California cops shoot dead 13-year-old boy armed with toy gun


Recommended Posts

DocM

Dot - there are non-firing toys & models that look as realistic.

Cops want to end their shift without being in a body bag, and seeing someone in a non-open carry state like California not follow directions to drop a weapon puts them defensive.

Here in Michigan the assumptions would be different because we are an open carry state. Seeing someone with a rifle/shotgun or exposed handgun is much less paranoia inducing. Even more so during hunting seasons, which is most of the year depending on the game.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Arachno 1D

 

According to that account, one of the deputies opened fire after the boy was twice ordered to put the gun down and instead turned toward the officers as the barrel of the weapon rose in their direction.

Police also have said the deputy who opened fire could not tell from the angle of his position that he was shooting at a child, but saw the gun and feared for his life.

The sheriff's department has refused to identify the deputies involved. Their lawyer has declined to comment.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-10-25/news/sns-rt-us-usa-california-shooting-20131023_1_california-cop-two-deputies-two-officers

 

 

"He has quite a bit of experience with this kind of weapon. He's aware of the kind of damage these kinds of weapons can do," said Santa Rosa Lt. Paul Henry of one of the cops who opened fire. The weapon can fire ammunition that "can penetrate his body armor, can penetrate the metal of his vehicle, and also the sides of houses and buildings in the area."

http://www.hngn.com/articles/15680/20131024/california-cops-shoot-kill-13-year-old-boy-armed-toy.htm

 

It seems quite clear to me from the news given so far that the officers were in clearly marked vehicles,gave two clear warnings to the boy to drop the weapon and the officer that fired first as indicated above,feared he was about to be fired upon.As Ive stated already the recent school shootings by a teenager would clearly be in the back of their minds at the time and may well have caused further tension in the situation.

 

http://www.onenewspage.us/n/US/74w2r3yen/Boy-13-carrying-toy-gun-shot-dead-by.htm

Link to post
Share on other sites
blerk

Kill first, ask questions later, even if it's a kid. Yep, sounds like america.

It's not just cops in America that shoot and end up killing the person. Armed cops are trained to shoot until the threat is gone. If the cops are amazing marksmen, yes they will shoot the gun and disable that but more realistically they will fire quite a few shots at the person, miss a few times, hit the person a few times and possibly end up killing the person. 

 

A teen was killed relatively recently by an armed cop here in NZ. The cop fired 14 times, hit the teen 4 times. Teen died. The investigation of the report found the officer justified in shooting the teen. Unfortunate case, but that's the way it happened. 

 

"The officer who shot Mr Kelly-Tumarae intended to incapacitate an armed offender and so remove a threat to his own life," he said.

"Having decided to use his pistol, he continued to fire until he perceived that the immediate threat to his life had passed. In those circumstances the force used was justified."

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Original Poster

should have complied...no sympathy

Link to post
Share on other sites
cork1958

When the police tell you to "drop it", you probably should listen to them.

 

Umm, do you think?!

 

While this IS a very sad story, the kid should've listened. Even a 13 year old should know how f***ed the world is today with all the school shootings and stuff.

 

Feel totally sorry for both the officers and the kids family.

Link to post
Share on other sites
He's Dead Jim

And who makes a profit out of this, news vendors, fake gun dealers, real gun dealers?

Link to post
Share on other sites
JonnyLH

Its a shame that it wasn't in the UK as the cops wouldn't have shot the boy instead the boy would have punished and not killed, but what can you since the boy is dead now. :(

They have the same policy in the UK. If you don't drop it, they shoot. There's been similar stories like this in the UK.

 

Unfortunately this is a sad story but, if you don't drop a gun when armed police say so, you're gonna have a bad time.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
LimeMaster

They have the same policy in the UK. If you don't drop it, they shoot. There's been similar stories like this in the UK.

 

Unfortunately this is a sad story but, if you don't drop a gun when armed police say so, you're gonna have a bad time.

Really, guess it depends on the area, but I still think they should have taken a different approach as he was only 13. They should know that 13 year old boys are stubborn. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kami-

Really, guess it depends on the area, but I still think they should have taken a different approach as he was only 13. They should know that 13 year old boys are stubborn. 

Never heard of SCO19? TAG? ARG? TFG? TTFU? etc... There are many armed police response teams throughout the UK, they'll just as easily shoot you for non-compliance with a "drop the weapon" command as the Americans would.

Link to post
Share on other sites
LimeMaster

Never heard of SCO19? TAG? ARG? TFG? TTFU? etc... There are many armed police response teams throughout the UK, they'll just as easily shoot you for non-compliance with a "drop the weapon" command as the Americans would.

I guess they only send out armed ones, if a serious crime is being committed as the ones I've seen definitely don't look like they're armed.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Rohdekill

And who makes a profit out of this, news vendors, fake gun dealers, real gun dealers?

Funeral Homes

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kami-

I guess they only send out armed ones, if a serious crime is being committed as the ones I've seen definitely don't look like they're armed.  

Take a walk around an airport sometime... always walking past amed officers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Rohdekill

Really, guess it depends on the area, but I still think they should have taken a different approach as he was only 13. They should know that 13 year old boys are stubborn. 

They also know 13 year old boys kill over hurt feelings and tennis shoes.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM

Any police unit would. If the OP pic is the one he was carrying it's obvious the red toy marker was removed.

That or it was a BB (.177 caliber ball bearing) or pellet (.177, .22 or .25 caliber lead pellet) spring, gas or air powered gun. These do not have the red toy marker because they can actually injure a person even though not a full firearm.

Link to post
Share on other sites
LimeMaster

Take a walk around an airport sometime... always walking past amed officers.

I guess that would make sense to have armed officers in airports due to the restrict security.

 

They also know 13 year old boys kill over hurt feelings and tennis shoes.  

Link? :huh:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Rohdekill

 

 

Link? :huh:

You need a link to the dozens of instances where a teen kills classmates/staff because they felt bullied (a.k.a. their feelings got hurt)?  Or, you looking for the roughly thousands of links where kids are mugged/maimed/killed over Jordan tennis shoes?  just google it yourself!

Link to post
Share on other sites
trag3dy

Really, guess it depends on the area, but I still think they should have taken a different approach as he was only 13. They should know that 13 year old boys are stubborn. 

 

When a person armed with an ak-47 points the gun and fires at you it doesn't matter how old the person pulling the trigger is. The police couldn't take the chance that the kid would run into a neighborhood house or his own house and open fire. Especially when he's not responding to their demands. If the gun in the first post is the one the boy had it looks about as real as it gets.

 

What would be a real tragedy is if we heard a story with a heading like this: "boy, 13, kills entire family with ak-47, police stand by doing nothing". 

 

I feel the parents have just as much blame here for letting the kid have the gun in the first place (if they did) and not teaching their kid to obey police. I'm also pretty sure the police officers gave the boy more than one chance to comply. In fact (not that it makes it any better or worse) I'm willing to bet the kid was a total spoiled brat.

 

But yeah, just blame the police, much easier.

Link to post
Share on other sites
LimeMaster

You need a link to the dozens of instances where a teen kills classmates/staff because they felt bullied (a.k.a. their feelings got hurt)?  Or, you looking for the roughly thousands of links where kids are mugged/maimed/killed over Jordan tennis shoes?  just google it yourself!

That's messed up. :s

 

 

When a person armed with an ak-47 points the gun and fires at you it doesn't matter how old the person pulling the trigger is. The police couldn't take the chance that the kid would run into a neighborhood house or his own house and open fire. Especially when he's not responding to their demands. If the gun in the first post is the one the boy had it looks about as real as it gets.

 

What would be a real tragedy is if we heard a story with a heading like this: "boy, 13, kills entire family with ak-47, police stand by doing nothing". 

 

I feel the parents have just as much blame here for letting the kid have the gun in the first place (if they did) and not teaching their kid to obey police. I'm also pretty sure the police officers gave the boy more than one chance to comply.

 

But yeah, just blame the police, much easier.

I'm not saying what the boy done is right, but I just think the police could have tried a different approach.

Link to post
Share on other sites
trag3dy

That's messed up. :s

 

 

I'm not saying what the boy done is right, but I just think the police could have tried a different approach.

 

How do you know they didn't right now?

Link to post
Share on other sites
LimeMaster

How do you know they didn't right now?

In the article it doesn't mention anything about them trying different methods, so I believe they went to straight to using the gun after telling the boy to drop the weapon.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
xendrome

Ahh so they have the right to kill him, it's completely okay that they shot a 13 year old boy dead because he had a toy gun.. What a complete idiot.

 

They could have gone about it a million and one other ways, tasing him or even one shot to somewhere that isn't lethal, nevermind both opening fire on him for not listening to them when they asked him to drop his toy.

 

So the cop that went to work that morning for $13 an hour should just take a chance and assume the gun that looks totally real and has no orange tip, because it was clearly modified. so they should risk their lives because of the actions of another person.

 

You are WRONG on so many levels it's not even funny. You don't shoot someone unless you want it to be lethal, and tasers only work at short distances and LE versions only last for 15 seconds, then you have to hit them again. LE training teaches you force on force, or else your doing it wrong. You don't take a knife to a gun fight. And the officers have no way of knowing if that gun is real or not untl they can get their hands on it in a case like this where it was modified from it's original condition.

 

The comment quoted above is a PERFECT example of someone commenting on a topic that they really have NO education/experience with.

Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM

That's messed up. :s

14 y/o not killed a 24 y/o teacher with a box cutter in Mass. last week then he goes to the theater to see a Woody Allen movie. There's a lot of messed up kids out there.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/10/24/21120131-teen-charged-with-killing-mass-math-teacher-saw-movie-after-her-murder

I'm not saying what the boy done is right, but I just think the police could have tried a different approach.

Come up with one in the next 10 seconds. The cops probably had less time.

Talking? Tried and failed.

Taser? Pepper spray? If more than 20-25 feet away then he's out of accurate & effective range.

Tear gas? He can still fire.

Billy clubs? Uh, no. You're dead before you reach a real shooter & you don't know if the gun is real, remember?

OK genius, what do YOU do?

Fact: sometimes there are no good options and you just have to eliminate the threat by whatever available means so you can get home alive. Sad, but true.

Link to post
Share on other sites
trag3dy

In the article it doesn't mention anything about them trying different methods, so I believe they went to straight to using the gun after telling the boy to drop the weapon.  

 

Yeah it's really easy to just assume cops in America are just all blood thirsty killers. I'm not sure when exactly this event took place but it's probably to early to know all the details.

Link to post
Share on other sites
LimeMaster

14 y/o not killed a 24 y/o teacher with a box cutter in Mass. last week then he goes to the theater to see a Woody Allen movie. There's a lot of messed up kids out there.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/10/24/21120131-teen-charged-with-killing-mass-math-teacher-saw-movie-after-her-murder

Come up with one in the next 10 seconds. The cops probably had less time.

Talking? Tried and failed.

Taser? Pepper spray? If more than 20-25 feet away then he's out of accurate & effective range.

Tear gas? He can still fire.

Billy clubs? Uh, no. You're dead before you reach a real shooter & you don't know if the gun is real, remember?

OK genius, what do YOU do?

Since the article doesn't explain the distance between them and since you claim no other method would work, then I would say shoot him in the leg as it may cause damage, but doesn't kill the boy and it means they would be able to deal with the boy properly and retrieve the weapon.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
DocM

Shooting to wound a limb? Cops and civilian carriers are specifically trained NOT to do that.

Why? Low percentage shot, successful only 10-15% of the time. Meanwhile, if he has a real gun he's shooting back and not aiming for your leg but to kill.

The other problem is what happens to the bullet the other 85-90% of the time? It flies into the background perhaps to hit a bystander, go through a building and hit an occupant, or ricochet and go god knows where.

Next theory?

(And remember you're talking to someone who's licensed to carry and has been in a firefight)

Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By FunkyMike
      Original article: http://money.cnn.com/2014/07/18/news/companies/ak-47-kalashnikov/index.html?hpt=hp_t4
       
      VIA: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-07-21/ak-47-sales-soar-after-us-sanctions-kalashnikov-imports
    • By Shaun N.
      A councillor and magistrate has refused to resign for posing with an AK-47 rifle and posting a picture on Twitter.
       
       

       
      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-26764022
       
      In my opinion even though he was not on official business, on holiday which was 7000 miles away and not actually breaking any laws he is still a council official that needs to uphold a certain standard and if he thinks it is OK to pose for a picture holding an AK-47 and then posting it on Twitter he is a very silly man.
       
      I think he should resign.
    • By Hum
      At a Tuesday press event in New York, Australian billionaire Clive Palmer, chairman of Blue Star Line shipping company, unveiled blueprints for his company's planned Titanic II. It's an exact replica of the haunted 1912 cruise liner that ... well, you've seen the movie.
      Palmer claims Titanic II will be the safest cruise ship in the world when it sets sail in 2016 from Southampton, England, bound for New York, following the ill-fated Titanic's original planned route.
      The press event, held at New York's Intrepid Sea, Air & Space Museum, was part of an ongoing campaign to promote the Titanic II launch. Blue Star held a Titanic II Gala Dinner at the Venetian in Macau this month to drum up interest among wealthy Chinese.
      Palmer has commissioned a Chinese shipyard to build the replica.
      The mining magnate won't say exactly how much money he's sunk into the project, but he doesn't appear worried about those who might be leery about boarding such a dubiously named vessel. Palmer says he's received offers of up to $1 million for passage on the ship's maiden voyage.
      source