you have the ability to use deadly force, and you are empowered to do so, you need to rise above the claim that the child could have "poses a deadly threat to others" you NEED more than assumptions! By your logic, all citizens are subject to execution at the will of Law Enforcement because anyone "could" pose a deadly threat to others.... And the simple fact that they could is justification for their execution!
Dav1d
Yet your words here certainly suggest that you believe you work for a third world police state! You and anyone that shares the beliefs you have expressed here, is certainly someone I would NOT entrust with my authority!
Dav1d
Your words here convince me that you poses a deadly threat, and that you are more than willing to use deadly force. That's exactly the kind of thug mentality I don't want in Law enforcement!
Dav1d
This community, Sonoma County (where this officer chose to execute a child) has long had an issue with Law Enforcement choosing to execute unarmed citizens, one must wonder at the failure of Police Chiefs and of Sherif's to educate their men, and to allow them to access firearms!
Dav1d
Right this officer chose to execute an unarmed child, when another experienced officer under the exact same circumstance, chose not to fire on an unarmed child! Personal responsibility would suggested this officer who murder an unarmed child screwed up, and that he should at the minimum take responsibility and resign. Instead he attempts to transfer blame and fault to the child, that can't defend himself. Can't tell his version of the truth.
Dav1d
The facts remain that within ten short seconds the officers dismounted, got behind their doors, and one officer shot the unarmed child eight times! That the other officer didn't see a need to fire on an unarmed child. That another experienced officer didn't feel threaten under the same conditions. And they then got back on the radio, and told dispatch that shots had been fired.
edit on 26-10-2013 by Dav1d because: (no reason given)
Investigators have yet to say whether or not the two deputies who drove up behind Lopez near Moorland and West Robles avenues identified themselves as law enforcement before ordering him to drop the gun.
The boy initially had his back to the deputies when the orders were issued, police have indicated.
They also have yet to confirm whether the deputies had turned on their cruiser's siren before issuing the orders. A witness told police he thought he heard the chirp of the vehicle's siren, but the deputy at the controls “indicated that he wasn't sure if he'd turned the siren on or not,” Santa Rosa Lt. Paul Henry said Friday.
Henry said he did not believe Lopez had any earphones or buds on at the time, but added Friday that he had not asked that specific question of investigators.
Police refused Friday to identify the type or model of service handgun used by the deputy or say how many rounds it held.
They also have declined to release dispatch tapes of the incident.
Since 2000, 26 people have died in Sonoma County in officer-involved shootings, including five cases where officers' use of a Taser was linked to the deaths.
Of those deaths, only one other case involved a teenager, 16-year-old Jeremiah Chass, an Analy High School student suffering a mental health crisis who was armed with a knife and engaged in a struggle with two sheriff's deputies, who shot him seven times.
The teen's family later settled their lawsuit against the county for $1.75 million.
Source: www.pressdemocrat.com...
I have actually.. The problem exists with those who refuse to understand the law, instead deciding to use what they think should have occurred while ignoring anything they dont like... Like the laws and court decisions.
OneManArmy
If you ever addressed the arguments instead of diverting away, maybe you wont find the arguments going around in circles.
OneManArmy
It pleases me greatly that there are people here that show you for what you are.
OneManArmy
I fear you are in the police public relations department, and you are not very good at your job.(of course this is just an opinion)
OneManArmy
Anyone that can choose to work in the role of apologist for oppression for money or for free is a danger to freedom the world over.
OneManArmy
You keep claiming that the boy refusing to drop the weapon is an established fact, with just the officers as a source. You make the claim that the boy turned to face the officers(as I expect anyone would do when challenged) as a reason for his being shot with only the officers testimony as proof.
OneManArmy
You seem to find it very very easy to accept the officers version of events while happily disregarding any other eyewitness testimony, or open and shut easily acknowledgeable outcomes from this case(the boy is dead, he had a toy gun). And that my friend is why I called YOU out on double standards. But for some reason you applied it to the actions of the police officers, classic deflection.