Should he have been killed?

Damocles said:
They protect your rights by being willing to stand between you and somebody attacking you. In this case they were called to face a child brandishing a gun in a school. The people who had the gun pointed at them were the victims.


Now, had he been pointing a wallet at them, I would agree. (See Amadou Diallo).



Which makes it so they too are "the people".

Usually you and I can find some agreement on this topic, but saying that cops have no right to protect themselves from harm when somebody is aiming a weapon at them is preposterous.
Click to expand...
i'm not sure where you got the idea I said cops can't defend themselves. I never said that. what i'm saying is that cops shouldn't have extra leeway or immunities for making mistakes when they feel they need to defend themselves. the same standards that apply to us should apply to them.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
i'm not sure where you got the idea I said cops can't defend themselves. I never said that. what i'm saying is that cops shouldn't have extra leeway or immunities for making mistakes when they feel they need to defend themselves. the same standards that apply to us should apply to them.
Click to expand...

However, this thread is about this case. There isn't much room in there. The kid had what everybody thought was a gun and wouldn't put it down, instead he continued to point it at the cops. It isn't rocket science or even difficult to understand that they would perceive this as a threat and react accordingly. What "leeway" do they need? What would you do if the kid entered your house and did the same thing? You'd frickin' shoot him, because you would perceive it as a threat... If you were in the school, what would you have done? Try to tackle the kid with the gun pointing at other kids giving him a chance to potentially kill another child?

What do you expect the cops to do when a gun is pointed at them and the perpetrator refuses to put the thing down? Time for negotiations?
 
Supreme Being Yurt said:
you're right, except i got an A plus golden star in civics :) . i never said otherwise as to governments. are you suggesting we disband the entire police force in every state and DC?
Click to expand...
no, but I do suggest limiting their power and authority.

Supreme Being Yurt said:
the immunity is atrocious, that doesn't take away from our protection. which you and i both enjoy.
Click to expand...
something funny i've experienced in my life. whenever I needed protection, there was never a cop around. I've always had to protect myself. Not to take away from their ability to bring someone to justice after the fact though.
 
Damocles said:
However, this thread is about this case. There isn't much room in there. The kid had what everybody thought was a gun and wouldn't put it down, instead he continued to point it at the cops. It isn't rocket science or even difficult to understand that they would perceive this as a threat and react accordingly.
Click to expand...
and for this particular case I said I was split on it. Not having been there and not knowing the specifics, I cannot say that they were right or wrong for it.
 
DamnYankee said:
More Hollywood thinking here. You shoot at the center of mass because it's the largest target and not easily moved out of the way like an arm or a leg. It's a split-second decision-aim-shoot with a relatively inaccurate weapon, not a sniper set-up.



Queue-up Legion with some inane remark about a rifle exploding.
Click to expand...
There is no decision.

 
Return of Dune said:
What part don't you understand? There is no discretion when shooting, they are trained to always shoot to kill.
Click to expand...

They are trained to always go for center mass, the reason for this is that even a highly trained cop will miss 6 out of 10 shots at a moving target in high stress situations on average. The idea that they can hit a hand or some other thing is a television show silliness. Stress adds to inaccuracy, so they are taught to shoot at the center of the body. That it also will almost always kill them doesn't change this.
 
Disillusioned said:
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...

Uhhh no....that's not what cops are supposed to do, and whether they have kids at that school or not is irrelevant. You put on the uniform, you don't get to use it for your own personal emotions.
 
Damocles said:
They are trained to always go for center mass, the reason for this is that even a highly trained cop will miss 6 out of 10 shots at a moving target in high stress situations on average. The idea that they can hit a hand or some other thing is a television show silliness. Stress adds to inaccuracy, so they are taught to shoot at the center of the body. That it also will almost always kill them doesn't change this.
Click to expand...

Its not as though shooting a kid in the leg is a guarantee to keep him alive in any case.

In my opinion, without more facts on this police action, I have to say they were in the right. The 'kid' was 15 and knew what he was doing was serious. I'm distrusting that the cops say it was their only option, but I can say I understand their position. That it was a pellet gun was discovered after the fact, and it's highly unlikely a regular officer could identify it as such beforehand.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
I understand that this may be unable to push past your authoritarian statist mindset, but if a cop points a gun at you, whether you've done nothing wrong or not, what do you do? now why is it that WE must be immediately subservient and they do not?
Click to expand...
Well because they represent authority, because they can get sued, because anybody poiting a gun at me will immediately be adressed as "sir" and mot of all because being subserviant to the armed police officers lets everyone go home at the end of the day. And I don't know about you Smarter but seeing tomorrow is one of my lifelong ambitions.
 
Kel Tec RFB said:
Uhhh no....that's not what cops are supposed to do, and whether they have kids at that school or not is irrelevant. You put on the uniform, you don't get to use it for your own personal emotions.
Click to expand...
I'm saying it's a relevant factor. You bring a gun to the school where my kid is you're going to get shot no matter how "professional" I'd like to be. It's nice how personal feelings just get turned off when you "put on the uniform" and I suppose you think priests never sin and lawyers are all honest and judges never let their personal feelings affect judgements. Cops are people.

As a side story on caution I personally know a retired sheriff's deputy who can't use his right hand because a 12 year old stuck a knife through it when he thought she was "no danger". This is the real world not some armchair or game, and in this world bullets kill people.
 
Disillusioned said:
As a side story on caution I personally know a retired sheriff's deputy who can't use his right hand because a 12 year old stuck a knife through it when he thought she was "no danger". This is the real world not some armchair or game, and in this world bullets kill people.
Click to expand...

Really now? I, a war veteran, never would have imagined that's bullets kill people or that complacency is dangerous. Save your holier than thou attitude for someone else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top