&#x27;Cleveland police shoot dead 12 year old boy &#x27; When will it end.

The officer had every right to shoot the kid. If a police officer gets a call about an armed man (which they did) and sees the reportedly armed man give a firearm to a kid (which he did) and then the kid reaches for the gun when the police officer identifies himself (which he did) then it's absolutely acceptable for that police officer to assume the kid will become a threat to his life and the life of others (by brandishing a weapon) and the correct thing to do was to prevent any further escalation by, surprise, killing the kid before he actually does become a threat and start to brandish the firearm, potentially injuring or killing himself or others.

As for firearm control, I prefer America's system of firearm ownership (i.e. a God-given right to every citizen that shall not be infringed) but unfortunately states like NY and Cali don't understand that last part of the 2nd A, and neither does the American government.

Reply 3

james22

Original post by qasidb

We're told the kid reached for the gun in the holster despite being told by the police to put his hands up. If this is true, maybe they were were justified in shooting him although they could've aimed for his legs at least and made a rush towards him immediately afterwards. They couldn't have know whether the gun was real or not and were not told by the dispatcher that the caller who alerted them wasn't sure about it being real or fake either.

Nevertheless, I do disagree with the US's gun policy. They should just outright outlaw them or however the rule is in the UK. There are too many of these shootings.

But thinking about it, if this happened in the UK, armed response units may have been dispatched and the kid may have ended up dying anyway if he indeed reached for the gun because the police are trained to shoot if the person reaches for the gun.

You can't just aim for the legs. The risk of missing is extremely high then. You always aim for the largest part which is the chest.

Reply 4

OP

Original post by qasidb

We're told the kid reached for the gun in the holster despite being told by the police to put his hands up. If this is true, maybe they were were justified in shooting him although they could've aimed for his legs at least and made a rush towards him immediately afterwards. They couldn't have know whether the gun was real or not and were not told by the dispatcher that the caller who alerted them wasn't sure about it being real or fake either.

Nevertheless, I do disagree with the US's gun policy. They should just outright outlaw them or however the rule is in the UK. There are too many of these shootings.

But thinking about it, if this happened in the UK, armed response units may have been dispatched and the kid may have ended up dying anyway if he indeed reached for the gun because the police are trained to shoot if the person reaches for the gun.

Yes they may have been justified in shooting him from their account of things, but we haven't heard anything from any witnesses. The cops could be lying to save themselves, not surprising considering the amount of crooked cops in the US.

What concerns me is that they say the orange safety tag was missing but if the gun was in his waistband how would they have known it was missing?

This would never happen in the UK because a child would never carry a replica gun in public.

Reply 5

OP

Original post by Jemner01

The officer had every right to shoot the kid. If a police officer gets a call about an armed man (which they did) and sees the reportedly armed man give a firearm to a kid (which he did) and then the kid reaches for the gun when the police officer identifies himself (which he did) then it's absolutely acceptable for that police officer to assume the kid will become a threat to his life and the life of others (by brandishing a weapon) and the correct thing to do was to prevent any further escalation by, surprise, killing the kid before he actually does become a threat and start to brandish the firearm, potentially injuring or killing himself or others.

As for firearm control, I prefer America's system of firearm ownership (i.e. a God-given right to every citizen that shall not be infringed) but unfortunately states like NY and Cali don't understand that last part of the 2nd A, and neither does the American government.

Two officers on one child? The kid only reached for the gun, they fired too early. The officers could shot several bullets before the kid even pulled out the weapon.

In my opinion the officers got scared and blindly shot him. They should have taken into account the age of the child and the unlikely hood he would carry a real firearm.

Reply 6

Original post by Schrödingers Cat

Two officers on one child? The kid only reached for the gun, they fired too early. The officers could shot several bullets before the kid even pulled out the weapon.

In my opinion the officers got scared and blindly shot him. They should have taken into account the age of the child and the unlikely hood he would carry a real firearm.

They eliminated a potential threat to the safety of others, under the judgement that the firearm was real (which is wasn't, but the officers had no way of telling because the air-soft gun had no orange tip/markings) and that the kid was reaching for it with the intent to use it. It's my opinion that the ultimate result was a misunderstanding, but the officers acted appropriately to the situation and with what little information they in the very little time they had between arriving on the scene and killing the boy.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 7

OP

Original post by Jemner01

They eliminated a potential threat to the safety of others, under the judgement that the firearm was real (which is wasn't, but the officers had no way of telling because the air-soft gun had no orange tip/markings) and that the kid was reaching for it with the intent to use it. It's my opinion that they ultimate result was a misunderstanding, but the officers acted appropriately to the situation and with what little information they in the very little time they had between arriving on the scene and killing the boy.

My original point however is this would have never happened if guns weren't legalised. The same goes with the all the school shootings and cinema shooting.

Reply 8

Original post by Schrödingers Cat

My original point however is this would have never happened if guns weren't legalised. The same goes with the all the school shootings and cinema shooting.

No, it wasn't. With regards to your response to me, you did not mention the legal status of firearms. You went with the angle that the officers reacted inappropriately, which I disagree with.

As for firearm legalise and civilian ownership, we'd be here all night if you and I were to argue the finer points of ownership considering you and I have completely opposite stances. I will say that barring citizens the right to bear arms will neither stop gun crime nor prevent the police from killing civilians. The opposite, in fact- because now criminals know law-abiding citizens can't defend themselves and the police know that law-abiding citizens aren't a threat to a corrupt government, tyranny or any form of governmental action including the action of the police and military.

Reply 9

OP

Original post by james22

You can't just aim for the legs. The risk of missing is extremely high then. You always aim for the largest part which is the chest.

Considering how close the officers were to the boy, hitting the legs would have been easy

Reply 10

stoltguyboo

18

What would people be saying if the kid was a maniac and went around shooting people in the street? And the cops just ignored it? they obviously deemed it to be a threat and maybe the kid didn't understand? what the cops was asking him to do or something but I definitely don't condone the shooting of a child but somebody should of had the sense to look and know that it was fake but still don't play with Fake guns in the street.....Don't even play with them at all IMO but if people are going to...Do it in their own garden not in the road as this can make people nervous and ring the police and something like this can happen.

#CommonSense

Reply 11

OP

Original post by Jemner01

No, it wasn't. With regards to your response to me, you did not mention the legal status of firearms. You went with the angle that the officers reacted inappropriately, which I disagree with.

As for firearm legalise and civilian ownership, we'd be here all night if you and I were to argue the finer points of ownership considering you and I have completely opposite stances. I will say that barring citizens the right to bear arms will neither stop gun crime nor prevent the police from killing civilians. The opposite, in fact- because now criminals know law-abiding citizens can't defend themselves and the police know that law-abiding citizens aren't a threat to a corrupt government, tyranny or any form of governmental action including the action of the police and military.

My original point in starting the thread was not blame for the officers, but let me ask you this; how did the officers know the orange safety indicator was missing if the gun was in the boys waistband?

All I have to say is look at other countries who ban firearms and look at how often civilians die from police.
Examples; Uk, Sweeden, Norway, Germany.

Reply 12

Original post by Schrödingers Cat

Considering how close the officers were to the boy, hitting the legs would have been easy

Says someone who's never fired a gun. Officers around the world, not just in the US, are trained to aim at center mass because it's the easiest place to hit. If they miss then the bullet may hit an innocent bystander, and that's not a risk the police will take if they can help it. The legs have the femoral artery, which if shot means the recipient of the bullet will be killed within minutes if an ambulance isn't available. It's safer and more practical to aim for the torso of a target, specifically the pelvic girdle.

Reply 13

OP

Original post by stoltguyboo

What would people be saying if the kid was a maniac and went around shooting people in the street? And the cops just ignored it? they obviously deemed it to be a threat and maybe the kid didn't understand? what the cops was asking him to do or something but I definitely don't condone the shooting of a child but somebody should of had the sense to look and know that it was fake but still don't play with Fake guns in the street.....Don't even play with them at all IMO but if people are going to...Do it in their own garden not in the road as this can make people nervous and ring the police and something like this can happen.

#CommonSense

Well no shots were fired and he wasn't a maniac. The person who called 911 said the gun was probably fake. If the US police department did their job correctly none of this would have happened

Reply 14

MindTheGaps

17

Original post by Schrödingers Cat

This event occurred yesterday in Cleveland US (where else):

Article: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/nov/23/cleveland-police-shoot-dead-12-year-old-boy-carrying-fake-gun

One of the many things I hate about America is their gun policy. There is no need for guns to be legal, proven by the vast amount of countries who intelligently ban the sale or use of fire arms.

30 people a day died of gun crime in the US in 2013, a ridiculous number of deaths that could have been easily prevented with the change of one law.

How many more kids need to be killed on the street or in schools for the people of America to wake up and realize that guns and violence are not the answer.

Wake up people of America!!!

Thing is, this didn't really have anything to do with gun legislation. And anyway, very few (if any?) countries ban the sale or use of firearms. Many have far more liberal laws than America.

I don't want to defend the US police here because this is hardly the first time they've shot a black kid and asked questions later. But really, at what point when you're being asked by armed policemen to drop your 'weapon' and put your hands above your head do you think it's a good idea to refuse, pull the offending object out of your waistband and start waving it around? If that had been a real gun, far from impossible in the US, someone else could easily have been shot.

Reply 15

Original post by Schrödingers Cat

My original point in starting the thread was not blame for the officers, but let me ask you this; how did the officers know the orange safety indicator was missing if the gun was in the boys waistband?

All I have to say is look at other countries who ban firearms and look at how often civilians die from police.
Examples; Uk, Sweeden, Norway, Germany.

The boy began to pull it out before the officers shot. I don't think the details of how far the gun was drawn before the shots were fired have been released. I can tell you that if someone begins to brandish a weapon then the police should have every right to prevent the brandishing of said weapon as a necessary action to ensure the safety of others. It happens that the weapon was fake this time, but the exception isn't the rule. better safe than sorry.

Reply 16

OP

Original post by Jemner01

Says someone who's never fired a gun. Officers around the world, not just in the US, are trained to aim at center mass because it's the easiest place to hit. If they miss then the bullet may hit an innocent bystander, and that's not a risk the police will take if they can help it. The legs have the femoral artery, which if shot means the recipient of the bullet will be killed within minutes if an ambulance isn't available. It's safer and more practical to aim for the torso of a target, specifically the pelvic girdle.

Who says I've never shot a gun? I have for your information and it's not hard to aim especially when your trained to do so.
They can't risk killing a bystander but can risk killing a 12 year old kid? It is very unlikely to hit the femoral artery, getting shot in the chest is almost certain death when the contact is not in the shoulders. I know the cops are trained to hit the chest but maybe they should have thought twice before shooting.

Reply 17

goobypls

14

You idiots do realize that the kid had a BB gun and not a real gun.

It's like me carrying a water gun and the cops shooting me because i refused to lay it down.

Reply 18