View Full Version : 8th-grader killed by Texas police had pellet gun
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57352546/8th-grader-killed-by-texas-police-had-pellet-gun/
(CBS/AP)
BROWNSVILLE, Texas - Police say the weapon a Texas eighth-grader pointed at officers in a school hallway before they killed him was a pellet gun that looked like a real handgun.
Interim Brownsville Police Chief Orlando Rodriguez says 15-year-old Jaime Gonzalez had "plenty of opportunities" to lower the weapon but "didn't want to."
Rodriguez says two officers fired three shots and struck Gonzalez at least twice.
Police are awaiting the results of an autopsy.
cont...
People are now saying the cops that shot the 15-year old used excessive force. :confused:
Streck-Fu
01-05-2012, 13:01
If the pictures accompanying online articles are correct, the gun looked real enough. Can't fault the police in this one and I am an admitted critic of unnecessary force from police.
Unfortunately for the child, his relatives and the officers involved I think the officers did what they had to do. That gun looked real enough.
Also unfortunately I can see a lawyer getting a hold of this and taking them to court.
What ever happened to personal responsibility and "Accidents Happen". Everything these days seems to lead to a law suit.
They can take them to court all they want and they will NOT collect jack-squat. It was a good shoot. Tragic....but good. Officers are not required to gamble with their lives. When a cop says: "Drop the gun". You drop the gun or die. Doesn't matter if the thing was carved out of soap - if they thought it to be real, then they are covered and acted reasonably under the circumstances.
Everybody loses in a tragic situation like this one - sad. :(
Richard :munchin
Definitely a shame. From the article it seems that the kid knew what he was doing, as much as any kid his age knows.
The gun looks real enough in the picture. I feel for the cop who had to do his duty.
Dad aways said, "Play stupid games; win stupid prizes!"
Buffalobob
01-05-2012, 14:53
Cowards not able to face down a 15 year old kid because they were afraid. Anyone who has been a combat officer or medic knows that the job requires you to face your fears and do a job that often means putting your weapon aside and getting out your map or aid bag even though there is danger. Just a pure and simple case of cowardice and shooting a kid in the back of the head.
HarabecWeathers
01-05-2012, 15:02
Cowards not able to face down a 15 year old kid because they were afraid. Anyone who has been a combat officer or medic knows that the job requires you to face your fears and do a job that often means putting your weapon aside and getting out your map or aid bag even though there is danger. Just a pure and simple case of cowardice and shooting a kid in the back of the head.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but from the statistics I have read, a disproportionately large amount of violent criminals are around that age. Given that teenagers' brains are less-developed than those of adults, could that not make them at least a bit more dangerous, and if not that, more unpredictable?
Every kid knows the rules for guns and knives at school, they are are a no go in any shape or form including use of your finger. And unfortunately this kid appears to have taken the orange tip off the pistol which might have tipped off the cops it was a fake.
If the officers made every effort to remedy the situation in a peaceful manner and the kid defied their requests and actually pointed the toy at them, then the kid played the odds one to many times and put the LEO's in a no win situation.
Buffalo - maybe you're from the Vietnam generation but if a young 15 yr old kid vietnamese pointed an AK at you, you'd put your weapon away and try to talk him down...??
If not - why are you requiring the cops to do so here??
I guess you can call me a coward as well because there's no way I'd "hope" the kid wouldn't shoot me. I'd try to shoot him first. Only if i could 100% GUARANTEE that I recognized the pistol as a fake, would I NOT shoot.
15 years old will kill you grave-yard dead same as a 26 year old combat vet. Bullets don't care who does the triggering.
Cowards not able to face down a 15 year old kid because they were afraid. Anyone who has been a combat officer or medic knows that the job requires you to face your fears and do a job that often means putting your weapon aside and getting out your map or aid bag even though there is danger. Just a pure and simple case of cowardice and shooting a kid in the back of the head.
How exactly did they act like a coward? Gun raised, told to put it down, didn't, most likely pointed it at them and they took the appropriate action.
It's never a good idea to put your gun down when someone else has theirs out making threatening gestures?
It's not the kid they have to be afraid of, it's the weapon, and it doesn't matter who's hands it's in.
And unfortunately this kid appears to have taken the orange tip off the pistol which might have tipped off the cops it was a fake.
Pellet, BB, and airsoft guns don't have the orange tips. On the other hand, a bad guy could easily paint one on a real weapon.
Pat
Leozinho
01-05-2012, 18:14
Buffalo,
Your hatred for the police is making you look deranged. I can guess you had an issue in the past with police, but you need to put that aside and look at the facts as they are known.
Cowards not able to face down a 15 year old kid because they were afraid.
I'll play along and just imagine that the age of the kid is relevant when he has what appears to be a weapon. How where the responding officers supposed to know his age? They don't get a bio of a gunman when racing to respond to a call. Are 15 year olds unable to murder?
Anyone who has been a combat officer or medic knows that the job requires you to face your fears and do a job that often means putting your weapon aside and getting out your map or aid bag even though there is danger.
They know there's danger and they didn't avoid it. Had they NOT responded to the call, then they'd have avoided putting themselves in danger. But don't expect them to get shot before returning fire.
Just a pure and simple case of cowardice and shooting a kid in the back of the head.
So if a gunman is pointing a weapon at your daughter, and you have a shot at the back of his head, you'd be a coward if you took it? (Can't believe I'm bothering to ask this rhetorical question, but your biased post calls for it.)
Buffalobob
01-05-2012, 18:25
Your hatred for the police is making you look deranged. I can guess you had an issue in the past with police, but you need to put that aside and look at the facts as they are known.
Cowardice is cowardice. If your life is more important than your self respect then pull the trigger.
but if a young 15 yr old kid vietnamese pointed an AK at you, you'd put your weapon away and try to talk him down...??
Ran plenty of missions in a free fire zone and we didn't kill women and children. I would not allow my men to do that nor would I. I have more concern for my self respect than that.
Pellet, BB, and airsoft guns don't have the orange tips. On the other hand, a bad guy could easily paint one on a real weapon.
Pat
Around here Pellet and BB is mixed, Airsoft on the other hand all come with an orange tip, they cannot be shipped within the CONUS without an orange tip and it is a federal offense to import Airsoft weaponry without the orange tip......which in most cases is removable.
As required by Federal Law, ALL airsoft guns shipped by www.AirsoftMegastore.comwill have a permanently affixed BLAZE ORANGE tip. By purchasing airsoft items from us, the buyer warrants that he/she is 18 years of age or older and is legally able to purchase the item(s) shown. It is the responsibility of the BUYER to ascertain and obey all applicable local, state and federal laws.
The weapon in question looks like a Glock of the AEP variety
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000SPIUFO/ref=asc_df_B000SPIUFO1848555?smid=A29UPS2WXM5PDL&tag=pgmp-1456-01-20&linkCode=asn&creative=395109&creativeASIN=B000SPIUFO
And yes a bad guy could paint the tip orange and even color the weapon pink and California has debated to make Airsoft weapons more safe and easily distinguished.
Around here Pellet and BB is mixed, Airsoft on the other hand all come with an orange tip, they cannot be shipped within the CONUS without an orange tip and it is a federal offense to import Airsoft weaponry without the orange tip......which in most cases is removable.
The weapon in question looks like a Glock of the AEP variety
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000SPIUFO/ref=asc_df_B000SPIUFO1848555?smid=A29UPS2WXM5PDL&tag=pgmp-1456-01-20&linkCode=asn&creative=395109&creativeASIN=B000SPIUFO
Odd, didn't see that even in California...which makes sense, really, since they are still dangerous, "You could put your eye out!" ;)
You can still paint a real weapon orange, so what's the point?
Pat
It doesn't matter who has the weapon that is pointed at you, if he pulls the trigger you could die.
In a choice between him or me he looses EVERY TIME.
By not taking the shot they would have put the choice of whether to shoot at a policeman or someone else in the kids hands. Personally I won't give him that choice if he points the weapon at me and that has nothing to do with self respect but rather the cold facts of life as we know it.
Odd, didn't see that even in California...which makes sense, really, since they are still dangerous, "You could put your eye out!" ;)
You can still paint a real weapon orange, so what's the point?
Pat
Exactly, that is the point, the law is useless. But it doesn't stop them from trying...
http://www.airsoft2day.com/news/86-new-bill-regarding-airsoft-guns-in-california.html
longrange1947
01-05-2012, 19:16
Cowardice is cowardice. If your life is more important than your self respect then pull the trigger.
Ran plenty of missions in a free fire zone and we didn't kill women and children. I would not allow my men to do that nor would I. I have more concern for my self respect than that.
BuffaloBob, you are full of it. I had a good friend whose wife was shot in the back and killed by a 12 and 13 year old during a break in. There is no cowardice in defending yourself and others against violence. I would have dropped the two punks in a millisec. If you would not have, then are just as guilty of her death as the two punks are. THAT is cowardice!
My daughter is LEO and would hope she has the inner courage to drop some kid with a gun that "could" kill other innocent kids. It is too easy to walk away and claim the so called "superior ground" when in reality there is a fear of being condemned for your actions.
Utah Bob
01-05-2012, 19:16
I wore a badge for 32 years. I probably would have done the same thing.
Call me a coward if you want.
And there's a big difference between being a cop and a combat soldier. trust me. I've been both.
Bad situation. The family lost their boy and the cops will never forget this incident. More than one has changed careers after something like this.
Odd, didn't see that even in California...which makes sense, really, since they are still dangerous, "You could put your eye out!" ;)Pat
Many of the photos on the airsoft packaging show the gun without the orange tip for a more "realistic" sell. I noticed that when my 9 y/o wanted one. I wasn't about to let him have something without the orange tip. Discovered they all have it, despite the packaging.
As for the 15 y/o - tragic.
Susan
MTN Medic
01-05-2012, 19:30
I would not allow my men to do that nor would I. I have more concern for my self respect than that.
Sucks, but actions have consequences.
FTR, the gun looks exactly like a Glock 17.
MTN Medic
01-05-2012, 19:32
NM
Snaquebite
01-05-2012, 19:48
Tragic as it is I stand with the PD on this one...to call them cowards is pure BS. I have a BB pistol that I shoo the cats out of my yard. From even a close distance you would think it's a SW M&P5. No red/orange tip. The only way you would know it's a BB pistol would be if you were staring straight down the barrell close up.
20830
longrange1947
01-05-2012, 19:54
Tragic as it is I stand with the PD on this one...to call them cowards is pure BS. I have a BB pistol that I shoo the cats out of my yard. From even a close distance you would think it's a SW M&P5. No red/orange tip. The only way you would know it's a BB pistol would be if you were staring straight down the barrell close up.
That close up, I doubt seriously if you would notice the bore size, as, from experience, it will be magnified. :munchin :D
Snaquebite
01-05-2012, 20:00
That close up, I doubt seriously if you would notice the bore size, as, from experience, it will be magnified. :munchin :D
You're right Rick... I would just see a gun.
BuffaloBob, you are full of it. I had a good friend whose wife was shot in the back and killed by a 12 and 13 year old during a break in. There is no cowardice in defending yourself and others against violence. I would have dropped the two punks in a millisec. If you would not have, then are just as guilty of her death as the two punks are. THAT is cowardice!
My daughter is LEO and would hope she has the inner courage to drop some kid with a gun that "could" kill other innocent kids. It is too easy to walk away and claim the so called "superior ground" when in reality there is a fear of being condemned for your actions.
Longrange - out of all the posts I decided to quote yours since you are the one I know, and knowing you personally, respect the most.
As the mom of a 15 yr old I have mixed emotions about this shooting. God forbid Zac should ever lose sight of what Chuck and I have taught him about guns but should that happen, I appreciate the second and even third look that ALL law enforcement take before firing a single shot whether in self defense or in defense of others. And, I know they do exactly that. Were it my son, I'd be so done in and wanting to blame Somebody for his death.
By the same token, if my boy was in danger from a fellow student, I'd want the police to do what ever it took to keep him safe.
I can't get past the idea of losing my son regardless of the reason or fault. God Bless the poor officer who had to make such a hard call. My heart truly goes out to them. At the same time so does my thanks that should such a thing occur I can believe my boy will be protected.
Like I said mixed emotions. All said and done, I stand by the officers who made the hard call.
Cheri - Zac's Mommy
Trip_Wire (RIP)
01-05-2012, 21:07
Buffalo - maybe you're from the Vietnam generation but if a young 15 yr old kid vietnamese pointed an AK at you, you'd put your weapon away and try to talk him down...??
If not - why are you requiring the cops to do so here??
I guess you can call me a coward as well because there's no way I'd "hope" the kid wouldn't shoot me. I'd try to shoot him first. Only if i could 100% GUARANTEE that I recognized the pistol as a fake, would I NOT shoot.
15 years old will kill you grave-yard dead same as a 26 year old combat vet. Bullets don't care who does the triggering.
I agree with you JimP. Looking at that 'Pellet Pistol' I would have to say it looked like a real Glock to me. I would have most likely have had to shoot too.
That said I thought that the manufactures of toy guns and pellet weapons had agreed to design them not to look like real firearms, using colors and other means.
That said there are many pellet type weapons on the market that have feet-per-second velocities that can kill or severely injure one.
Trip_Wire (RIP)
01-05-2012, 21:09
I wore a badge for 32 years. I probably would have done the same thing.
Call me a coward if you want.
And there's a big difference between being a cop and a combat soldier. trust me. I've been both.
Bad situation. The family lost their boy and the cops will never forget this incident. More than one has changed careers after something like this.
Very true as well. I spent 34+ Years on the job!
longrange1947
01-05-2012, 22:08
Cheri - I doubt seriously that Zac would get in that situation as he will unquestionably obey an LEO when he is told to do something of that nature.
That kid ignored orders and proceeded to pose a threat. I would have hated to see anyone's kid hurt if the officers decided to try and "talk" him into surrendering only to have him shoot someone if it had been a real gun. You and Chuck have done well in that realm of parenthood. :)
AS an aside, Those men and women, in LEO, must make on the spot decisions that will affect them and others for the rest of their lives. The trick is to make a decision that will have the least possible consequences if wrong. I know, you want to make the right decision every time but that is not realistic. Mistakes are made. To sit back, as some do, and in the comfort of hind sight and, no stress, and NO personal involvement and call them cowards is BS in my mind.
SLVGW360
01-06-2012, 08:48
For quite some time now, criminals have been painting real guns to look like BB guns or airsoft guns. I'm not saying that a kid would necessarily do such a thing, but you can't gamble the lives of innocents in either case.
Kids these days don't use their fists like we used to do. They either do nothing or go way beyond what we would even thought of doing.:(
RB
Cowards not able to face down a 15 year old kid because they were afraid. Anyone who has been a combat officer or medic knows that the job requires you to face your fears and do a job that often means putting your weapon aside and getting out your map or aid bag even though there is danger. Just a pure and simple case of cowardice and shooting a kid in the back of the head.
Bob, to put it plainly, that is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. This is an example of a no-win situation that LEOs are faced with sometimes. Obviously, this kid had some problems that had not been dealt with prior to this incident.
Dylan Klebold was 17 and Eric Harris were 18 when they killed and injured so many at Colombine.
In 1996, a 14 year old named Barry Loukaitis killed two students and a teacher in Washington state.
In 1997, 16 year old Evan Ramsey killed a principal and a student in Alaska.
In 1997, 16 year old Luke Woodham killed his mother, two students and wounded seven others in Mississippi.
Also in 1997; 14 year old Michael Carneal killed three students in Kentucky and 14 year old Colt Todd killed two students in Arkansas.
The list goes on. Now please explain to me how these officers showed any hint of cowardice? The kid had what appeared to be a real gun. He was warned more than once to drop it, which he chose not to. These officers were protecting the lives of all those in the school and did what they had to do. They, the boys family, and those in the school that day now have to live with it.
Barbarian
01-06-2012, 09:33
Posted by MTN Medic: "actions have consequences"
Call me callous, but that is a fact of life, and applies to all aspects of life, regardless of age, race, etc.
The LEOs' choice was a sad but necessary one. The boy's choice was an easy one, and he chose wrong.
DaveMatteson
01-06-2012, 12:02
Cowardice is cowardice. If your life is more important than your self respect then pull the trigger.
Interesting...my life in one hand...and my self respect in the other...yeah, I'll defend myself and SAVE my life...
BTW, what did the Army teach you during your weapons training about wounding people? I'm sure you read that the parents wanted to know WHY the police didn't wing their son. I was never trained to wound anyone. I was trained to fire "center of mass".
DaveMatteson
01-06-2012, 12:05
That close up, I doubt seriously if you would notice the bore size, as, from experience, it will be magnified. :munchin :D
Some of the old style gas operated all steel airsoft guns have a regular looking barrel while the 6mm insert is recessed into it. Unless you are looking at the barrel close up you would never notice it.
Is this the sickest film in America? Calls to ban ultra-violent gang movie starring children as young as 12
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2083134/Is-sickest-film-America-Calls-ban-ultra-violent-gang-movie-featuring-children-young-12.html#ixzz1iijqKzIw
"An ultra-violent movie that features children as young as 12 murdering their way through the streets of New York has been branded 'disgusting'.
Anti-violence campaigners claim the film, Toddlers, glorifies guns and have called for it to be banned.
Set in Harlem, the movie - released on DVD last month - follows the exploits of a boy who has to fend for himself after his drug dealer father is murdered..........."
I guess it's just keepin' it real in the hood.
But it's just a movie ...................
Is this the sickest film in America? Calls to ban ultra-violent gang movie starring children as young as 12
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2083134/Is-sickest-film-America-Calls-ban-ultra-violent-gang-movie-featuring-children-young-12.html#ixzz1iijqKzIw
"An ultra-violent movie that features children as young as 12 murdering their way through the streets of New York has been branded 'disgusting'.
Anti-violence campaigners claim the film, Toddlers, glorifies guns and have called for it to be banned.
Set in Harlem, the movie - released on DVD last month - follows the exploits of a boy who has to fend for himself after his drug dealer father is murdered..........."
I guess it's just keepin' it real in the hood.
But it's just a movie ...................
The glamorization of feral children.
greenberetTFS
01-06-2012, 17:25
Is this the sickest film in America? Calls to ban ultra-violent gang movie starring children as young as 12
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2083134/Is-sickest-film-America-Calls-ban-ultra-violent-gang-movie-featuring-children-young-12.html#ixzz1iijqKzIw
"An ultra-violent movie that features children as young as 12 murdering their way through the streets of New York has been branded 'disgusting'.
Anti-violence campaigners claim the film, Toddlers, glorifies guns and have called for it to be banned.
Set in Harlem, the movie - released on DVD last month - follows the exploits of a boy who has to fend for himself after his drug dealer father is murdered..........."
I guess it's just keepin' it real in the hood.
But it's just a movie ..........
I agree with you Pete it is a SICK MOVIE and just because they made it doesn't mean they were right in doing it...........:mad:
Big Teddy :munchin
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57352546/8th-grader-killed-by-texas-police-had-pellet-gun/
People are now saying the cops that shot the 15-year old used excessive force. :confused:
I feel sorry for the Cop....life just sucks sometimes.
http://news.yahoo.com/texas-school-shooting-many-questions-loom-234525229.html
FWIW, he wasn't shot in the back of the head, killed by two to the torso.
"...Rodriguez said the preliminary autopsy report showed the boy was shot twice in the torso. Family members initially thought he was shot in the back of the head, but that wound turned out to be a cut from a fall."
- Dan P.
What bothers me most about this story is the headline. Eighth grader. True, the kid might have been in eighth grade, but he was 15. Generally one is 13 in 8th grade. Media tugging on heartstrings again.
MTN Medic
01-06-2012, 18:53
I was 15 in 8th grade because my B-day is late in the year. I think most are 14 and a few are 15.
18 SR
17 JR
16 SO
15 FROSH
14 8th Grade.
I was 15 in 8th grade because my B-day is late in the year. I think most are 14 and a few are 15.
18 SR
17 JR
16 SO
15 FROSH
14 8th Grade.
Hmm, guess I was just going off my own experience and counting...
5 in k
6 in 1
7 in 2
8 in 3
9 in 4
10 in 5
11 in 6
12 in 7
13 in 8
Of course I was 18 my second time around in 11th grade. Thanks for pointing out possible age differences in schools to me.
Horned Frog
01-06-2012, 20:57
At 15 years old I was a sophomore in high school. My dad was KIA in Afghanistan and I tested out of the rest of my credits and graduated to work and help my mom. 15 is old enough to know better, but not old enough to "get it" that you aren't bulletproof. Sad situation, but as has been stated, he had an easy choice and made the wrong one. I'd side with the cops on this one 9 times out of 10.
mojaveman
01-07-2012, 15:47
A terrible tragedy.
Because of that young mans poor judgement, his parents, relatives, friends, etc, all have to live with the consequences of his actions as well as the officers who responded. At close range, weapons that fire projectiles that are propelled by air can kill very easily. Even if the officers had known that he just had a pellet gun I don't know that I would have blamed them for what they did. This catastrophy was entirely that kids design.
Ken Brock
01-08-2012, 10:58
it's a justified shoot all day long
yeah, it sucks because of all the negative media that the LEO will have to put up with
imagine though that the officers hadn't taken the shot and the 15 year old had a real gun and proceeded to murder a bunch of students
the media outcry would be even worse
buffalobob, I just can't understand where your judgement of this comes from
it's a justified shoot all day long
yeah, it sucks because of all the negative media that the LEO will have to put up with
imagine though that the officers hadn't taken the shot and the 15 year old had a real gun and proceeded to murder a bunch of students
the media outcry would be even worse
buffalobob, I just can't understand where your judgement of this comes from
I believe it might have something to do with what Buffalo Bob mentioned here:
Just a pure and simple case of cowardice and shooting a kid in the back of the head.
There were reports the kid was shot in the back of the head, which might lead one to believe the Kid wasn't facing the LEO(s) when he was shot....he may have even been running away. Since that report I have read that the injury in questions was incurred from falling.
But if that initial report turns out to be true in any form, meaning the kid wasn't facing or engaging the the LEO(s), then they likely over reacted.
Ken Brock
01-08-2012, 12:44
I believe it might have something to do with what Buffalo Bob mentioned here:
There were reports the kid was shot in the back of the head, which might lead one to believe the Kid wasn't facing the LEO(s) when he was shot....he may have even been running away. Since that report I have read that the injury in questions was incurred from falling.
But if that initial report turns out to be true in any form, meaning the kid wasn't facing or engaging the the LEO(s), then they likely over reacted.
if I was engaging a potential active shooter (especially in a school) I wouldn't hesitate to shoot them wherever I needed to
whether they are shot in the head or beaten to death with a brick, the end result is they are still dead
I guess I just don't see where the method of application matters when deadly force was justified
if I was engaging a potential active shooter (especially in a school) I wouldn't hesitate to shoot them wherever I needed to
whether they are shot in the head or beaten to death with a brick, the end result is they are still dead
I guess I just don't see where the method of application matters when deadly force was justified
If I shoot some stranger (armed or unarmed) attempting to exit my property in the back I am going to have a lot more questions to answer, and the possibility of it being considered self defense is going to plummet, whereas if the stranger is facing me the odds of self defense are in my favor.
Same goes for the cops, or at least it should be.
I have read the kid was in a hallway and also that he was in the Administration Office and that the school was already locked down. He allegedly had been in a fight and was also carrying a knife.
Lots and lots of unknowns. We'll just have to wait and see what the investigation brings.
Peregrino
01-08-2012, 13:36
if I was engaging a potential active shooter (especially in a school) I wouldn't hesitate to shoot them wherever I needed to
whether they are shot in the head or beaten to death with a brick, the end result is they are still dead
I guess I just don't see where the method of application matters when deadly force was justified
Concur. Maybe I've been soldiering too long but as far as I'm concerned once the decision is made the person with the shot, takes it. Front, back, etc. makes no difference whatsoever.
People do stupid things. Kids are even more stupid than most people are. If they can just live through their stupidity to emerge on the other side of life, that's the hard part.
As a LE Professional, now retired, I can understand, since I almost killed someone while inspecting them on the southern border. The gun looked real, in his right hand, I went through the driver window to control his Head and arm. We found out it was a .357 m but had a filled barrel. A moment I still remember.
The Cops will live with this for the rest of their lives. But they have to save their lives by doing what they needed to do. Clearly the youngster had some problems and felt he had nowhere to go with his problems.
Prayers out to all.
longrange1947
01-08-2012, 14:56
If I shoot some stranger (armed or unarmed) attempting to exit my property in the back I am going to have a lot more questions to answer, and the possibility of it being considered self defense is going to plummet, whereas if the stranger is facing me the odds of self defense are in my favor.
Same goes for the cops, or at least it should be.
I have read the kid was in a hallway and also that he was in the Administration Office and that the school was already locked down. He allegedly had been in a fight and was also carrying a knife.
Lots and lots of unknowns. We'll just have to wait and see what the investigation brings.
Sorry does not wash, if he was running and it was feared or thought that he would collect hostages then he is due to be dropped; STOP second guessing from the armchair.
Running away does not mitigate an armed threat, only that it may now be an ambush, hostage situation or anything worse then now.
Running away is the liberal BS of don't shoot unless "you have been shot first". It ranks right along side of MA's law that put a young mother in jail because she killed a home intruder without first trying to run away. Her out, a small basement window and her child was still upstairs unguarded. Mother still went to jail. They claimed she should have climbed through the window, with him in the room, and ran for help. "No life is worth property" according to the anointed, but tell that to a parent whose child is left behind. Oh yes, that law is still on the books in lovely Mass.
I will buy those guys a drink. They have caught enough hell from Monday morning quarterbacks.
Sorry does not wash, if he was running and it was feared or thought that he would collect hostages then he is due to be dropped; STOP second guessing from the armchair.
Running away does not mitigate an armed threat, only that it may now be an ambush, hostage situation or anything worse then now.
Running away is the liberal BS of don't shoot unless "you have been shot first". It ranks right along side of MA's law that put a young mother in jail because she killed a home intruder without first trying to run away. Her out, a small basement window and her child was still upstairs unguarded. Mother still went to jail. They claimed she should have climbed through the window, with him in the room, and ran for help. "No life is worth property" according to the anointed, but tell that to a parent whose child is left behind. Oh yes, that law is still on the books in lovely Mass.
I will buy those guys a drink. They have caught enough hell from Monday morning quarterbacks.
The kid had a gun on school premises which pretty much answers the question for me. Based on the information available at present, I don't believe the cops had any other choice than the tough choice they made.
But most everyone is a bit puzzled by Buffalo Bobs response, and I am just saying, I can see where some would have an issue if the kid was shot in the back. We are already condemning the kid and patting the cops on the back for a job well done, and we don't even know the facts yet.......And there have been those rare instances where brotherhood and loyalty cover up the facts and someones ass.
Not that is what BB had in mind when he made his post, but it crossed my mind that some might view it in such light
MTN Medic
01-08-2012, 17:30
I swore I was done with this thread because it is ridiculous and made me mad. Please ensure your facts are straight before debating on nefarious ones.
1) The gunman was not shot in the head. He was shot twice; once in the abdomen and once in the torso.
2) There is a 911 tape where it can be clearly heard that the police told the boy to drop the gun, the kid said something about being ready to die and then he was killed.
I am not going to bother posting the links because it might be good practice for those espousing police brutality to do their own research so that this kind of confusion does not happen again and tempers get unnecessarily flared.
Endorphin Rush
01-08-2012, 23:29
Gentlemen,
I read a few posts in this thread that mention that the police had to "protect themselves", as well as the term "self defense". Please consider this outlook: it is possible that the police did not respond to that school on that day to "protect themselves" or even "defend themselves". Consider, instead, that they responded to that school to save young, innocent lives other than their own. From what you ask??? Could it have been a scenario that may have turned into our nations next active shooter incident. I would bet that the thought had crossed the minds of those responding officers.
Put yourselves in the shoes that those officers wore on that day. The BEST case scenario, had they not engaged this armed young man, is that they could have been shot. And the ABSOLUTE WORST thing that could have occurred is that he might have escaped with that firearm and begun to engage innocent school children.
Those officers were not in their own homes defending their lives. They were in a school and potentially defending the lives of every innocent child that was present on that day.
If it worries anyone that the youthful, but still armed, male might have been shot in the back of the head as he turned away from the police, then consider this. Is it possible that, when he turned away, he no longer intended to engage armed police officers, but instead made a decision to seek softer, unarmed targets (students)??? What do you believe those officers would have thought had he had that chance to do so?
I do not bear a calloused heart. It is tragic that any person so young should have to die for any reason. But, it is exponentially more tragic to allow the death of innocent children in an attempt to save one who displays malice towards all.
The "where" of you being shot is irrelevent. You can be face to face with someone (most law enforcement gunfights occur within arms length to about 3 yards) and when the lead starts flying both participants are often doing the "funky-chciken", dodging, diving, dancing, running, etc.
Just as it took a few reaction intervals to get on the trigger and start yanking it, it also takes a few reaction intervals to perceive the negation of the threat, formulate a response, telegraph that response to your muscles and actually stop the yanking of the trigger; your adversary could very well have turned and be ruinning in that time frame. You CANNOT, nor is it required, instantaneously process the negation of the threat and immediately stop and recall all sent bullets.
For people to categorically state that if "one is shot in the back it is a bad shoot", simply lends credence to the fact that the individual has: 1) never been in a gunfight; or, 2) doesn't know what they are talking about.
You can be in a legitimate, straight-up gunfight and when the dust clears your adversary may have some holes in his back you don't recall putting there. Doesn't mean a thing.
Unless you are one of the cops in the hallway on THAT day and in THAT moment - it would be prudent to take a deep breath, step back and support the guy on the ground.
We are the profession of arms - we owe our kids and our law enforcement professionals better analysis and understanding than some of the posts here.
If WE have these issues.....is it so hard to understand why libs and the media have some of the whacky misperceptions THEY have??