Boy Shot Dead by Police for Holding Toy Gun

[Pupik]

This wouldn't happened if in the U.S. buying a gun would not like buying a loaf of bread.

Tripe is also available in the supermarket.

 

[disinfected]

"Did you even read the article, bro?"

 

[Nicksfix]

This wouldn't happened if in the U.S. buying a gun would not like buying a loaf of bread.

You've no clue.

Please do some homework before you post such a fallacy.

Like buying a loaf of bread ........ mmmmmk. There is a world of difference between purchasing bread and a firearm you know.

 

[disinfected]

You've no clue.

Please do some homework before you post such a fallacy.

Like buying a loaf of bread ........ mmmmmk. There is a world of difference between purchasing bread and a firearm you know.

Even so, this was a toy gun, so I am having trouble seeing what his argument about gun control is.

 

[a6m5]

He could be saying that because guns are so easy to obtain, police had to shoot a child not wanting to risk what this kid had may have been a real firearm.

Of course, he's way off base on the loaf of bread thing. If buying a gun in this country was as easy as buying a loaf of bread, as a Non-U.S. Citizen, my background check always at least take an hour or so, sometimes a day, so I'd be eating rice all the time....... oh, wait. I do! Har-har-har.....

 

[Nicksfix]

Kid in grocery store : Mom told me to come in here and buy a loaf of bread while she is waiting in the car.
Clerk : How old are you ?
Kid : I'm old enough to buy a gun, certainly I can purchase this loaf of bread.
Clerk : Sorry, but your not of age to purchase this loaf of bread. If I permit you to purchase this loaf of bread that would be considered a straw purchase. You are not permitted to purchase this item then turn around and give it to another person. Even if it is your Mother.
Kid : What !!!!!
Clerk : You heard me. Now get outta here kid before I am forced to call the law.
Kid (in car with Mom) : How come I can purchase a gun but not a loaf of bread ?
Mother : That's because certain people in this world don't have clue as to what is going on.

 

[a6m5]

It would bring a whole new meaning to straw purchases in grocery shopping.

 

[Kent]

First off,
@ Quattrodelta... Way to stay on top of the situation.

Regarding the actual story...
Very uncool, very sorry to hear this happened.
I'd like to think the police could have attempted to use non-lethal force by shooting for extremities but I suppose they only practice kill shots at the range these days.

Warning shots are a joke, they don't actually happen in anything but movies. It's too much of a liability, too much paper work, and too dangerous for both the civilians in the areas as well as the cop who might be showing lethal force warnings to an actual perp carrying a real gun (which would basically give the perp the upper hand).

All that said, and I'm most sorry for saying this part... This kid probably had it coming.
13 years old is way too old to claim ignorance.
At 13 I was mature enough to be interested in girls, I was studying highschool math, ancient history, and learning the basics of life as an adult.
If this kid was 5 or 6 I could understand him not responding to police by accident under these circumstances. However, unless a mental handicap or hearing handicap is revealed, I'd say the kid was definitely gambling with his life when armed police officers pointed their guns at him, demanded he drop the rifle, and he refused.

Genuinely sorry for the family but also just as sorry for the police officer who was duped into killing an "innocent" boy and has to live with that on his conscious for the rest of his life.

 

[Grayfox]

All that said, and I'm most sorry for saying this part... This kid probably had it coming.
13 years old is way too old to claim ignorance.
At 13 I was mature enough to be interested in girls, I was studying highschool math, ancient history, and learning the basics of life as an adult.
If this kid was 5 or 6 I could understand him not responding to police by accident under these circumstances. However, unless a mental handicap or hearing handicap is revealed, I'd say the kid was definitely gambling with his life when armed police officers pointed their guns at him, demanded he drop the rifle, and he refused.

Law says other wise, law says kids dont know right or wrong till 15 or so.

This is why juvenile crime is so high, they know they can commit crimes and get away with it.

 

[Famine]

Law says other wise, law says kids dont know right or wrong till 15 or so.

Depends on your law.

In the UK the age of criminal responsibility is 10 (except for viewers in Scotland). And, guess what, it is in Australia too - though there's an additional law that says that they can be charged with a crime but automatically have a defence of not sound mind until their 14th birthday, so it's effectively 14.

In the US it's 11 - a year older - for federal offences, but the States have their own numbers from 6 to 12.

 

[lancia delta hf]

First off,
@ Quattrodelta... Way to stay on top of the situation.

Regarding the actual story...
Very uncool, very sorry to hear this happened.
I'd like to think the police could have attempted to use non-lethal force by shooting for extremities but I suppose they only practice kill shots at the range these days.

Warning shots are a joke, they don't actually happen in anything but movies. It's too much of a liability, too much paper work, and too dangerous for both the civilians in the areas as well as the cop who might be showing lethal force warnings to an actual perp carrying a real gun (which would basically give the perp the upper hand).

All that said, and I'm most sorry for saying this part... This kid probably had it coming.
13 years old is way too old to claim ignorance.
At 13 I was mature enough to be interested in girls, I was studying highschool math, ancient history, and learning the basics of life as an adult.
If this kid was 5 or 6 I could understand him not responding to police by accident under these circumstances. However, unless a mental handicap or hearing handicap is revealed, I'd say the kid was definitely gambling with his life when armed police officers pointed their guns at him, demanded he drop the rifle, and he refused.

Genuinely sorry for the family but also just as sorry for the police officer who was duped into killing an "innocent" boy and has to live with that on his conscious for the rest of his life.

Not everyone matures at the same age, We dont know exactly what happened anyway, I mean why would a kid not drop his toy gun when faced with police pointing guns at him? Something is not right

EDIT: i'd like to know how they aproached the kid, From the front or behind, Did the kid see them coming or did they just spring a surprise on him and he's like wtf is going on etc etc

Or between using a sniper rifle from a static position and using a handgun while on foot.

Blame C.O.D for making people not know how a sniper works

 

[Grayfox]

Depends on your law.

In the UK the age of criminal responsibility is 10 (except for viewers in Scotland). And, guess what, it is in Australia too - though there's an additional law that says that they can be charged with a crime but automatically have a defence of not sound mind until their 14th birthday, so it's effectively 14.

In the US it's 11 - a year older - for federal offences, but the States have their own numbers from 6 to 12.

Dont know what it is, but kids here get off with crimes like vandalism, joy riding, theft.
Only more serious crimes get punishments like muggings or armed hold ups.

Assault can be a mixed bag.