It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Armed eighth-grader shot and killed by police

page: 2
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 01:46 PM
link   
My bros from the same school district he's in 10th grade just turned 16 this December




posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Communicationwillfreeus
 


Police don't shoot to injure, they shoot to kill.

That is why we have non-leathal weapons, so they do not have to kill. Once a police officer pulls his gun, if it goes off, it is meant to kill the criminal, not to stop them. Police know this, they train this way.
If they pull their guns and use them, someone dies.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   
God bless our screwed-up kids. War in the Heavens: It's a reality methinks. Sooooooo Sad.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by CALGARIAN
 


For me there are not enough details as yet...but I keep thinking....why did this young boy bring a gun to school? Was he reacting.... to bullying at school? Was he reacting to abuse at home?

Why didn't the police shoot him in the leg or shoulder? For me these questions need to be answered. There just is not enough story.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by gunshooter

Originally posted by Justaposter
reply to post by wrathchild
 


Maybe his birthday is late, my son just turned 15 and is in the 8th grade.

This is just so sad, my local news only has a few details, but did say they repeatedly asked him to drop his gun and he didn't.

This is a very sad story, and broke my heart just reading the few details that were out about it.


I don't know how your state works, but when I was 15, I was in tenth grade.
2nd


same here. I was in the 10th grade. the only kids in the 8th grade that were 15yrs old were future/ex DOC inmates.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 01:52 PM
link   
Besides, don't officers use those bean bag guns to prevent someone getting shot?



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 01:57 PM
link   
only in movies do you see a cop shoot a guy in the shoulder.....

if somebody was pointing a gun at you...and your job description states that do whatever it takes to protect yourself..do it

shoot for "large-body-mass".. that is how police are trained

another case of suicide by "cops"...

Asking for I.D. and whether or not mommy or daddy loved you as a child is not an option when your looking down your sights at a gun wielding lunatic.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Communicationwillfreeus

Originally posted by DelMar
Sad story indeed and I feel bad for his parents and friends. But at 15, you should have enough sense to know that you will be shot if you engage the police with a weapon. Should he have been tasered, you asked. No.


If they repeatedly ask him to drop the gun then someone had time to take aim. Why did that person/officer take a kill shot if there was no direct hostages? Just sayin.


Because real life isn't the movies; You never shoot to "warn"; "wound;scare or intimidate".

You shoot to"stop" immediately.
To prevent the loss of life.
Guns save lives.We don't have details ;possibly he pointed the gun at the officer or gave them some indication he was about to fire.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mister_Bit

Originally posted by Communicationwillfreeus

Originally posted by Mister_Bit
Just read the link and I don't see anything sad about it, he had a gun, he was shot.

I wont be wasting any tears for him.



You are really young and just mouthing off or just really jaded to humanism. It is sad because of the people affected. The children around him will be forever haunted by this. The teachers who were there will be affected as will the officers. It is a very sad situation that this boy's life had come to the point of "suicide by cop." It would be sad for anyone to have their life turned to this moment. If you need anything else explained I am sure myself or some other good people here would love to help you out.

Better to be haunted by this than shot dead by a crazed idiot or worse, maimed... those "haunted" kids are still alive thanks to the cops.


I was expressing why it was a sad situation to some one who could not see why it was sad for this to happen. I wasn't saying anything else about it being o.k. or handled wrong. You should really get your concepts and reading comprehension down before going at someone without making sure what you are saying fits. However, you are correct in stating the obvious, (insert goofy voice with eyes crossed) " Better to be haunted by this than shot dead by a crazed idiot or worse, maimed... those "haunted" kids are still alive thanks to the cops.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Darkblade71
reply to post by Communicationwillfreeus
 
Police don't shoot to injure, they shoot to kill.

That is why we have non-leathal weapons, so they do not have to kill. Once a police officer pulls his gun, if it goes off, it is meant to kill the criminal, not to stop them. Police know this, they train this way.
If they pull their guns and use them, someone dies.


That training is more to protect the officer and to instill the fact that deadly force is a last resort. It's not law. An officer should always be allowed their own judgment.

If you can't attempt to take down an armed, but NOT shooting 8th grader with some other means than a kill-shot, you just might be the type that wants to shoot somebody anyways.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by 46ACE

Originally posted by Communicationwillfreeus

Originally posted by DelMar
Sad story indeed and I feel bad for his parents and friends. But at 15, you should have enough sense to know that you will be shot if you engage the police with a weapon. Should he have been tasered, you asked. No.


If they repeatedly ask him to drop the gun then someone had time to take aim. Why did that person/officer take a kill shot if there was no direct hostages? Just sayin.


Because real life isn't the movies; You never shoot to "warn"; "wound;scare or intimidate".

You shoot to"stop" immediately.
To prevent the loss of life.
Guns save lives.We don't have details ;possibly he pointed the gun at the officer or gave them some indication he was about to fire.


Guns do save lives, I 100% believe that. Thanks for answering my question. I hope for more details to validate your guesses.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Communicationwillfreeus
 

UHM no(let's talk"reading comprehension" ): The unfortunate officer placed in the situation who was forced to fire on an adolescent will be "forever haunted" by the kids death at his hands.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by caladonea
 


Lots of gangs and home invaders here just saying



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by The GUT
 


I am in agreement, they should of used non-lethal force, however, I was not there, so do not know how it all went down.

Bottom line here is when a police officer tells you to drop whatever it is you have in your hand, be it a pen, or a gun, you best drop it.

Or you will end up dead.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 02:06 PM
link   
Man this hits close to home.
Being from the Valley, I know there have been quite a few
of these incidents(not as tragic as this one) lately in the
surrounding areas.
So sad.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by The GUT

Originally posted by Darkblade71
reply to post by Communicationwillfreeus
 
Police don't shoot to injure, they shoot to kill.

That is why we have non-leathal weapons, so they do not have to kill. Once a police officer pulls his gun, if it goes off, it is meant to kill the criminal, not to stop them. Police know this, they train this way.
If they pull their guns and use them, someone dies.


That training is more to protect the officer and to instill the fact that deadly force is a last resort. It's not law. An officer should always be allowed their own judgment.

If you can't attempt to take down an armed, but NOT shooting 8th grader with some other means than a kill-shot, you just might be the type that wants to shoot somebody anyways.



Thank you. That was my point exactly. If they had time to talk, they had time to aim. The people on here who say otherwise would not speak so boldly if the decision were being made about their own child. Anyone who says he deserved it is speaking coldly from the ease of anonymity behind their computer. If they were put in a group they would tone it down and look for aggravating circumstances before throwing out the, "that young boy deserved to die," B.S. Again, thank you for expressing a smart level headed response.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by The GUT
 


Its hard for most people to realize that being a police officer is still just a job....

You likely have a wife and kids....they need you to come home at the end of the day.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Darkblade71
reply to post by The GUT
 


I am in agreement, they should of used non-lethal force, however, I was not there, so do not know how it all went down.

Bottom line here is when a police officer tells you to drop whatever it is you have in your hand, be it a pen, or a gun, you best drop it.

Or you will end up dead.


I do agree with that. But, you are really at the mercy of the officer holding the gun. You just have to hope it isn't the guy looking for justification to make his first "kill" for all the boys at the precinct.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Darkblade71
reply to post by Communicationwillfreeus
 


Police don't shoot to injure, they shoot to kill.

That is why we have non-leathal weapons, so they do not have to kill. Once a police officer pulls his gun, if it goes off, it is meant to kill the criminal, not to stop them. Police know this, they train this way.
If they pull their guns and use them, someone dies.


Police officers are not "judge;jury and executioner"; they shoot to "stop": to prevent the imminent lethal bodily harm to themselves or others. If you die as a result of your wounds That's an unfortunate side effect of violent crime but not usually the officers intention. ( "so called justified shooting anyway) Thats why that kid that got shot in the backwhile facedown on the train platform in San Francisco was such a heinous crime.

Cops are not "executioners".They have no more authority to commit " murder" than you or I. All human deathsare "homicides"; "Murder"however is decided in a court of law.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by 46ACE
reply to post by Communicationwillfreeus
 

UHM no(let's talk"reading comprehension" ): The unfortunate officer placed in the situation who was forced to fire on an adolescent will be "forever haunted" by the kids death at his hands.



Unless that officer was excited to get his first kill, then he may not be haunted by shooting a kid? "UHM no" you still aren't with me try again.
It was a sad situation that no one "deserved" to be a part of. I can't be any clearer than that.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join