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.
However, the mere fact alone that a person possesses a deadly weapons does not justify the used of deadly force. (Harris v. Roderick (9th Cir. 1997) 126 F.3rd 1189, 1202.)
See also Curnow v. Ridgecrest Police (9th Cir. 1991) 952 F.2nd 321, 324-325; holding that deadly force was unreasonable where the suspect possessed a gun but was not pointing it at the officers and was not facing the officers when they shot.
Source: www.legalupdateonline.com...
Can you show me in that law where it states that punishment for the crime of openly carrying a toy is an offence that carries the punishment of summary execution on the spot, with bullets in the back.
I wait patiently.
And also show me a law that states openly carrying a real firearm is punishable by summary execution by bullets to the back.
The last I knew, cops being judge, jury and executioner existed only in the realms of Judge Dread.
blackthorne
sheriff promises an open and transparent investigation.
Xcathdra
JayinAR
No, but they are responsible for their own.
As is the kid,
Speaking of trigger happy... You do see the double standard you just made right?
JayinAR
In my story, if the cop had pointed his weapon at me, I would have shot him. Simple as that.
JayinAR
In this story, the cops fired APPARENTLY without any threat of bodily harm to themselves.
Wrong.. You nor I get to decide if an officer perceives a threat or not. That falls to the officer and the subsequent inquiries.
Again you are ignoring the fact the kid had a weapon. While we can go back and forth, people have to accept the fact that we dont know what the weapons look like. To base your argument off of the no threat opinion does not hold up.
And? Contrarty to popular belief and officer is not required to start at the bottom and work their way up. Confronting a person who is holding what looked like a real gun allows law enforcement to jump steps. We do not have to start at any particular "level".
JayinAR
They skipped a couple of steps in the "use of force continuum".
Steps (in general)
* - Physical presence
* - Verbal Commands
* - Empty Hand
* - Intermediate weapons
* - Lethal force
Lets compare now -
Physical presence - Officers in a marked patrol unit while wearing offical uniforms - check
Verbal Commands - They gave multiple commands to drop the weapon - check.
Empty hand - Not applicable due to the weapon.
Intermediate - Not applicable due to the weapon.
Lethal force - Failure to drop the weapon = threat.
JayinAR
You don't go around shooting people like freakin' John Wayne simply because they aren't listening to you. Jesus!
Actually when a person is armed and refuses to put a weapon down, they are the ones responsible for the situation and aftermath.
I guess we could make the counter argument that the kid was john wayne'ing it when he failed to comply.
So yes the police used their force continuum correctly.
REsearch info for those who want to learn -
Reasonableness Standard[edit]The United States Supreme Court, in the case of Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, (1989), held that when engaged in situations where the use of force is necessary to effect an arrest, or to protect an officer's life or that of another, a law enforcement officer must act as other reasonable officers would have acted in a similar, tense, rapidly evolving situation.
These deputies did not have the luxery of reading a news story, nor the luxery of knowing if the guns are real or not. When its not discerable, its considered a weapon.
Is this a horrific siuation? Absolutely
Could it have been prevented? Absolutely
All that was needed was for the kid to put the weapon down.
HawkeyeNation Put yourself in the shoes off a police officer just one day and your opinion will change. Like the above stated this could've been handled differently and I wish a young kid did not lose his life.
Wrabbit2000
reply to post by OneManArmy
Can you show me in that law where it states that punishment for the crime of openly carrying a toy is an offence that carries the punishment of summary execution on the spot, with bullets in the back.
I wait patiently.
And also show me a law that states openly carrying a real firearm is punishable by summary execution by bullets to the back.
The last I knew, cops being judge, jury and executioner existed only in the realms of Judge Dread.
I would love to continue debating this...but you're pulling things from thin air in profound examples of hyperbole to stoke emotions. That's just not workable and leaves nowhere to go with it.
Can I show you a law where ..what? Cops can shoot someone in the back for ..well, anything? Not really.... We can get into the technical engagement guidelines departments have for firing on a fleeing felon, depending on the felony witnessed by the Officer making the call ...but that doesn't apply here.
It doesn't apply any more than suggesting anything was a summary execution, murder or deliberate killing of a child with disregard to law or circumstance.
If it comes out that these cops screwed up, I'll be as vocal against as I am currently about waiting to see all the information, while leaning in support of them. I am just as hard AGAINST cops at times as I can be supporting them, as my thread and posting history stands clear on. It is a case by case thing though, and in this case, I don't think I have near enough information to what happened to make a call either way.
I'm shocked by how many, through assumption of facts no one has, can make such a call with such absolute terms.
Bedlam
You can pretty much guarantee if you drive up behind someone and shout at them, they'll turn around. And it doesn't matter so much what you shout. It's a socially conditioned response. You are going to look first and think about what was said second. ESPECIALLY if you aren't "up to something" to begin with.
jimmyx
why would any "kid" be carrying around at 3:15 pm, an exact replica of an AK in the first place???...to parents, demand that your kid never carry a gun out in public openly displayed, you WILL BE STOPPED, and you WILL BE IN DANGER OF BEING SHOT by police...friggin' morons, no common sense, this is 100% the fault of the parents...hey, maybe next time some parent will let their "kid" wear a fake suicide vest out in public, with fake satchels of explosives and wires coming out of it...that would be fun right??...again, friggin morons
OneManArmy
jimmyx
why would any "kid" be carrying around at 3:15 pm, an exact replica of an AK in the first place???...to parents, demand that your kid never carry a gun out in public openly displayed, you WILL BE STOPPED, and you WILL BE IN DANGER OF BEING SHOT by police...friggin' morons, no common sense, this is 100% the fault of the parents...hey, maybe next time some parent will let their "kid" wear a fake suicide vest out in public, with fake satchels of explosives and wires coming out of it...that would be fun right??...again, friggin morons
Ive heard it all now, now its the parents fault. SMH.
You can pretty much guarantee if you drive up behind someone and shout at them, they'll turn around. And it doesn't matter so much what you shout. It's a socially conditioned response. You are going to look first and think about what was said second. ESPECIALLY if you aren't "up to something" to begin with.
jimmyx
why would any "kid" be carrying around at 3:15 pm, an exact replica of an AK in the first place???...
jimmyx
OneManArmy
jimmyx
why would any "kid" be carrying around at 3:15 pm, an exact replica of an AK in the first place???...to parents, demand that your kid never carry a gun out in public openly displayed, you WILL BE STOPPED, and you WILL BE IN DANGER OF BEING SHOT by police...friggin' morons, no common sense, this is 100% the fault of the parents...hey, maybe next time some parent will let their "kid" wear a fake suicide vest out in public, with fake satchels of explosives and wires coming out of it...that would be fun right??...again, friggin morons
Ive heard it all now, now its the parents fault. SMH.
did you see the picture of the gun?...looks real to me...exact same color of the barrel and the stock, same shape, same size...have you heard about any school shootings recently?? tell me...how did they end? how many boys his age have you seen, openly carrying in the middle of the afternoon, an exact replica of an AK down the street? what would you think if you saw this guy walking right past your house with one of these, as your own kids were out front...would you just smile at him and say howdy?edit on 25-10-2013 by jimmyx because: (no reason given)
Dav1d
The office certainly appears to have made some significant assumptions, and those assumptions proved to be wrong. Those assumptions directly lead to the killing of a child. The actions of law enforcement officers must be reasonable, in this case I suggest they are far from reasonable. I suggest that if it had been George Zimmerman he would be back in jail, not home in bed. Being a member of law enforcement doesn't make one above the law! As much as some in law enforcement would like to pretend that it does! Being an officer doesn't yet invest in you the powers of judge and jury. You don't have an Inherent right to summarily execute anyone you fear.
OneManArmy
jimmyx
OneManArmy
jimmyx
why would any "kid" be carrying around at 3:15 pm, an exact replica of an AK in the first place???...to parents, demand that your kid never carry a gun out in public openly displayed, you WILL BE STOPPED, and you WILL BE IN DANGER OF BEING SHOT by police...friggin' morons, no common sense, this is 100% the fault of the parents...hey, maybe next time some parent will let their "kid" wear a fake suicide vest out in public, with fake satchels of explosives and wires coming out of it...that would be fun right??...again, friggin morons
Ive heard it all now, now its the parents fault. SMH.
did you see the picture of the gun?...looks real to me...exact same color of the barrel and the stock, same shape, same size...have you heard about any school shootings recently?? tell me...how did they end? how many boys his age have you seen, openly carrying in the middle of the afternoon, an exact replica of an AK down the street? what would you think if you saw this guy walking right past your house with one of these, as your own kids were out front...would you just smile at him and say howdy?edit on 25-10-2013 by jimmyx because: (no reason given)
It wouldnt be a replica if it didnt look like the real thing.
I would have challenged him on what the hell he thought he was doing with what looked like an assault rifle?
Sure I would have had my guns sights trained on him, I would have at least given him a chance to respond, and if he responded aggressively I would have shot to maim, I wouldnt have unleashed my clip into his back.
But hey its the parents fault right?
OneManArmy
Dav1d
The office certainly appears to have made some significant assumptions, and those assumptions proved to be wrong. Those assumptions directly lead to the killing of a child. The actions of law enforcement officers must be reasonable, in this case I suggest they are far from reasonable. I suggest that if it had been George Zimmerman he would be back in jail, not home in bed. Being a member of law enforcement doesn't make one above the law! As much as some in law enforcement would like to pretend that it does! Being an officer doesn't yet invest in you the powers of judge and jury. You don't have an Inherent right to summarily execute anyone you fear.
Sums it up right about exactly, I dont need to have been there to see this fact.
The boys death is all the proof I need.