Should he have been killed?

C

Cancel 2018. 3

<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
Texas 8th Grader Shot and Killed by Police was Carrying a Pellet Gun

The Texas eighth grader shot and killed by police in a middle school hallway Wednesday was carrying a pellet gun, not a handgun as police initially thought.

The parents of 15-year-old Jaime Gonzalez are demanding to know why officers took lethal force against their son, but police say the boy was brandishing — and refused to drop — what looked like a handgun, and that the officers acted correctly.

According to police radio records obtained by the Brownsville Herald, officers arrived at Cummings Middle School and saw a male holding a black handgun in a hallway. Police said he pointed the gun at officers as they repeatedly asked him to drop the weapon:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/upd...d-killed-by-police-was-carrying-a-pellet-gun/

if anyone has more facts to share, that would help. i don't know how i feel about this one yet. if there were no other people in immediate harm, why didn't the police back off or use non-lethal force?

btw...15 in eighth grade?
 
I'm split on the issue. even though it's a pellet gun, it's dangerous. Kid should not have had it in school. Not having been there and very doubtful any video is available, I question how much time between 'drop it', him pointing it at the cops, and them shooting there was. All too often nowadays, cops are too trigger happy knowing they'll have all the legal protection in the world and then some.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
I'm split on the issue. even though it's a pellet gun, it's dangerous. Kid should not have had it in school. Not having been there and very doubtful any video is available, I question how much time between 'drop it', him pointing it at the cops, and them shooting there was. All too often nowadays, cops are too trigger happy knowing they'll have all the legal protection in the world and then some.
Click to expand...

that is pretty much how i feel. if no one else was in immediate danger, seems this could have gone a different way.
 
And if it turned out to be a real weapon and the cops wait until he entered a classroom and kills two or three or four, what would you be whining about then.....?

The little fuck was playing with fire and got his ass burned.....not unexpected as I see it......just sad.
 
bravo said:
And if it turned out to be a real weapon and the cops wait until he entered a classroom and kills two or three or four, what would you be whining about then.....?

The little fuck was playing with fire and got his ass burned.....not unexpected as I see it......just sad.
Click to expand...

or he may have actually been surrounded with nowhere to go. nothing is said about that. that's why i'm split. If he'd just been confronted with poor tactics and planning on the officers part, I can see them having to shoot. If they had him surrounded with nowhere to go, I think they were way too hasty.
 
For once I'm in agreement with bravo, for all the cops know they're looking at columbine x+1 . Don't point a gun at a cop, don't bring a weapon to school and don't get surprised when the cops shoot first and ask questions later when there are kids involved. How many of those cops have kids attending that school?
 
bravo said:
And if it turned out to be a real weapon and the cops wait until he entered a classroom and kills two or three or four, what would you be whining about then.....?

The little fuck was playing with fire and got his ass burned.....not unexpected as I see it......just sad.
Click to expand...

you really need to calm down...

if no one else was in immediate danger
Click to expand...

care to try again
 
Disillusioned said:
For once I'm in agreement with bravo, for all the cops know they're looking at columbine x+1 . Don't point a gun at a cop, don't bring a weapon to school and don't get surprised when the cops shoot first and ask questions later when there are kids involved. How many of those cops have kids attending that school?
Click to expand...

i'll ask again....does anyone have any more facts about this. i can't tell if anyone else was in immediate danger.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
or he may have actually been surrounded with nowhere to go. nothing is said about that. that's why i'm split. If he'd just been confronted with poor tactics and planning on the officers part, I can see them having to shoot. If they had him surrounded with nowhere to go, I think they were way too hasty.
Click to expand...

this
 
Disillusioned said:
For once I'm in agreement with bravo, for all the cops know they're looking at columbine x+1 . Don't point a gun at a cop, don't bring a weapon to school and don't get surprised when the cops shoot first and ask questions later when there are kids involved. How many of those cops have kids attending that school?
Click to expand...

correct me if i'm wrong here, but didn't we the people create a professional police force to act in the name of law without emotion and train them to make sound decisions in times of crisis? or did we just want to legislate super rights and privileges to a select group of people in the name of the government?
 
SmarterThanYou said:
correct me if i'm wrong here, but didn't we the people create a professional police force to act in the name of law without emotion and train them to make sound decisions in times of crisis? or did we just want to legislate super rights and privileges to a select group of people in the name of the government?
Click to expand...

without emotion.....? where did you get that idea?
 
Supreme Being Yurt said:
without emotion.....? where did you get that idea?
Click to expand...

several sources, namely some court opinions, politicians, alot of city attorneys defending from brutality lawsuits, and lots and lots of police officers.....at least until one of them gets caught on video acting irrationally, then all the 'emotions running high' excuses come out.

it's not that difficult to do your job without having emotions get in the way, even a high stress job. I did it every day for 6 years in the marine corps.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
several sources, namely some court opinions, politicians, alot of city attorneys defending from brutality lawsuits, and lots and lots of police officers.....at least until one of them gets caught on video acting irrationally, then all the 'emotions running high' excuses come out.

it's not that difficult to do your job without having emotions get in the way, even a high stress job. I did it every day for 6 years in the marine corps.
Click to expand...

i've never served or held a job that put me in what could be a life and death situation. i just can't imagine any job, even my desk job, that can be done without emotions. first year of my professional education they tried to drill emotion out of us. it was simply impossible, but they did their best in order to produce unemotional or unbaised advocates. i don't see how any job or profession, especially where lives are on the line, can be done without any emotion.

imo...if police had no emotion, they would be nothing more than robots with guns.
 
Supreme Being Yurt said:
i've never served or held a job that put me in what could be a life and death situation. i just can't imagine any job, even my desk job, that can be done without emotions. first year of my professional education they tried to drill emotion out of us. it was simply impossible, but they did their best in order to produce unemotional or unbaised advocates. i don't see how any job or profession, especially where lives are on the line, can be done without any emotion.

imo...if police had no emotion, they would be nothing more than robots with guns.
Click to expand...

imo, this is where we have issues. on one hand, we expect police to act with common sense and compassion, like not handcuffing, macing, and tasing a 9 year old having a temper tantrum and on the other hand, we write volumes of policy that police must follow so that their 'emotions' don't get in the way of enforcing the law.

robots with guns? i can handle that if their programming is strict. it usually is. that's why they get the perks and extras, right?
 
SmarterThanYou;931972]imo, this is where we have issues.
Click to expand...

we only have 'issues' because you have yet to admit i'm always right. ;)

on one hand, we expect police to act with common sense and compassion, like not handcuffing, macing, and tasing a 9 year old having a temper tantrum and on the other hand, we write volumes of policy that police must follow so that their 'emotions' don't get in the way of enforcing the law.
Click to expand...

fair enough and i see your point. however, i don't think emotions can ever be taken out of any person in any job. we can strive to be as objective as possible, but never without any emotions. i could give you some experiences i've had, but i would rather not share with the interwebs. needless to say, i've had to do my very best to distance myself from my emotions in order to help someone. for me, it is about keeping emotions under control,rather than being devoid of them.
 
So the question presented is "should an eighth grader armed with a pellet gun have been shot and killed by police?"

Um, no.
 
There's no way to know if the weapon was a pellet gun. It could have been a real gun. If someone points a gun at you in a threatening manner you're a fool not to shoot first. This ain't Hollywood people, this is the real world, and bad shit happens when people do dumb things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top