Officer shoots 16 year old boy twice

[TheeBadOne]

Can't see the trees for the forest

A few are missing the boat completely. What do OSS's and dead people have to do with each other? The threat was stopped. OSS does not mean "KILL". There have plenty of people who later died of a gunshot but first killed/hurt the person who shot them. OSS means just that, threat stopped (don't have to be dead).

JMHO

 

[BluesBear]

KRAUTGUNNER stated:
The 9mm WW ammo (147grs subsonic) the junior LEO used, is a pathetic joke! OSS=77%!!!

Not a joke if you're the one with one in your chest.
I surely would NOT let someone shoot me with anything that was even as pathetic as .1% OSS.
Your Bravado May Vary

 

[David Wile]

Hey Mad Man,

Thanks for all the information you provided. Your post really contained a lot of information that takes a whole lot of thought to consider it in a meaningful manner. Quite frankly, I had to read and re-read much of it several times, and I am still not sure what I think about some of the points. Sadly, it is far easier to make a trite remark shot from the hip without any serious consideration of what is really involved in a situation which is rarely black or white. Most things in life rarely are black and white, and really do require consideration. Thanks again for all the food for thought.

Best wishes,
Dave Wile

 

[Mad Man]

Something else to consider:

In addition to not being immediately arrested after a defensive shooting like a civilian would be, some police departments provide counseling for officers who have to shoot somebody. Officers receive support from their peers. To some degree, an officer who shoots somebody is treated by the system as a victim. (Policies obviously vary from department to department).

Even a justified killing can effect the shooter. I whole-heartedly support this treatment for police officers during the initial phase of the investigation. Innocent until proven guilty, and all of that.

Contrast that with the treatment of a civilian in the same situation. While subjected to the same potential trauma, not only is the civilian not afforded counseling, but is treated as a criminal (arrested, handcuffed, jailed, etc.). This can only make an already bad situation more stressful for a civilian who has to use deadly force to defend himself.


Remember this case about a man who saved several lives after grabbing the bad guy's gun? He killed one of the robbers, and was jailed because "possesing" said gun violated his parole for an earlier drug conviction : http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/08/17/MN229399.DTL

San Francisco -- A man hailed by San Francisco police for seizing a robber's gun to stop a violent holdup at a live-work loft has been jailed by state authorities on a possible parole violation -- handling the gun.

Police are frustrated that Detrick Washington, a 25-year-old San Franciscan who they say was instrumental in saving himself and four other people Tuesday night, has been locked up.

"He took a chance. I believe we could call him a hero," Inspector Armand Gordon said. "He basically saved five people's lives, including his own."

.....

 

[JShirley]

16 yr olds who commit crimes and attack LEO's are not 'boys'.

Well, do you mean that as one type of individual? Attacking a LEO is a crime, of course- did you mean "16 year olds who commit crimes THEN attack LEO's"? Or, did you mean "16 year olds who commit crimes OR attack LEO's"?

In any case, if you mean individuals age 16 who commit crimes, that would be all of us. Yep, every one.

Speeding...crime.
Jaywalking...crime.
Theft...crime.
Changing lanes in intersections...crime.
Running stop signs...crime.
Indecent Exposure...crime.
Assault...crime.

I'm pretty sure all of us is guilty of one or more of these "crimes". Should we be exterminated?
My warning antenna tend to up when I hear that any "type" of person should be exterminated. Sounds like a Final Solution to me.

 

[clubsoda22]

Had a veterin officer and his rookie in my college city go into foot pursuit of a 15 year old carjacker. They chased im into a dead end alley and the kid whipped around, pulled a gun and fired a wild shot. From a good distance the veterin officer fired 3 shots striking the kid twice in the chest and once in the head. After testifying in court the veterin officer was confronted by the mother of the kid infront of the media with camera's rolling. She asked simply "Why?" to which he responded "Because i'm a better shot than your son"

Then came the riots.

 

[JShirley]

"Because i'm a better shot than your son"

Good thing I wasn't drinking anything when I read that!

 

[BluesBear]

"Because i'm a better shot than your son"

Absotivily, Posilutely BRILLIANT !

 

[Quartus]

like a civilian would be, some police

Police ARE civilians


Except in a police state.


Which is why the terminology matters.

 

[CZ-100]

Thats Terrible.. He was such a GOOD BOY.

 

[David Wile]

Hey folks,

Clubsoda22 just cited the following:

Had a veterin officer and his rookie in my college city go into foot pursuit of a 15 year old carjacker. They chased im into a dead end alley and the kid whipped around, pulled a gun and fired a wild shot. From a good distance the veterin officer fired 3 shots striking the kid twice in the chest and once in the head. After testifying in court the veterin officer was confronted by the mother of the kid infront of the media with camera's rolling. She asked simply "Why?" to which he responded "Because i'm a better shot than your son"

Let's assume that the paragraph cited is accurate in the details provided. The cop's response would certainly be accurate. However, his response is also a sterling example of extremely bad judgement. While the response may have been accurate, it was inflammatory in its nature and intent. Why? Because he goes on to say, "Then came the riots."

Not only was his remark bad judgement, it would probably be found negligent, and that would put his police department and city on the hook for damages. As a taxpayer, I don't like the idea of paying increased taxes for the bad judgement of cops or any other government employees.

Look at the knee jerk posts that followed which showed the writers' obvious glee at the cop's flip remark. None of those folks stopped to consider the ramifications of that cop's remark and how many people were harmed as a result of the remark. What is this thing we have in us that makes us speak so quickly without cosidering what we are saying?

If someone in private industry were to say something similar which caused his company to be exposed to civil lawsuit, you can bet that person would be looking for another job - and rightly so.

The cop may have been correct as to why the woman's son was dead instead of himself, but his remark caused more needless problems. Considering he was "in front of the media with camera's rolling," could he have expected his remark to contribute to further trouble and expose his city to further legal problems? Absolutely. While his remark may have been "correct," it was not cool or neat or funny. It was irresponsible and wrong. It is a shame that some of us think it was funny.

Best wishes,
Dave Wile

 

[Sergeant Bob]

David Wile

Let's assume that the paragraph cited is accurate in the details provided. The cop's response would certainly be accurate. However, his response is also a sterling example of extremely bad judgement. While the response may have been accurate, it was inflammatory in its nature and intent. Why? Because he goes on to say, "Then came the riots."

Why just assume it's accurate? If a cop really stated that in front of the media outside a courtroom, with the ensuing riots, it would be easy enough to verify with some linkage. I'm sure something like that would be all over the internet.
I did some searching and could find no references to it. Could you help us out here Clubsoda?

 

[JShirley]

Look at the knee jerk posts that followed which showed the writers' obvious glee at the cop's flip remark. None of those folks stopped to consider the ramifications of that cop's remark and how many people were harmed as a result of the remark.

Mr. Wile,

Let me explain something to you. No one was harmed "as a result" of a police officer's statement. If anyone was harmed through rioting, it was because people chose to riot.
When asked why the police officer shot the boy, "Because I was a better shot than he was" is not only correct and true, but I find it cool, and neat, and funny.
The truth often is.
Now, I think if we find documentation, it will show that riots occurred because of "an evil racist shooting" or some such nonsense. In which case, the officer's remark did not "cause" any riots, (even though we understand that PEOPLE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS, instead of there existing some "knee jerk" response that MAKES them burn down their neighborhoods and kill others) the totally correct actions of self-defense "caused" the riots.

John

 

[David Wile]

Mr. Shirley,

I am sorry for you. It is sad that anyone finds humor in the death and the sorrow of others. Perhaps the Holocaust was a real knee slapper for you. Maybe a lynching would be a real hoot for you - as long as it is one of "them" and not one of "us."

People may choose to riot, and that is regrettable. However, the cop's statement apparently incited the riot, and that is reprehensible - not humorous.

You are apparently a moderator on this forum, and the example you set for others is just as bad as the example the cop set for his community when he made such a remark. Your example is not only bad for this forum, it is also a bad example for 2nd Amendment rights. There are folks out there who would love to take the guns away from everyone but cops and soldiers, and they take great pleasure in pointing to your comments such as yours that you found the cop's words to be "cool, and neat, and funny." To them, we are all just red neck racist trash who cannot be trusted with firearms.

You set a bad example for gun owners and as a moderator for this forum.

David Wile

 

[JShirley]

Mr. Wile,

It might help if you read all my replies in this thread.

My warning antenna tend to up when I hear that any "type" of person should be exterminated. Sounds like a Final Solution to me.

-Me

Also note the cartoon of Hitler in hell. Obviously my hero...

People may choose to riot, and that is regrettable.

No, usually it's stupid. Folks typically burn down their own neighborhoods. Not that wanton property destruction of others' is great, either.

I used your own phraseology. You're quoting yourself. (Which is pretty cool, neat, and funny, huh? )

If this story is true, I'd love to meet that officer, and shake his hand.

Of course, the shooting wasn't funny. Since it happened, the truthful response to a foolish "why" is.