Jump to content

Deputy kills 13-year-old carrying fake rifle


Scruit
 Share

Recommended Posts

http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/24/justice/california-fake-rifle-boy-killed/index.html?hpt=ju_c2

 

Looks like an airsoft rifle with the orange tip cut off.

 

Thoughts?

 


A sheriff's deputy mistakenly thought he saw a teen carrying an assault rifle on a California street this week and shot him dead, authorities said.

 

It turned out the 13-year-old boy was carrying two fake guns, a replica AK-47 and a fake hand gun, the Santa Rosa County Sheriff's office said.

 

The official report is that the officers took cover behind the cruiser doors and ordered the kid to drop it.  Instead he turned to face them.  A witness claims the officers didn't say anything to the kid, just shot him from inside the car - He further added that he was too far away to hear if any words were spoken (but still knows that nothing was said?)

 

Hopefully the officers were smart enough to nose the cruiser towards the kid and have a good video showing what actually happened.

 

The rifle the kid was holding looks just like the real one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can any of us have intelligent opinions on this without hearing all the facts?

 

There will be an investigation, more witnesses, video, etc. - Only then can anyone really make a judgment as to who was at fault.

 

This is ORDN.  We have no patience for logic or critical thinking.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can any of us have intelligent opinions on this without hearing all the facts?

 

There will be an investigation, more witnesses, video, etc. - Only then can anyone really make a judgment as to who was at fault.

 

There are things that we can discuss.  Does the rifle look real?  Should they have been able to tell it was an airsoft gun?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i found this quote interesting

"He was a 13-year-old boy who was no harm to anybody. This was not a grown man walking down the street with a gun," she told the affiliate. "He was a 13-year-old little boy, you could just tell him to put it down."

 

 

Isn't that the whole point of a gun? to equalize the playing field so to speak? It wouldn't matter if he was 12, 18, 30, 50, 85 or 100, a gun is just as deadly no matter who is squeezing the trigger...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter what the kid did.  The officers will be found to be acting within guidelines and they will be free to return to work and find another person to shoot.  This is happening more and more.  Because you might point a gun at the officer (but haven't), they will point a gun at you and shoot unless you submit to their orders and allow yourself to be disarmed and arrested.  Sooner or later this will start to end badly for the Po Po.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The report I've just read this morning indicated that the boy was raising the barrel of the fake rifle in the direction of the two Deputies after he was told twice to drop it. 

 

I believe it stated that within 10 seconds of the suspicious person call that shots were fired by the senior Deputy - 8 shots total. 

 

Of course, this is per the officers report and we don't have video or eyewitness accounts to confirm or contradict their version of the event. 

 

With that said, why did the kid remove the orange tips on both fake weapons? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The report I've just read this morning indicated that the boy was raising the barrel of the fake rifle in the direction of the two Deputies after he was told twice to drop it. 

 

I believe it stated that within 10 seconds of the suspicious person call that shots were fired by the senior Deputy - 8 shots total. 

 

Of course, this is per the officers report and we don't have video or eyewitness accounts to confirm or contradict their version of the event. 

 

With that said, why did the kid remove the orange tips on both fake weapons? 

Just a guess here, bit I'm going with: To make them look more realistic... to give the illusion that he was seriously "strapped".

 

Nowhere near enough information, but it's a shitty situation all around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There will be an investigation, more witnesses, video, etc. - Only then can anyone really make a judgment as to who was at fault.

Because we all know an investigation will get to the bottom of this and that truth will prevail. And that if the cop was in the wrong, he will be held accountable and justice will be served.

This space intentionally left blank to avoid offending anyone

2012

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I think is telling--and pretty shitty in the bargain--is that this took place only hours following the fatal shooting of the teacher in NV, and in that instance, the shooter was a 12 yo boy.  I agree with most of the posts here that it sounds like an over-reaction by the officers, but I guarantee that incidents like that, especially in close time proximity to each other, must weigh heavily on the minds of the police.  It is correct to HOPE that the police be 110% diligent at all times in the use of their weapons, but seriously....if it was you in the uniform and you responded to a report of a suspicious man carrying an assault rifle, would you be able to make a conscious decision to hold fire as a gun was turned toward you...with the possibility that you would never to go home to YOUR family again?  Tough call....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do Not Fire Until Fired Upon?

 

I wholeheartedly agree. I'd rather on officer take a bullet to the vest than see an innocent shot/killed because of twitchy trigger fingers. I hate to be so bold, but I'd take a dead cop over a dead child, any day of the week. Fuck... that sounds really shitty. I don't mean it to sound that way, but I really do think there is a moral obligation to protect the innocent. This child didn't need to die. He was completely harmless. Operating on the assumption that he was ready to do harm clearly isn't the best course of action.

 

 

x10000

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do Not Fire Until Fired Upon?

 

I wholeheartedly agree. I'd rather on officer take a bullet to the vest than see an innocent shot/killed because of twitchy trigger fingers. I hate to be so bold, but I'd take a dead cop over a dead child, any day of the week. Fuck... that sounds really shitty. I don't mean it to sound that way, but I really do think there is a moral obligation to protect the innocent. This child didn't need to die. He was completely harmless. Operating on the assumption that he was ready to do harm clearly isn't the best course of action.

 

While I believe that cops are far too eager to shoot people these days, you are easily comfortable with "giving away" a cop's life on the chance that a kid had a toy gun or didn't mean anything.  A bullet from an AK would easily penetrate a cop's bullet-proof vest.  There is no way I would expect anyone to wait until they have been shot at before taking steps to protect themselves.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as cops are taught that every citizen encountered is a potential cop-killer until proven otherwise, these kind of incidents will happen. Acceptable collateral damage in the name of protecting our warrior hero police force.

 

Teaching them the opposite is a great way to ensure more dead cops.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...