Cops v 15 Year Old Boy

[bust]

Research claims the use of Capsicum Spray can sometimes enhance the erratic behaviour of mental illness sufferers assuming he was in the midst of some type of episode.

 

Bit like poking stick at an animal or reptile.

[Torneyboy]

That maybe why it didn't work ...going by the way he carried on in K Mart something was not right with him...

[Hugh_Hoy]

I gotta laugh at the speculation and second-guessing going on here by folks who don't have much of a clue as to what happened. For instance, they don't know if the dead guy lunged at the officers, how far away he was from the officers, exactly what may have been done to "peacefully" resolve the situation, what other options were available (such as a net, rubber bullets, stun gun, etc.) It appears that the kid was armed with two deadly weapons. That all officers fired (except one)is not surprising. It is not necessary that each be in immediate of death or great bodily harm.

 

Discussions like these always take place when a cop kills some innocent crazy or punk kid. Sympathy goes with the perp. Speculation goes against the cops. I suspect that those expressions spring from some bias.

 

OH...did that ticket you tried to get out of make you a lasting foe of all law enforcement action?

 

HH

[bust]

Ok just to bring you up to speed HH Victorian Police have been under the spotlight for many years about being trigger happy.

 

I for one am not suggesting that it was not a threatening situation. The question is whether fatally shooting the kid was the only option available.

[Redbaron]

Capsicum spray affects different people in different ways. For most it burns the fuck out of your eyes and skin, rendering you a blubbering mess. For a small percentage it does absolutely nothing (I've been there, it kills me but one of the lads at work doesn't even blink). If it doesn't work, I'm guessing the next thing to try is the firearm. Fucking big call to make to shoot at 15yo though. I'm guessing the kid didn't hear or accept the warning. (Drugs?)

[rogueyam]

"There may be more to it, we don't know yet, but I really do wonder why ... just one policeman might not have shot at his arm or shot at his leg.

 

Somebody's been watching too much television. A handgun is not a disabling device, it is a killing device. If the cops are justified in pulling the trigger then their training is to aim for center mass - the middle of the chest. The issue here is should they have shot at all. It makes no sense to criticize them for successfully placing the shots where their training directed them to.

 

Also the criticism that all three cops fired seems misplaced as well. All three were presented with the same set of circumstances. All three have received the same training as to when deadly force is justified. Does the fact that all three reached the same decision at the same moment make them seem more or less disciplined? I'd say more.

 

If whatever this kid did created a justification for any one to shoot then it created that justification for each of the three to do so. What are the officers supposed to do in that instant? "Uh, Bob, how about you shooting the guy." "Oh no, Jim, after you." If any one officer is shooting to kill, why should we be concerned that the alleged criminal received three fatal shots instead of just one? Either way he's dead.

 

Also, the quote in the article that the confrontation "didn't seem fair" is just horribly wrongheaded. It is not supposed to be a "fair fight" no matter what level of force is appropriate. The alleged criminal has absolutely no legal right to resist the officers by force. By contrast the officers are professionally obliged to risk their lives and use force to stop the miscreant. To imply any sort of symmetry between the two parties is morally obtuse.

 

Finally, one poster said the cops need more time at the range. Wrong! It's those more typical cases where scores of shots are fired and the criminal is barely hit at all that indicate a need for more firearms training.

[drogon]

For once I mostly agree with RY...

(although I dislike the NRA)

[..]

For once I mostly agree with RY...

(although I dislike the NRA)

 

I guess I'll have to drink myself into a stupor just to deal with the thought LOL!

 

Cheers,

SD

[Old Hippie]

"...OH...did that ticket you tried to get out of make you a lasting foe of all law enforcement action?

 

HH ..."

 

 

Which one?

[Old Hippie]

OK but if that was a concern I am sure they would not have been firing a warning shot into the ground if there was a risk of hitting an innocent bystander.

 

I do not accept that pumping his chest full of lead was the only solution.

 

 

Big difference. Let me explain. A cop points a gun at the ground near him, maybe 1 meter away, nothing behind it, nothing in between, he fires a warning shot...now, increase the distance to say 3-4 meters, the target is moving, you want to hit a small moving, unpredictable target...behind him may be people, or object the bullet may ricochet off of, and hurt someone else, maybe the officers themselves...even if you hit him in the leg or arm, he can be so fucked up, he keeps coming at you, now what? more bullets to the leg and arm?