Shoot first, ask questions later; that seems to be today's form of dealing with people regardless if they are dangerous or not. That's what I gathered when I read a story today on the news (see Link below) about how an L.A. County Sheriff Deputy shot a boy who was riding his bike playing "cops and robbers" and happen to point his gun at the Sheriff's after being told to drop it. Considering the story does not mention the boy's age which obviously shows this was an underage child, it makes me wonder if our society has reached a point of paranoia where we can not even trust our own children.
What has happened to our society? This is not the same society I remember 20 years ago where playing out in the streets was a common thing; where playing cops and robbers was the Nintendo of the old days, where cops didn't pull their guns out just because. Did they truly feel this child (or young person) was a true threat that they needed to shoot him? It seems to me our society has lost it's way and we deserve nothing less than a severe punishment for it. What is happening today in this economy, where no matter how much of a little bit of hope comes up something else begins to collapse setting us back again, is an indication to me of how much we have lost our way (those who screwed up and those who did little to nothing to stop it). It's things like this that will push some people to want to ban anything that looks like a gun; toys, game controllers, tools, etc. It's always everyones solution to eliminate what is seen as the source of the problem rather than educate people how to use them properly. We deserve the Gov't we are moving towards. They say you get what you deserve and be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.
Link
Agreed.
When you say in the heat of the moment, that is where I see it different from everyone else. There was no bad situation besides a kid with a gun, no shooting, no murder, no violence. I just don't see why shooting first in this situation was the right choice. I understand the not getting shot by the kid part, but do we truly believe cops should shoot first every time? Bad people shoot first, that's how it always works. Cops are suppose to handle the situation with the least amount of force possible. How do we know the kid intentionally pointed the gun? In the end it's the cops word vs the kids word and who's gonna say the cops lied? No one. I just think the cop did not need to shoot first. thats all. The situation did not seem to merit the cop shooting first. That's just my opinion.
I get it. And that is what is so great about this country, you are entitled to your opinion. BUT. You are still forming an opinion based on the outcome. Requiring the cops to wait until they are fired upon before engaging a bad guy would lead to a lot of funerals with bagpipes. The "heat of the moment" was the point at which the person with the gun pointed it at the cop. What would be your opinion if the gun had been real and a 15 year old had shot the cop? Would you feel that it was the "right" thing to do? I know that there are dozens of shootings every year that shouldn't have happened. Here in the Swirling Epicenter we had a doozie a couple of years ago...man on something roaring around the neighborhood threatening people and pushing people around. Cops came and the man reached into his pocket and came out with something shiny that he held like a gun. Cops shot him about a dozen times. It was a staple-gun. Were the cops wrong? I don't think so. When you put yourself in those situations...you are responsible for the outcome. You can argue diminished capacity...drugs, alcohol, etc...but you made that choice, too. Cops are not psychic, they have to act and act decisively in a split second. Any reasonable person will act for self-preservation.
Because his actions indicated he was GOING to shoot at them, he esculated the situation.
you are very, very wrong. SURVIVORS shoot first. the guy who is quicker on the draw in the one who wins.
When cops wait on perps to "shoot first" innocent victims die.
When a guy breaks into your house with a gun, you go ahead and let him shoot first... when a guy puts a gun to your wives head and starts tearing off her clothes, you go ahead and let him shoot first, if a mugger has dropped his gun, and you point your gun at him and tell him to freeze, and he jumps towards his own gun on the floor, grabs it and whips it around towards you,... you go ahead and let him shoot first...
Me, I'd like to get off the first (and ONLY) shoot in all those scenarios. Shooting first does not make you evil, and it is very sad that you beleive so.
This didn't start with Columbine. Columbine made the news because it was a white suburban middle-upper class school that had a fair amount of people getting shot/killed.
Its been happening in inner-city schools. I went to an inner-city school we had metal detactors and Police patroling the school way before Columbine happened, why well because Lepton's would bring in guns to school/shot people.
"Swat teams are breaking into peoples homes without ever sending regular cops in, shooting all dogs to death (standard procedure of swat team is to kill all the dogs) and beating the residents.. usually because someone called in and lied, or because they were following "leads" they know to be bogus (drug dealers mail drugs to random addresses, then their contants in the post office intercepts the package instead of letting it be delivered... the police KNOWS that and is tracking them... so what do they do? swat the people who were addressed on the package despite them never receiving it.)"
I'm not saying that the swat team never came before regular cops BUT the proper procedure is for regular cops to make the assessment if the swat team is needed. If someone calls in saying that so and so has a gun and is shooting people the 911 dispatcher CAN NOT make the call for the Swat team to go to that area.
It is the Sheriff or Police Chief's call to send in Swat and usual they'll send them in after several officers make the assessment that the SWAT team is needed. Also about shooting dogs, yes, it is standard procedure (but if its only if they can't get around the dogs or if the dogs have the potential at getting at the officers). I love dogs some dogs can be very protective and get violent when they feel threaten. Dogs do act differently when guns are being shot and loads of people are coming to their homes. You can say well the SWAT team has body armor yet it doesn't protect neck, legs, and arms. After owning a part wolf whose bite was pretty vicious it is not fun to be bite by a dog nor is it safe to be attacked by a dog when you have an automatic weapon in hand.
To my knownledge most SWAT teams now have started using tranquilizers for animals.
After reading the story the police did tell the kid to drop the weapon. I am confused as to why he didn't compile. Why did he point the gun at the police.
Also as stated the officers shot him probably shot him in manner not to kill. Again, police go through training and continual training on shootiing, so I'm certain if they wanted to with 2 shots COULD have killed him.
Charles I do understand what you are saying about society. They did tell him to drop his weapon and the article doesn't say how much time elasped between them telling the kid to drop the weapon to them shooting the kid. From reading it I could assumed they said 'drop the weapon' then the kid pointed the gun at them and the police shot him, they said 'drop the weapon' then the kid pointed the gun at them and the police could have waited a few minutes, or even how many times they said drop the weapon (usually it does get said repeatly).
Society doesn't corrode over night nor a year it happens over time. Just like a tooth that has a cavity. The cavity problem didn't start when you felt the pain it most likely has been doing damage to your tooth quite some time until the point you felt the pain and consequences of the cavity.
For the majority of places, it DID start with Columbine, because of the exact reason you stated... it made the news.
After Columbine, there were policies inacted in every school district, beyond the inner-city schools that may have had these prior. People realized that it could happen everywhere, not just in inner city areas, and it came to be acknowledged that kids of that general age in any area can and may, get a weapon, and use it for mass murder.
The series of events (from the officer's point of view) as described in the article.
1. Report made of "someone" riding a bicycle and waving a gun around.
2. Cop spots the rider.
3. He tells the subject to drop the gun.
4. The subject points the gun at the cop.
5. One non fatal shot was fired on the subject.
Okay, first of all you can't always tell that a 15 year old is indeed a 15 year old. Secondly, the kid didn't follow orders and the police had to take appropriate actions. Third, there is a lot of gangs that rise up in the L.A. area and there have been shootings known to involve kids as young as 10 years old. Four, the officer's job is to protect the general population from threats, if the officer hadn't fired on the suspect and it had been a real gun (which it looked like) there could have been many more lives endangered. It was his duty to not let the kid shoot anyone which is what he appeared to be going to do next.
If you want to blame someone, blame the kid and/or his parents. The parents shouldn't have gotten him a "toy" that could be mistaken for a real weapon. The kid shouldn't have pointed his gun at real cops. Don't blame the officer for doing his job, what's next suing the grocery store for bagging your groceries?
the_Peoples_Party, thats why you knock on a door with a search warrent. the special weapons and assult tactics units should only be used in extreme cases. like a bank robbery or hostage situation.
http://www.avpress.com/n/14/0514_s8.hts
http://www.avpress.com/n/12/0512_s5.hts
Posts from Palmdale's newspaper about the shooting, if anyone's interested.
AHA! I knew it!
Idiot parents give their 15 year old retarded kid a replica gun to play with. Here is a hint on how not to get your retarded son shot, don't give him a real looking fake gun. (or a real gun)
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
