Police shoot an "armed" middle school student

[Raesvelg]

Damn you and your lazy quoting, lol.

I disagree. For military purposes FMJ is the best.

We must agree to disagree then.

So a rifle chambered in 5.56 has a higher chance of being fed with wrong ammo and should be re-chambered ASAP?

I'm gonna ignore the rest, since to be honest I don't know what you're arguing about at this point.

Anyhoo.

No. That's a straw man, and you know it.

Either way, it also has no bearing on my original statement. A pistol, with well-designed ammunition, at close range, can be as deadly or more deadly than a rifle with less well-designed ammunition.

That is what I'm discussing. You're discussing something else entirely, at this point, specifically that rifles are more dangerous than pistols on the whole, which is rather obvious and need not be argued.

Unless maybe you've been talking to that guy who thought that .223 wouldn't go through a vest lol.

Incidentally, you might remember the specifics of something that I've forgotten; One of the NATO allies that was using the 7.62x51 had their own round for the rifle that I remember being reputed as absolutely vicious, but I simply cannot recall which country or what the specifics were... Still FMJ, of course, but very prone to just flying apart inside tissue.

 

[ElPatron]

We must agree to disagree then.

Tell me any kind of ammunition that could perform better than FMJ, even if it violated the Hague convention, and I'll agree with you.

Until then, there is no way I am going to consider any kind of ammunition superior to FMJ or partially jacketed rounds with solid cores.

No. That's a straw man, and you know it.

Either way, it also has no bearing on my original statement. A pistol, with well-designed ammunition, at close range, can be as deadly or more deadly than a rifle with less well-designed ammunition.

How was my statement a strawman if you stated two times that you consider that there are rifle ammo designs that do not perform well?

Incidentally, you might remember the specifics of something that I've forgotten; One of the NATO allies that was using the 7.62x51 had their own round for the rifle that I remember being reputed as absolutely vicious, but I simply cannot recall which country or what the specifics were... Still FMJ, of course, but very prone to just flying apart inside tissue.

It was due to the steel jackets being too thin.

Germany makes them. Before searching I was convinced it was the Swedes manufacturing them, I was wrong.


Let's see:

-- hollow points are not cost effective, they have a lot of variables that might make them perform bad. Why shouldn't people hand-load self-defense rounds to higher pressures (and thus higher velocities)? Because the bullet was designed to expand reliably in a certain velocity range. If the military needs a HP round that has to expand reliably even in longer ranges, then in close range the high velocity will make them zip trough without expanding enough.
Plus, HP rounds perform poorly against troopers with gear all over them.

HPs don't feed reliably in AR15s, don't forget that the 5.56 has to be fed in a very steep angle.

Plus, the cavity would make their ballistics get worse, specially at longer ranges.

-- Soft point bullets are not as effective as HP unless they are designed just right. Again, it wouldn't be cost effective, so the military would just make tons of under-performing bullets. Has many disadvantages, like a dedicated HP.

-- Polymer tip is also very expensive. It allows better ballistics than a regular HP. Polymer is not very dense and would not allow rounds to penetrate reliably. If you made them of harder metals, they would not deform and make expansion difficult.


Plus, these methods are very, very, very expensive.

Imagine troopers training every day, spending $0.50-$1.00 every time they shoot (machineguns would make the bill rise up the roof).

Imagine the bullets not being able to perform because of the way they were designed. Plastic tips can fall off because ammo is carried all over the world.

Hollow points could get their tips dented and have their effectiveness lost. Or just not feeding at all.

 

[TKretts3]

From what it said in the news post it seems like the kid brought it upon himself. He not only punched a student in the nose, but brought a Pellet Gun that closely resembled a real gun to school, and then pointed it at the police, refusing to lower it.

He could have lowered the gun, but he didn't.

 

[Something Amyss]

I'm sure the Huffington Post wasn't the only publication that spun the story that way either. :|

It's sad that running with a viable question is now considered "spin."

Sadder still that picking up an issue from the local press somehow constitutes both "spin" and somehow it being the Huffington Post's doing.

I'm not saying it's an iron-clad argument, I'm just saying that the kid might have been saved if the cops had used a taser. We'll never know.

It's not really an argument, period. That's the problem.

In this situation, Tasers weren't called for and wouldn't be used. This is evidenced by the already stated bit about being outside of Taser range.

You're being unrealistic. You argued excessive force based upon unrealistic expectations.

 

[MaxwellEdison]

*This* is a situation I'd like to see a taser used in, if possible.
I'm not uncomfortable with the cop's actions here, though.

Before anyone gets on me for this, just know that I'm usually arguing against even taser use. I'm not just blindly supporting the cops here.

 

[Commissar Sae]

My friends and I regularly play with some relatively realisic airsoft guns out in the local woods. While all the guns have bright orange tips so they remain legal if a cop showed up I would put the gun down immediatly. I'm in school right now studying education to be a high school teacher and I can tell you showing up with a pellet gun and threatening anyone is grounds for expulsion and legal prodeecings.

Does it suck that the kid got shot over a pellet gun, yes, but I'm not going to blame the cops or the school for doing their job in this situation.

 

[Saika Renegade]

Simply copy pasting from my response elsewhere on the subject:

The police officers were forced to make a decision based on information they had at the time. The pellet gun was apparently convincing enough that they ordered him to drop the weapon, and he didn't comply. As noted far earlier in the thread, some pellet guns are nearly identical to their real-world counterparts--how many of you would trust a stranger who had already punched someone in the face to point something at you and not know if you'd hear a puff of compressed air or the bang of primer going off?

Besides, I have yet to meet any police officers who have been trained to let a suspect shoot first.

File this under tragic but justified.

 

[Vangaurd227]

I kinda feel bad for the poor kid....I know what he did was incredibly stupid but I just wish there was a way to stop people like that without killing them =/

 

[Sovvolf]

I kinda feel bad for the poor kid....I know what he did was incredibly stupid but I just wish there was a way to stop people like that without killing them =/

There is, a good psychologist, months if not years of counseling. However these aren't immediate solutions and needed to be done before this happened. I lay a slight amount of blame on the parents for not noticing the signs, I feel that if they'd have been able to spot the signs of depression which turned the kid to violence and to suicide by cops, this incident would never had occurred. A good parent should be able to tell when there is something wrong with their child.

Though, when he held up the school, that was kind of a point of no return. If he'd had dropped the gun, maybe they could have done something for him but he refused to put the gun down and he readied the weapon for firing. At that point the police had little options other than to open fire.

Its sad and its tough, I wish they'd have been another way, however upon reading all the posts, I don't see one outside of being telepathic. If I was in that situation, I'd have put the teen down. I wouldn't have felt good about it, I wouldn't be happy about it, however there were other lives potentially at stake, its either one 15 year old or a class full plus two police officers.

 

[xdiesp]

Far West style gun control and police brutality in one, I can't remember if they rank 5th and 6th on the list of freedoms.

 

[Makon]

Far West style gun control and police brutality in one, I can't remember if they rank 5th and 6th on the list of freedoms.

Yeah, because it's police brutality to eliminate the threat posed by what is perceived as an armed suspect who is aiming what appeared as a live weapon at police officers who refuses to drop it.

 

[jp201]

Edit 2: Comment removed because apparently "stop quoting me now" is difficult for some people to comprehend, and the knowledge that ten other people have already told me the exact same thing seems to be no deterrent.

I don't care much in this case because the kid obviously wanted to commit suicide. I just find it disturbing that everyone is so comfortable that a kid was shot to death, even if he was believed to be armed. What happened to tasers? and restraint?

No. Don't. You won't change my mind.

Once he raised the gun, lethal force was needed in this situation. Tasers have to be used from a certain distance which likely the kid did not give the police the opportunity and even then does not guarantee anything as it is still possible for him to unload a few bullets in the gun (yes i know it was a pellet gun but you must treat it as a real gun for the time).

The police must make sure as soon as he pointed the gun at them that he never get a shot off. The only absolute way to make sure of that is lethal force. A shot in the leg can still kill him after a while and he will still have the ability to use his weapon. It is not like the movies where there are certain shots that are non lethal, whenever a gun is fired, it is for lethal purposes.

There are no winners here, it is a horrible situation that no cop would ever want to be in.

I believe lethal force should be a last option but in this situation he gave the police no other option.

I don't think many people are comfortable with what happened but it had to be done. The alternative would be that he fired a round off and perhaps takes the life of someone else.

 

[rayen020]

i have been told since forever don't point anything at a cop, ever. they gave multiple warnings, he pointed a weapon at them, they reacted. it doesn't matter what the weapon was, once the cops have their guns drawn games are over. they were too far away to tase him. from what i've read they were justified in their reation. as to the three shots the way i read it is there was more than one cop on the scene and three fired.

 

[Hennofletch]

*Rolls up sleeves and wades in*

Okay just to stop the America hate from some people on this board, I'm from the UK. There I said it, they say that's the first step to recovery.

In the UK we have armed police officers but they are in the minority. As guns are not as common here, the bulk of our police have the luxury of being unarmed.

BUT in this circumstance armed officers would have responded and would have almost certainly shot this kid. If Unarmed cops showed up and this guy had a real gun they would be dead. End of.

In the US where guns are much more common, it is imperative that cops are armed. Going unarmed against a gunman is suicide.

Guns are a fact of life. To try and wish them away are naive to say the least.

I'm not a gun nut, I'm from the UK and in this instance I'd have shot the kid. Then I'd have booked some counselling to deal with the nightmares.

*Retreats to a position of cover*

I think i have found a sane Englishman! KILL HIM NOW, BEFORE THE DISEASE SPREADS!

Don't worry, apparently sanity isn't contagious.

 

[Jabberwock xeno]

1. Kid was stupid that he brought it to school.

2. Kid was REALLY stupid he pointed it as police officers

3. Officers SHOULD have asked him to drop the weapon first.

I think the only action that needs to be taken now is stress that too the police force, but that's it.

*Rolls up sleeves and wades in*

Okay just to stop the America hate from some people on this board, I'm from the UK. There I said it, they say that's the first step to recovery.

In the UK we have armed police officers but they are in the minority. As guns are not as common here, the bulk of our police have the luxury of being unarmed.

BUT in this circumstance armed officers would have responded and would have almost certainly shot this kid. If Unarmed cops showed up and this guy had a real gun they would be dead. End of.

In the US where guns are much more common, it is imperative that cops are armed. Going unarmed against a gunman is suicide.

Guns are a fact of life. To try and wish them away are naive to say the least.

I'm not a gun nut, I'm from the UK and in this instance I'd have shot the kid. Then I'd have booked some counselling to deal with the nightmares.

*Retreats to a position of cover*

I think i have found a sane Englishman! KILL HIM NOW, BEFORE THE DISEASE SPREADS!

Don't worry, apparently sanity isn't contagious.

I wish it were...

Though, I feel that making rubber/plastic ammunation more used in both police and for consumers would help a lot.

They are incapacitating, but normally less lethal. There are exceptions, of course, but so is there with normal ammunation.

 

[VincentR]

I realize this thread is probably just rehash after rehash of opinions at this point, but I might as well throw out my (no-doubt unoriginal) opinion on the matter.

It's a tragedy, pure and simple. Without any idea on what the kid was thinking, I can't even say he was in the wrong; something happened that caused him to act completely different from what essentially everybody else said he was usually like. I mean, there's parents just backing up their kids, but even class-mates and the school superintendent said the boy was usually a good kid - into music and helping out other people whenever he could.

As for the cops' actions - they were completely in the right. It's tragic that they didn't have access to bean-bag guns or something right at the moment the kid started raising the fake gun, but as far as I can tell - and I assume for my own sanity - they had no idea it was a fake gun. There is no such action as shooting someone in the arm or leg or something to try and non-lethally take them down. 1) It's fairly difficult to hit a small target like that, 2) it won't reliably bring down a dangerous target before they - presumably - have a chance to retaliate, and 3) it's gotta be a natural instinct to aim for center mass for these guys, and it's not hard to fire off 3 shots incredibly quickly.

The cops will likely live in regret and sorrow for the rest of their lives, which is already a greater punishment than they could possibly deserve for doing what they felt was necessary to protect themselves and the people around them.

I think that's about it.

 

[Something Amyss]

3. Officers SHOULD have asked him to drop the weapon first.

They did.

Multiple times.

Even the article from the beginning of the thread mentions it, though it does gloss over the "multiple times" portion.

 

[Reiterpallasch]

1. Kid was stupid that he brought it to school.

2. Kid was REALLY stupid he pointed it as police officers

3. Officers SHOULD have asked him to drop the weapon first.

I think the only action that needs to be taken now is stress that too the police force, but that's it.

*facepalm*

'Fifteen-year-old Jaime Gonzalez "had plenty of opportunities to lower the gun and listen to the officers' orders, and he didn't want to," Interim Police Chief Orlando Rodriguez said.'
....
'They could hear police charge down the hallway and shout for Gonzalez to drop the weapon, followed by several shots.'

Did you even read the article before commenting?

EDIT: ninja'd D;

 

[Reiterpallasch]

I'm sure the Huffington Post wasn't the only publication that spun the story that way either. :|

It's sad that running with a viable question is now considered "spin."

Sadder still that picking up an issue from the local press somehow constitutes both "spin" and somehow it being the Huffington Post's doing.

My mistake on the Huffington Post attribution. It seems as if the article was written by Associated Press journalists and just hosted on the Huffington Post.

And the "spin" that I was referring to is how the article portrays the police as the villains here. Now how is villainizing police officers who did EXACTLY what they should have done considered a "viable question"?

I wasn't referring to the guy who started this thread, I was referring to the original article. Sorry if there was a misunderstanding.

 

[Jabberwock xeno]

3. Officers SHOULD have asked him to drop the weapon first.

They did.

Multiple times.

Even the article from the beginning of the thread mentions it, though it does gloss over the "multiple times" portion.

1. Kid was stupid that he brought it to school.

2. Kid was REALLY stupid he pointed it as police officers

3. Officers SHOULD have asked him to drop the weapon first.

I think the only action that needs to be taken now is stress that too the police force, but that's it.

*facepalm*

'Fifteen-year-old Jaime Gonzalez "had plenty of opportunities to lower the gun and listen to the officers' orders, and he didn't want to," Interim Police Chief Orlando Rodriguez said.'
....
'They could hear police charge down the hallway and shout for Gonzalez to drop the weapon, followed by several shots.'

Did you even read the article before commenting?

EDIT: ninja'd D;

I must have missed that >.>

I rephrase my statement: The kid was a IDOT.