Update on accidental shooting of boy by police


PDA






xjer
September 7, 2007, 04:39 PM
http://www.newsok.com/article/3120381/

NORMAN (AP) - Second-degree manslaughter charges will be filed against two Noble police officers involved in the accidental fatal shooting of a 5-year-old boy, a district attorney said Friday.


Austin Gabriel

Austin Gabriel Haley was killed Aug. 3 after one of the officers fired his .40-caliber handgun at a snake in a birdhouse outside a home in Noble. The boy was standing at a dock at a pond near the house when he was hit.

District Attorney Greg Mashburn identified the officers as Brad Rogers and Shawn Richardson. They would face up to four years in prison if convicted of the felony charge.


The only reason I post this is because I think it could happen to any of us.
I no I have been just as careless at sometime or another. I was just fortunate
enough not to have the disastrous results.

Three different times I have had to complain to my neighbors about stray bullets coming close to me or my family.

Mike

If you enjoyed reading about "Update on accidental shooting of boy by police" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Bazooka Joe71
September 7, 2007, 05:06 PM
Second-degree manslaughter charges will be filed

Good.


The only reason I post this is because I think it could happen to any of us.


No, it couldn't.


I don't shoot animals in rural areas Period.

chipperi
September 7, 2007, 05:09 PM
Only 4 years, how sad. These supposedly highly trained idiots fired rounds into a bird house trying to get a rattle snake out. 1st degree negligent homicide with 20 yr sentences would be more fitting.

Tommygunn
September 7, 2007, 05:40 PM
Quote:
The only reason I post this is because I think it could happen to any of us.
No, it couldn't.
I don't shoot animals in rural areas Period.

Who said you were on the backside of the gun -- and not the "receiving" end of the deal?????:uhoh::uhoh::uhoh::scrutiny::scrutiny:;)

Cannonball888
September 7, 2007, 05:55 PM
bird house trying to get a rattle snake out
It turned out to be a nonpoisonous rat snake stuck in the birdhouse. Lethal force not required.

kungfuhippie
September 7, 2007, 06:02 PM
Why didn't they call animal control? Last I checked animal control was for animal problems and cops were for people problems (with a gray area in there)
Also, maybe I just retarded, but I never knew a rattle snake that got very far off the ground (bird house)
Shooting animals is fine, they just weren't obeying the 4 rules, and had terrible aim since the snake didn't seem to die.

woo18
September 7, 2007, 06:04 PM
Did the police officers even offer an explanation as to why they decided to shoot?

bruss01
September 7, 2007, 06:10 PM
I am the first one to jump on a police officer when they are plainly involved in misconduct (bribes, wife-beating, JBT-ism, etc).

But this is just a tragedy all the way around. It is a case of simply not thinking, or not thinking ENOUGH. I am most profoundly sorry for the family in question who lost a beloved tyke. But I am also sorry for the officer, who made a mistake by acting without thinking things through. This otherwise good man (I have heard nothing to the contrary) will have his life ruined by his thoughtless error. It's very much like accidentally running over a kid on a tricycle because you were going a little too fast or weren't attentive enough. The only difference is that a gun, rather than a car, was used in this incident.

I'm very sad for all concerned.

Zoogster
September 7, 2007, 06:26 PM
They made a bad call, only saw what was 20 feet in front of them and didn't think about what was out of sight further away. If they obeyed the 4 rules the chances of injury would have been far less. If one shoots at an animal, especialy while not at immediate risk, then the ground should be the only background. That means shooting upwards at things is a no no.

Once again having a hammer does not make everything a nail. He should have used a stick or pole or some other object to knock it around or knock it down, not a pistol round.

If they really were determined to shoot it, birdshot would have been proper for the situation. However I imagine there is a policy on the ammo carried, and I am pretty sure it would include buckshot, and perhaps slugs for the shotgun, meaning birdshot would not be an option. That means shooting it was not an option.

I remember a post recently about many people joking around about shooting hornets with various things. The concept of shooting a nest up in the air however seemed pretty acceptable. This is one of the potential results people should keep in mind.

Officers'Wife
September 7, 2007, 06:32 PM
Hi Bruss,

But I am also sorry for the officer, who made a mistake by acting without thinking things through. This otherwise good man (I have heard nothing to the contrary) will have his life ruined by his thoughtless error.
While I agree this was a tragedy, your analogy is far too simplistic. When an office worker or other part time driver runs over the kid is a very different consideration to a PROFESSIONAL driver going too fast or being inattentive.

It is not unfair to hold the professional to a higher standard, in fact, it should be mandatory. Had this happened here at Fort Campbell by enlisted or officer MP all hell would break loose to the full extent of the UCMJ. If the civilian police are less trained in safe use of a firearm they should have their sidearms, rifles and shotguns locked up and allowed only baton and other non lethal weapons.

LEO, taxi driver, farmer, butcher, baker or candlestick maker, if they cannot use their tools safely need to find another occupation for the good of society. If they neglect that simple duty they need to be removed from society.

Selena

GRB
September 7, 2007, 06:36 PM
Actually they should have done absolutely nothing to the snake. There was no reason to do anything. They could have called in someone to see if it was a venomous species, and then had it removed as a nuisance, but that would be about it. They seemed to have panicked right along with the propery owner, whom if I recall, agreed they should shoot it. It was an extremely bad call to start trying to shoot it, a worse call because they did not have a proper backstop, and made worse still because of in whom the bullet wound up. Yes, I believe they deserve every charge placed against them, and if found guilty, I beleive they deserve that too. I also believe the property owner should be charged as in aiding and abetting.

All the best,
Glenn B

lacoochee
September 7, 2007, 07:12 PM
I think second degree manslaughter is very appropriate in this case. In fact, they are getting off lightly as far as I am concerned. Shooting up is only done in very controlled circumstances with absolutely nothing more lethal than birdshot or snakeshot (which by the way would have been a good way to get rid of the snake if a firearm just had to be used.) They should have known better, they killed a five year old boy, just let that sink in for a moment, he was fishing with his Grandpa and then he was dead. :( Damn, think I will go hug my three year old now.



Manslaughter in the second degree is any unlawful killing not included in the definition of murder and of manslaughter in the first degree. It is not defined in specific terms, but by the catchall definition of section 2228, Okla. Stat. 1931, which is:

"Every killing of one human being by the act, procurement or culpable negligence of another, which, under the provisions of this chapter, is not murder nor manslaughter in the first degree, nor excusable nor justifiable homicide, is manslaughter in the second degree."

Further clarification:

http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=81159

In a case where the defendant is charged with second-degree manslaughter, the State must demonstrate the requisite culpable negligence and absence of legal justification beyond a reasonable doubt.


Yep, seems appropriate to me.

kungfuhippie
September 7, 2007, 07:27 PM
They made choices that contradicted their training, and the choices were plain dumb. I swear every year they even play those commercials before new years and independence day telling you to not shoot into the air. So now they must pay for their negligence. It's too bad their poor judgment resulted in a dead little boy, but it did. People must take responsibility for their actions. A great saying is;
"think twice before speaking, thrice before acting"
when you do this often you can avoid stupid reactionary choices.

pax
September 7, 2007, 07:38 PM
Second-degree manslaughter charges will be filed ...

I am personally eating crow on this one, being among those who thought charges would never be filed.

Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

pax

revjen45
September 7, 2007, 07:38 PM
A peon who did this would have been fried for negligent homicide. We always hear about how well trained the police are, so they had no excuse for such stupidity.

elrod
September 7, 2007, 08:23 PM
And it's all just failure to observe rules #2 and 4. Simple rules with profound penalities for nonobservation. How sad.

Car Knocker
September 7, 2007, 08:30 PM
A peon who did this would have been fried for negligent homicide.
What's the definition of negligent homicide in Oklahoma?

lamazza
September 7, 2007, 08:59 PM
Very sad story. Terrible for all involved.

thexrayboy
September 7, 2007, 09:17 PM
Stupid is supposed to hurt. Its supposed to cost you something when you do something stupid. Thats how mother nature teaches those who whose learning curve is more of a plane.

What these two officers did was stupid. Plain and simple. The consequences of their stupidity was tragic beyond words. They need to suffer serious consequences for their actions. The charge as stated is probably appropriate. If they are convicted and serve meaningful time justice may be served. We will see if they actually are sentenced to real time. The possibility of prison time is not a guarantee.

lacoochee
September 7, 2007, 09:18 PM
They are essentially charging them with negligent homicide, that's the definition of second degree manslaughter as I posted it above. When I "googled" for the Oklahoma interpretation of second degree manslaughter, it came up a lot in association with drunk driving incidents that resulted in a death.

Manslaughter in the second degree is any unlawful killing not included in the definition of murder and of manslaughter in the first degree. It is not defined in specific terms, but by the catchall definition of section 2228, Okla. Stat. 1931, which is:

"Every killing of one human being by the act, procurement or culpable negligence of another, which, under the provisions of this chapter, is not murder nor manslaughter in the first degree, nor excusable nor justifiable homicide, is manslaughter in the second degree."

Henry Bowman
September 7, 2007, 09:18 PM
There you go, pax. ;)

Names for charges (crimes) vary from state to state, but it seems more like negligent or reckless homicide that man2. I mean that as man2 being what would seem like a higher charge. Man1 is usually "I shot in passion but didn't intend to kill," where man2 is usually "I pointed the gun at him, but didn't mean to shoot." To me, negligent is "an accident that could hve been avoided by taking proper care."

Blackfork
September 7, 2007, 09:24 PM
These officers are demeaning policing and destroying public trust. It's not anyone ELSE doing it. It's the police themselves.

Huge tragedy all around. For all of us. Destroyed credibility is very hard to recover. Dead children are lost forever.

If I was a judge I would be tempted to fry these guys, to bolster confidence in the justice system and law enforcement.

Henry Bowman
September 7, 2007, 09:53 PM
If I was a judge I would be tempted to fry these guys, to bolster confidence in the justice system and law enforcement.And if I had pulled the trigger, I would be in a mental institution on suicide watch. It's sad, very sad no matter how you look at it.

jerkface11
September 7, 2007, 11:06 PM
I hope pax brought enough crow for both of us.

Robert Hairless
September 8, 2007, 12:02 AM
I haven't seen a maxima culpa in years. I thought they were extinct or at least an endangered species. Never saw one in a gun forum ever. Saw a Mia Farrow once but that's entirely a different species.

Sharps-shooter
September 8, 2007, 12:08 AM
This reminds us all of the not so fun side of firearms, the great responsibility that comes with carrying and using them. One false move can bring about unspeakable horror, tragedy that will haunt all parties involved to the end of their days.

Guns can be a lot of fun. They can also be extremely useful. I think all responsible citizens should learn to use them. It's good to be familiar with firearms, but we must never let ourselves feel too familiar with them. When you stop thinking of the fact that every gun can possibly be deadly, then you're on thin ice. Unfortunately, the same familiarity that allows us to be proficient with firearms-- or cars, or fire, or any other powerful tool-- can lead us to forget how powerful they can be. We must be vigilant not to let familiarity breed contempt or laziness.

I think we all, or almost all, know the four rules. They're pretty comprehensive guidelines for keeping from killing anyone you don't mean to kill, and it only takes a minute to learn them. But once you've learned them, you can't ever let yourself forget them.

Waddison
September 8, 2007, 01:12 AM
I have a 3 year old grandson. I also keep Nishikigoi in a 4200 gal. pond. We often sit by the pond watching the fish swim and talking about them (as best you can talk with a 3 year old). To lose him in such a manner is unimaginable.

The horror the poor kid's family must be suffering!

My heart goes out to the family...

Waddison

damien
September 8, 2007, 01:17 AM
Originally Posted by Bazooka Joe 71

I don't shoot animals in rural areas Period.

Then where? Maybe you should shoot them in urban areas instead, that would be a lot smarter... :rolleyes:

GRB
September 8, 2007, 01:48 AM
You know the more I read of the above comments, the more I realize how some people are just so anti law-enforcemnt they are self contradictory in their statements. Not the majority, but some. In other words, they say anything so long as it comes out that the police are wrong. As I stated earlier, these guys should get all they deserve, as many charges as possible, and I believe they should be found guilty base don the facts I know, so please don't anyone accuse me of being only supportive of the police. Now back on target, how can anyone rationally say things like this:

These officers are demeaning policing and destroying public trust. It's not anyone ELSE doing it. It's the police themselves.

Huge tragedy all around. For all of us. Destroyed credibility is very hard to recover. Dead children are lost forever.

If I was a judge I would be tempted to fry these guys, to bolster confidence in the justice system and law enforcement.

Who do you think arretsed and charged the officers? Who do you think testified about those charges in court, either before grand jury or judge? It was the police, that is who. There are bad apples in all professions, those with intent, and those who do bad out of stupidity. Yet you apparently juedge all police by these 2 officers and their actions.

Here is another statement I almost cannot believe someone has made:

We always hear about how well trained the police are, so they had no excuse for such stupidity. Do we always hear this? Really now! I have heard it from some officers, and other LEOs; but I have also heard how porrly trained are the officers within some departments, especially those in small towns that do not have lots of money. In fact, some police officers hit ther streets with no to minimal training, and then get it on the job.

You guys are proliferating a stereotype to support your argument. There is enough evidence in this case to support the prosecution of these officers as bad apples, maybe even enough to find their department's training or regulatins at fault, but certainly not enough to condemn all police or LE agencies.

Best regards,
Glenn B

bsf
September 8, 2007, 01:49 AM
Joe 71

I don't shoot animals in rural areas Period.

Then where? Maybe you should shoot them in urban areas instead, that would be a lot smarter...
Yeh, I do not get the "rural" comment either. I feet pretty comfortable killing tasty animals in rural environments.

This incident sucks.

Misfire99
September 8, 2007, 05:25 AM
It's Rambo fever. When I was a kid growing up in the desert I would hunt snakes with a stick. Only a fool needs a gun. These guys have shoot first mentality. They should be fried. But you watch just because they go to court doesn't mean they will go to jail. If they go to court and are found not guilty then they can't be retried. That's why they are going to court to protect their butts in the future. Some might say I'm cynical but mark my words and see if this isn't what happens.

MaterDei
September 8, 2007, 05:38 AM
This is a tragedy for all involved. My prayers go out to all of them.

kungfuhippie
September 8, 2007, 10:32 AM
As much as I dislike law suits and lawyers. I think the family should sue the police department. They just need to wait until a conviction is made.

XavierBreath
September 8, 2007, 10:56 AM
I'm going to toss a few facts and apparent contradictions out on the table. I have been following this story very closely. You can find my opinions and statements from Austin's family on my blog, as well as multiple news links, video and photos.

First though, Renee Haley, Austin's mother writes:My name is Renee Haley....the proud mother of Austin Haley who was shot and killed by a Noble Police Officer. I want to mention two very important things that have been somewhat forgotten in the blogs. First, the THREE police officers who reported to the house of the snake, decided to literally pick up their feet, step over a hoe, rake, and hedge clippers placed directly inside the gate before the police officers arrived to shoot the snake. The second fact is this was not a poisonous snake, but a rat snake that is very similar to a king snake. It was five feet long, but it could not get out of the small opening in the bird house because it had eaten bird eggs or birds. It was stuck and harmless! I do forgive the police officer who shot my precious son, but I do believe there have to be consequences of his behavior. Please keep us in your prayers...God bless all of you.

Renee


kungfuhippie: Why didn't they call animal control? Last I checked animal control was for animal problems and cops were for people problems (with a gray area in there)Noble Oklahoma did not have an animal control officer at the time of the shooting.

From another news story (http://newsok.com/article/keyword/3120824/):On Aug. 3, Anita Williams called police to report a snake hanging from the birdhouse of her neighbor's house at 337 Crest Lane, according to an affidavit filed with the charges. The homeowners were not home.

Key, Rogers and Richardson responded to the animal control call because the city didn't have an animal control officer.

The officers attempted to remove the snake with a police baton and the handle of a yard tool before deciding to shoot it. Rogers fired two shots; the second hit Austin in the head.

Judging from the photos, the snake was near or in a bird house underneath the corrugated fiberglass roof of a patio.

Officer Brad Rogers was a rookie who had been on the police force about a month. He was the only shooter, and he fired two shots. The first round missed the snake and struck the water near Jack Tracey and Austin Haley. The second round went through the snake and hit Austin Haley in the head, killing him. Sgt. Shawn Richardson was a five plus year veteran on the police force. He was Rogers' direct supervisor and was present when the shots were fired. Link (http://newsok.com/article/keyword/3120584/)

A third officer, Michelle Key, is also on paid administrative leave. Key was the first officer to respond to the snake call, according to court documents filed with the charges. Link (http://newsok.com/article/keyword/3120824/)

Rogers and Richardson were each charged Friday with second-degree manslaughter, a felony, and are expected to surrender to authorities next week. Link (http://newsok.com/article/keyword/3120584/)

Some news stories say a .40 caliber gun was the weapon, others say a .357 magnum. In my opinion, the actual caliber is irrelevant as long as it matches the shooter's gun.

There is the claim that the officers first tried to use a police baton and garden tools to try to dislodge the snake. Renee Haley disputes this. She was not present, however, and neither was anyone posting here thus far. Whether a baton or garden tools were attempted first though, is largely irrelevant in my opinion. The use of the handgun in that area and circumstance was dangerous and inappropriate.

There is a claim the bullet ricocheted prior to striking Austin. The first shot hit the water very close to the child, and the grandfather, Jack Tracy, began to gather his grandchildren to leave the area when the second shot struck Austin. Ricochet bullets do not usually land so close together. This is an attempt to lessen the shooter's responsibility. Whether the bullets ricocheted is irrelevant in my opinion. Here is video (http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/08/06/boy.killed.ap/index.html#cnnSTCVideo) of Jack Tracey's statements.

Now, I had better put on my moderator hat. The first thread on Austin's death (http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=293658) was closed due to the chest thumping, cop bashing and rampant speculation. Let's keep this thread a learning experience.

Keep in mind that the "facts" are being disputed, and people are going to trial. This case is still wide open, and it can conclude in many unpredictable ways. Let's keep this thread positive.

kungfuhippie
September 8, 2007, 11:11 AM
Well, that answers that. This is the gray area I meant. Police often get to serve in different ways in more rural places.

GRB
September 8, 2007, 01:06 PM
But you watch just because they go to court doesn't mean they will go to jail. If they go to court and are found not guilty then they can't be retried. And the point of that statement is what? That they are different than anyone else facing criminal charges. Heck, from what I have read, and I know it is limited, I think they may well be guilty and deserve punishment for negligent homicide; and that the department deserves to be sued and lose big time. Yet, under the justice system as established in the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights, they have a right to go to trial. Are you implying they should be lynched, rather than be given the opportunity to protect themselves in a court of law. For all you know, they will plead guilty to lessor charges. That is what I expect will happen at least with the superior officer. The other, the rookie, well he may be able to get off on negligence charges if his training was less than reasonable in content or amount, and since his sergeant did not tell him not to shoot. Of course both may be found guilty and never go to jail, but that is up to the sentencing authority. Then again both may be found not guilty; and of course, both may be found guilty or plead guilty and be sentenced to jail. Time will tell.

All the best,
Glenn B

Bazooka Joe71
September 8, 2007, 01:18 PM
And if I had pulled the trigger, I would be in a mental institution on suicide watch. It's sad, very sad no matter how you look at it.


Yeh, I do not get the "rural" comment either. I feet pretty comfortable killing tasty animals in rural environments.

SHUT UP GUYS!

Quit making me look stooopid.:D

You know what I mean't...Man, it wasn't even late at night so I can't blame it on sleep either.:banghead::D

I'm just plain SOL.

URBAN

Zoogster
September 8, 2007, 01:24 PM
Ok Glenn, in hindsight that sounds great. Yes they made a serious error in judgement on how to go about it. However if someone is concerned about a snake they just cornered or found, leaving the scene or waiting an hour or more while animal control arrive no longer knowing where it is located is probably not the most effective way to remove it. Calling the "experts" to identify a holed up snake while it is still important and an immediate problem is not usualy going to work in the real world.

If this was on private property, they had the blessing to shoot by the owner of the property, and they were in a rural location where if they did not deal with it then, nobody would deal with it while the snake was still in that known location, it is less than crystal clear. If they had the birdhouse on the ground prior to shooting (while shooting is definately still not the only option) at it then it would not have been such a danger.

They went about it wrong, and for that they are being punished. Wanting
the "experts", or multiple agencies all tasked with specific jobs to be on immediate responsive call is not only expensive, but often does not work. Police response time is minutes, animal control response time is often hours in remote rural areas.
In rural locations the police and fire often do a lot more tasks than what outsiders would define as thier assumed roles. The fire department can double as ambulance/rescue and the police do extra tasks like help someone out and remove what they believe is a dangerous animal.
Not everyone everywhere has become so helpless as to need special experts paid for with taxes for every specific need that arises in society. Most individuals deal with these things themselves, and when the occasionaly individual is unable or unwilling to the police come and assist. If however someone improvising does something foolish that places others in danger, and someone gets hurt, then they will be held responsible.
So the trick is not to have "experts" for everything, but to have people that know thier limits and call on someone else when they are at a loss.

XavierBreath
September 8, 2007, 01:55 PM
Zoogster,

The incident did occur on private property.

The officers did not have the blessing of the homeowner, rather, they had the request of a neighbor to eradicate the snake. The homeowner was not at home.

Noble Oklahoma did have an Animal Control Officer at one time. He may have retired, or he may have been terminated due to budget cuts. I'm not certain why they did not have Animal Control at the time of the shooting.

The snake was not a lethal threat. If left alone, it would not have harmed a single person.

Noble Oklahoma is a town in Cleveland County, and is part of the Oklahoma City Metropolitan Area. As of the 2006 census estimate, the city population was 5,591. Currently, Noble is Cleveland County's third-largest city behind Norman and Moore. I would not call Noble rural.

It does not take an expert to follow four simple rules of handgun safety.

1. All firearms are always loaded
2. Never let the muzzle of a firearm point at anything you are not willing to destroy
3. Keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to shoot
4. Be sure of your target and what is behind it

A person authorized by government to carry a gun and keep the peace does not need to be an "expert" in the gun's use, but one would think they should be reasonably safe.

GRB
September 8, 2007, 02:01 PM
Zoogster,

No matter what these officers did about that snake such as waiting for animal control (which we are now informed there was no local animal control), or handling the situation themselves, they did it wrong when it came to use of deadly force. I can guarantee you that lethal force can only be used, even by their department, when someone's life is at immediate risk, or there is risk of imminent serious bodily harm. Leaving the snake alone would have been the best thing to do until someone familiar with snakes could have checked it out. Even had this been a rattle snake, and yes rattlers are known to climb sometimes (as opposed to what someone less informed seemed to think) there was no imminent threat of bodily harm or death to anyone so long as they stayed away from the birdhouse and the snake. My point was not as much about them getting experts as someone who knew what they were doing, and obviusly these officers did not have a clue based upon reported facts. The point is, they apprarently used lethal force when it was not necessary, not safe, and not authorized. As a result they killed an innocent bystander. For this they need to be punished. By the way, the property owner has no right to decide for an officer when he is or is not authorized to use lethal force.

As for the expanded roll of police and fire, I guess when you look at it they actually needed those experts, they were none to great at knowing how to handle a snake, but air headed machismo seems to have ruled. All they needed to do was to use some good sense and contact someone with enough knowledge about snakes to have told them what to do. But they apparently did not use good sense. They also should have used some foresight, and my hindsight has nothing to do with the actions they took.

They have radios and cell phones, or had a phone in a nearby house (probably in the house of the person who placed the complaining call). They could have called any zoo, herpetological society, animal control agency, veterinarian, wildlife agency and given a description of the snake to ID it. You see their state does have those experts, they are the Fish and Game department or whatever they are called in that state; I'll bet anyone dollars to horse hockey that their state has a wildflife agency of some sort. They did not do that though; instead they elected to use deadly force. There are rules for use of deadly force, and again I am willing to bet that they violated those rules. For the officers to have not screwed u0p would not have required hindsight, it would have required adherence to the rules. If they did not get rules about use of deadly force, then the department is severley negligent. These officers, were in my opinion, based upon the reported facts to date, apparently extremely negligent.

No hindsight really involved by the way, it should have been foresight on the part of the officers to realize that their use of deadly force would be inappropriate. I base that on my 28 years as a law enforcement officer, and my 14 years or so as a firearms instructor for my agency. They, in my opinion, screwed up bigtime if the reported facts to date are correct.

All the best,
Glenn b

brerrabbit
September 8, 2007, 04:01 PM
From the descriptions of the snake, and yes I do live in Oklahoma, it was a snake commonly called a black snake, it is related to the king snake family. I have seen them grow to over seven foot. They are very, very common.

Pretty much everyone knows that they are not poisonous, but they do bite.

My feelings on this matter is that it is a tragedy all the way around.

While a lot of the people quarterbacking the LEO's actions do have points. None of them were there.

Yes, there were violations of the four rules, and yes a death did occur. If we got a death sentence for every screwup we did, this board would be pretty bare.

They are being charge with manslaughter. Will it stick? I do not know. this will be up to the jury. I really do not know what I could say their punishment should be. There are too many ways of looking at it.

Glenn

Deputies in rural areas are often used for animal control. They often do use deadly force to control animals. If the town could have afforded an animal control officer, likely they would have called him instead of the officers.

The odds of a randomly fired bullet hitting someone depending on the locale is incredibly low, the odds caught them out. I look at most safety rules, gun safety included as a method of stacking the deck in your favor, if you keep violating the rules the odds will catch up to you

El Tejon
September 8, 2007, 04:07 PM
Regardless of the outcome of this prosecution, I believe there are two lessons for us here in THRland:

1. Just because you have a gun does not mean that it is the solution to every problem.

2. You are responsible for every, single bullet that you launch. The Four Rules are Life. If you do not have to shoot, don't! Instead of visualizing yourself as Batman or some other crime-fighting superhero, visualize yourself being prosecuted and facing decades in a prison.

Dorryn
September 8, 2007, 04:18 PM
I don't shoot animals in rural areas Period.

So you only shoot animals in major cities and suburbs?

Crunker1337
September 8, 2007, 04:19 PM
It seems like a fair punishment. They didn't intend to kill the boy, they just didn't think things through enough.

Feanaro
September 8, 2007, 04:40 PM
If we got a death sentence for every screwup we did, this board would be pretty bare..

There is a significant difference between a screwup that results in a buggered screw or a broken lightbulb and one where a 5 year old gets shot in the head.

brerrabbit
September 8, 2007, 04:49 PM
Feanaro

That is the point of the comment.

Master Blaster
September 8, 2007, 08:42 PM
I have an 8 year old son who has been shooting a .22 for 2 years. When I read the story about the little boy being killed, I decided to ask my 8 year old son what he would do if he saw a poisonous snake in a tree in our yard. His answer was leave it alone, and it will go away. I then asked him if he thought it would be a good idea to shoot the snake if it came back. His answer was a resounding no, so I asked him why and he said you dont shoot a gun in the air because you could kill somone when the bullet comes down.

My eight year old who has been shooting 2 years knows better and has more common sense than these two grown sherriffs deputies.

Bartholomew Roberts
September 10, 2007, 10:50 PM
For those who are curious about where their post went, I removed the posts of a known troll. I also deleted a number of well-reasoned responses to the trolling because they no longer made sense.

jerkface11
September 10, 2007, 11:06 PM
As I said in the previous thread about this. If the cops had used their tasers on the snake they'd probably have an interesting story to tell for years to come. Instead they reached for what was hanging on the other hip.

LightningJoe
September 10, 2007, 11:11 PM
One bullet was too many for this Barney Fife. American LEOs are pretty good, I think, on average, even in Wrongturn OK. But some hotdogs do get through.

If you enjoyed reading about "Update on accidental shooting of boy by police" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!