Police shoot 13 year old carrying fake rifle.

reply to post by Dav1d


Well ive seen AK47 airsoft replicas and yes the real thing and from a distance there is no way to tell.As for the other officer did he have a clear line of fire? Did he not respond in time just because he didnt fire doesnt mean he came to a different conclusion this is an assumption on your part. You have no idea what the officer was thinking he could have been busy diving for cover you have no clue yet you try to use this as proof well its not.

You asked what another person would do. We happen to have another experience officer there, and we know what he did. No where do I suggest why. Only that he failed to shoot.

You too were not there, yet you claim he was to inexperienced to get into a position where he could fire from. Nothing supports this wild guess. Nor do you have anything that supports your other guesses.

The facts are there was another officer present who was experienced.
That officer did not fire.
The officer that did fire lied to the court as an expert witness on fire arms.
The officer that fired posted in threads where the subject was how to kill and unarmed man and get away with it. Where the consensus was to claim you are afraid for your life and others.
Those are the facts.

Airsoft sells AK47 guns that cost 35 dollars and AK47 guns that are made from wood and metal that go for 200 or more dollars. This was a cheap plastic toy for 35 dollars, even the reporters in the room acknowledge they had no problem seeing it was plastic!

Dav1d
You asked what another person would do. We happen to have another experience officer there, and we know what he did. No where do I suggest why. Only that he failed to shoot.

You too were not there, yet you claim he was to inexperienced to get into a position where he could fire from. Nothing supports this wild guess. Nor do you have anything that supports your other guesses.

The facts are there was another officer present who was experienced.
That officer did not fire.
The officer that did fire lied to the court as an expert witness on fire arms.
The officer that fired posted in threads where the subject was how to kill and unarmed man and get away with it. Where the consensus was to claim you are afraid for your life and others.
Those are the facts.

See your inferring i made a statement as fact no merely pointing out to you other possibilities but once again you took it to mean i somehow i thought the other officer inexperienced obviously you have an emotional interest in the outcome.What ever your personal motivations are the fact remains the decision by the other officer not to fire doesnt matter since we dont even know if a decision was mad or the opportunity didnt present itself. Or other circumstances were involved like being on the radio you have no clue why he didnt fire his sidearm yet your willing to use that as proof the other officer shouldnt have fired either. This is a classic non sequitur since we have no clue why the officer didnt fire this was the point i was trying to get you to see.

dragonridr

...What ever your personal motivations are the fact remains the decision by the other officer not to fire doesnt matter since we dont even know if a decision was mad or the opportunity didnt present itself.

I don't know what your personal motivation (seeing as how you want to make this about me) is but your claim that it "doesn't matter" when we don't know why he didn't shot is ridiculous. Of course it matters.

Witness report that both officers got out of the car and had there weapons train on the child. I'm willing to assume an eleven year veteran police officer knows how to park his car in such a way that both officers have the child in their sight. I'm also willing to assume that an eleven year veteran police officer isn't on the radio, when he believes there is a possibility his partner life is in danger.

Just like the posters on this thread that won't acknowledge that shooting 8 rounds into a child is more than attempt to stop the child it is the intention to kill the child.

Dav1d
Thank you for demonstrating what a bull head opinionated thug does.

No.. thank you for proving my point.

Dav1d

dragonridr

...What ever your personal motivations are the fact remains the decision by the other officer not to fire doesnt matter since we dont even know if a decision was mad or the opportunity didnt present itself.

I don't know what your personal motivation (seeing as how you want to make this about me) is but your claim that it "doesn't matter" when we don't know why he didn't shot is ridiculous. Of course it matters.

Witness report that both officers got out of the car and had there weapons train on the child. I'm willing to assume an eleven year veteran police officer knows how to park his car in such a way that both officers have the child in their sight. I'm also willing to assume that an eleven year veteran police officer isn't on the radio, when he believes there is a possibility his partner life is in danger.

Just like the posters on this thread that won't acknowledge that shooting 8 rounds into a child is more than attempt to stop the child it is the intention to kill the child.

Im not making it about you merely your tactics. Play on emotion link together facts to tell your story. See you asked a question ill give you an answer what is my motivation? Well the answer is simple i dont believe people should be convicted in the court of public opinion with people believing there psychic. In a situation where someone believes there life is in danger has a call to make. You cant take information learned later and apply it to the situation had a buddy in Afghanistan i didnt agree with the decision he made but i understood why he did it. Unless you can understand what its like to have to make a life and death call there not taken lightly nor should they be.When the investigation is complete if the officer had truly believed a man was walking around with an AK47 in a neighborhood and they did indeed warn them twice to drop the gun then this is an unfortunate accident.

See when people have agendas they try to make everything plug into there world view. Cops are evil governments bad priests are child molesters or mexicans are illegals its all stereo typing. And that is the worst thing people can do because people are no longer responsible for themselves but an entire group.And in a country the quickest way to bring it down is to separate its citizens.If i wanted to take down any country first thing you do is create an us verses them and i see it all over now a days. Democrats vs republicans rich vs poor,black vs white,Islam vs Christians your playing there games wake up people.

If you follow this story from the beginning you know that Law Enforcement has been spinning this case from the very beginning. The original report said the child had been shot at least once. At that point in time, they knew he had been shot multiple times. You can not set out to minimize the events and downplay the events, and not expect it to matter. This is one of their own, and they are spinning the facts in a way that clearly shows this. If this child had been killed by a civilian we would be getting a very different set of facts. Just like they claimed the officers shouted twice when they acknowledged they where not sure they had even shouted!

They are dribbling out facts in a way that is calculated to minimize the impact and anger.

Dav1d
If you follow this story from the beginning you know that Law Enforcement has been spinning this case from the very beginning. The original report said the child had been shot at least once. At that point in time, they knew he had been shot multiple times. You can not set out to minimize the events and downplay the events, and not expect it to matter. This is one of their own, and they are spinning the facts in a way that clearly shows this. If this child had been killed by a civilian we would be getting a very different set of facts. Just like they claimed the officers shouted twice when they acknowledged they where not sure they had even shouted!

They are dribbling out facts in a way that is calculated to minimize the impact and anger.

Ok let me explain something nothing is clear at the beginning press will put out any information they get false or otherwise.What the police knew or didnt know early on information is constantly changing.If you think everything put out by the press is true your sadly mistaken.Where in the information age now it dont have to be correct theres no fact checking the rush is to be the first to put it on the wires.Now your assuming its protection but stop and think the police do not want to be the source of wrong information before they release it they are going to try to keep there facts as current as possible.You see this as stalling or not releasing information but they cant one if the police release information and the police officer can show the department was hostile he can accuse them of setting him up making everything they do suspect.I call this the OJ defense the police department has to walk a fine line between the public and the officers rights.Are they protecting him well yes in a respect there trying to protect his rights.

Nowfor your next part if a civilian shot a man running around the streets with an AK47 not sure how this could play oot unless drug deal gone bad? There is no possible situation to explain why someone would shoot someone they thought was an AK47 unless it was self defense and if they meet the bar for self defense they would be right back out of jail the same day.You keep using irrelevant posts to boost your claims so ill make it simple.

In order for this police officer to get in trouble for shooting that boy it has to be shown that he knew the gun wasnt real this is unlikely because im sure he thought it was. So that being out of the way then his next hurdle is was him drawing his weapon and firing at what he perceived to be a threat a logical reaction? And did he try to get the subject to comply? If both these answers are yes then we have a very tragic accident. If there no he needs to go to jail because then he violated the boys rights and then needs to also be put on manslaughter charges because his negligence led to the boys death. Im not defending the officer by any means but i will defend the rights he has because emotion doesnt determine guilt or innocence it just clouds the issue.

dragonridr
reply to post by Dav1d

 

Ive seen alot of people in this thread think this is an opportunity to make there dislike for government or police a public issue.

No, a lot of the people in this thread are taking the opportunity to make their dislike for corruption and oppression a public issue. If you ask me, its been a long time coming, and better late than never.
Government is necessary, law enforcement is necessary, the way they carry out those duties is not, its corrupt to the core and its time to clean house. If there is any justice in the world, this poor boys death may lead to some real change, but I doubt it will. Its only when enough people get angry about something that any sort of change might even be a possibility.

Interesting note visibly angry people carrying replica guns are walking on the streets of Santa Rosa and guess what? They are not being executed! They are not being killed! The cops have request that they not carry guns on the street, but they don't seem to have any problems telling that they are not real this week. Not one has been killed.... Not one wounded...

Dav1d
Interesting note visibly angry people carrying replica guns are walking on the streets of Santa Rosa and guess what? They are not being executed! They are not being killed! The cops have request that they not carry guns on the street, but they don't seem to have any problems telling that they are not real this week. Not one has been killed.... Not one wounded...

Because the protestors didn't point a weapon at law enforcement.

Secondly im sure they informed the police of the planned protest.

OneManArmy

dragonridr
reply to post by Dav1d

 

Ive seen alot of people in this thread think this is an opportunity to make there dislike for government or police a public issue.

No, a lot of the people in this thread are taking the opportunity to make their dislike for corruption and oppression a public issue. If you ask me, its been a long time coming, and better late than never.
Government is necessary, law enforcement is necessary, the way they carry out those duties is not, its corrupt to the core and its time to clean house. If there is any justice in the world, this poor boys death may lead to some real change, but I doubt it will. Its only when enough people get angry about something that any sort of change might even be a possibility.

edit on 201310America/Chicago10pm10pmTue, 29 Oct 2013 14:25:50 -05001013 by OneManArmy because: (no reason given)

You funny in one sentence ou claim people are not using this for there own personal issues with the government.Then the next you claim its because of a corrupt government.Yeah no your right peoples personal issues arent involved at all.Hopefully theres more people like me and less like you willing to wait for the facts instead of using this as an opportunity to share your beliefs.

Dav1d
Interesting note visibly angry people carrying replica guns are walking on the streets of Santa Rosa and guess what? They are not being executed! They are not being killed! The cops have request that they not carry guns on the street, but they don't seem to have any problems telling that they are not real this week. Not one has been killed.... Not one wounded...

I dont believe police departments shoot protesters ah that would be really bad dont you think?So what was your point really other then to once again put up irrelevant information to prove your point.Funny you can allways tell agitators from cooler heads. In fact here i give props to the boys brother letting everyone know the family didnt want violence.And warned the protesters to please refrain from violence cooler heads resolve things not emotion. Im sure if the officer is guilty hes going to jail but dont convict him before all the facts are known it will be another month or two. Look on the bright side youll have more time to rant and rave how broken the system is.

Xcathdra


Because the protestors didn't point a weapon at law enforcement.

Of course when this child was executed, he wasn't facing law enforcement. His broken replicate gun wasn't pointed at anyone. Yet in less than 10 seconds he was just another homicide, dead.

Same conditions, only now instead of a child, you have an angry crowd, an angry armed crowd in your words of last week. And some of those "guns" were pointed at people. Yet no one got kill, no one got wounded, and just how many were arrested for having a "gun" in public? Where the laws changed that day in California? Is it only certain days like Tuesdays that an unarmed child may be gunned down in California and it is acceptable? Once again you have Law Enforcement not enforcing the laws but choosing to play Judge Dredd, choosing to be judge Jury and executioner if needed. It's not Law Enforcements job to pick and choose what laws to enforce and when, any more than it is Law Enforcement job to be executioner.

You Xcathdra told us just last week it was a crime for a child to have a replicate gun in public, a crime so severe that it justified the homicide of the child! Yet this week visibly angry children armed with actual replicate guns is not criminal behavior, is not justification to take action! A visibly double standard. You preached as to how the possession of a replica was a crime in California, a crime that justified a homicide. Yet this week it's nothing.

Yep it's really starting to look like location, neighborhood, and the fact that this child had a hoodie played a role in this homicide, as well as the often preached need to react, not think. To take action, any action... As well as the knowledge that one can always claim one was afraid later.

Dav1d
Interesting note visibly angry people carrying replica guns are walking on the streets of Santa Rosa and guess what? They are not being executed! They are not being killed! The cops have request that they not carry guns on the street, but they don't seem to have any problems telling that they are not real this week. Not one has been killed.... Not one wounded...

When I used to work in the city... if we get a job call in a bad neighborhood we would carry to the hilt.... the thing is we would see kids with bb guns packed in their waistline and see them play with their toy guns etc. dressed in baggy clothes... did we shoot them? Nope!!! We could tell the difference in child's play, as well all the people in the neighborhood could too... did they shoot kids with toys? Nope!

I'd say this guy became a cop so he could shoot someone... I think 10% of those who become cops are like this guy... dunno what causes it, maybe video games or being bullied in high school? I have a ex-friend who joined the military just for that...said to kill someone... sick Mother F'er. I disowned him real quick and warned the military of his intentions...

dragonridr


I dont believe police departments shoot protesters ah that would be really bad dont you think?

But shooting kids that happen to live in the wrong neighborhood is some how acceptable? Somehow no big deal?

dragonridr
So what was your point really other then to once again put up irrelevant information to prove your point.

My point is once again we have experienced officers that have made a choice not to shoot when confronted with visibly angry children (unlike Andy) armed with guns! Not only did they choose not to shoot, they chose not to confront, not to arrest, not to confiscate. Just last week here on this thread we where told that this behavior (displaying a broken replicate gun) in California was criminal behavior that justified a homicide, yet now it's nothing. No big deal... It goes directly to what would reasonable officers do when confronted with a child armed with a gun on a public street in this county. We know that his partner chose not to shoot. We now know many other officers also made that same choice.

dragonridr
Funny you can allways tell agitators from cooler heads. In fact here i give props to the boys brother letting everyone know the family didnt want violence.

Yes cooler heads don't shoot children for having a toy on the streets! Nor on the sidewalks, or even in fields! Glad you can see that! as to the brother what else could he have said? Anything other than that would have been used against him, as at a minimum attempting to incite a riot.

dragonridr
And warned the protesters to please refrain from violence cooler heads resolve things not emotion.

Once again a double standard is displayed! It is acceptable for an officer to use his weapon based solely on his emotions, his feelings, his fear. But for civilians to operate from their emotions when simply expressing an opinion is somehow wrong and inappropriate.

dragonridrIm sure if the officer is guilty hes going to jail but dont convict him before all the facts are known it will be another month or two. Look on the bright side youll have more time to rant and rave how broken the system is.

Yet when a civilian is arrested for a crime of this very sort law enforcement is so very quick to go to the court of public opinion, look at Lisa Irwin parents they were certainly convicted in the court of public opinion by Law Enforcement before they where arrested! Again we have a double standard, a different treatment based solely on ones status within the Law Enforcement community. Or look at how Law Enforcement chooses to enforce laws within New York City, where cops choose not to write tickets for other Law Enforcement agents and their friends and family, not to enforce laws if you are associated with certain groups! [url=http://rt.com/usa/nypd-jail-free-ebay-669/]

You guys can argue until your blue in the face.. The kid's dead, the officers are not in trouble, what's new? Look what happen to Zimmerman, they drug him through the mud, they lied, made up stories, and people were ready to hang zimmerman. OFF WITH HIS HEAD THE PEOPLE SAID...An officer does the same damn thing and it's no big deal. What is new? THEY WIN YOU LOOSE

Once again the story changes... Why!

Henry said he couldn't precisely describe the type of replica weapon Lopez carried because investigators did not include the specific make and model in the police report about the incident.

The weapon had already been booked into evidence and, according to police protocol, couldn't be retrieved without an evidentiary reason just to answer questions from the media.

Source

Is this now an acknowledgement that the gun shown to reporters was not the actual toy gun? At this late point are we just now learning that the so called replicate "gun" is not a replicate of the gun this child was carrying?!?

At a minimum it now appears it certainly wasn't the gun the child was carrying!

So all of you who rushed to condemn Andy based on how real the gun looked, are you surprised to learn a week later the police now claim they don't even know the make and model of the gun, now!

In response to The Press Democrat's request for a copy of the emergency dispatch recordings of the incident, Henry said investigators had not yet reviewed the recordings.

Henry said that after they do, the police department will discuss the request with the Sonoma County District Attorney's Office, which will ultimately decide whether any criminal wrongdoing took place by any party involved in the shooting.

So a week into this case, and the police haven't yet even gotten around to their own official recordings, are even worried about about what they might show. What question they might raise?

dragonridr
Yeah no your right peoples personal issues arent involved at all.Hopefully theres more people like me and less like you willing to wait for the facts instead of using this as an opportunity to share your beliefs.

This is an internet forum, sharing our beliefs is all any of us is doing.
Of course there are people here with "personal issues", there are in almost everything in life.

There will always be crimes and those that defend the crimes and those that actively support them.
Thats life.
The reality is that if everybody took the official line, we would be in chains, working for free and living under a dictatorship. Whats the point of checks and balances if no one is being vigilant and making sure they are maintained?

And when I said government was corrupt, it was a statement of fact. Not opinion.
There has been a corrupt element in the police for decades, did you ever see "Serpico"?
The patriot act being signed without even being read is a damning evidence of such government corruption.
My own governments expenses scandal and the now clamping down on the freedom of the press for outing it is as much evidence of government corruption that even the weakest of minds needs.

imitator

Dav1d
Interesting note visibly angry people carrying replica guns are walking on the streets of Santa Rosa and guess what? They are not being executed! They are not being killed! The cops have request that they not carry guns on the street, but they don't seem to have any problems telling that they are not real this week. Not one has been killed.... Not one wounded...

When I used to work in the city... if we get a job call in a bad neighborhood we would carry to the hilt.... the thing is we would see kids with bb guns packed in their waistline and see them play with their toy guns etc. dressed in baggy clothes... did we shoot them? Nope!!! We could tell the difference in child's play, as well all the people in the neighborhood could too... did they shoot kids with toys? Nope!

I'd say this guy became a cop so he could shoot someone... I think 10% of those who become cops are like this guy... dunno what causes it, maybe video games or being bullied in high school? I have a ex-friend who joined the military just for that...said to kill someone... sick Mother F'er. I disowned him real quick and warned the military of his intentions...

edit on 30-10-2013 by imitator because: (no reason given)

You sir sound like an officer I can respect! And if I'm correct in that assumption I'd like to thank you for your service!

I'm not sure I can agree with your assertion that he became a cop to shoot someone. I believe he was a cop to long for that to be true. But at some point he crossed a line, and came to believe it was acceptable to shoot and justify it later. I really believe that should have been caught by his superiors and they failed him. But when you work out of a department where excessive force is deemed acceptable it taints you over time. In this county excessive force is deemed reasonable.