8th Grader with a Gun

Larry Gude

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Ponytail said:
that raised an eyebrow with me too. Not too many people connected those dots at the end of the cnn article either.

Doesn't sound all that innocent to me. I'm willing to bet that the officer that shot him is not feeling all that great about it, but in the long run, I'm willing to bet that lives were saved...if not immediately, years from now.
Click to expand...
This just in! Kid was born in Philly!!!

:evil:


j/k!
 
MMDad

MMDad

Lem Putt
awpitt said:
...but did they have to shoot him three times? That's the part I'm wondering about. I don't fault the police for shooting to disable the kid but three times seems to be a bit much.
Click to expand...
There's no such thing as shooting to disable other than in movies. If you don't intend to kill you don't shoot.
 
MMDad

MMDad

Lem Putt
awpitt said:
Yes, think it through.

I shoot at his shoulders, legs, or maybe his abs in order to disable him.

As I already said, if the kid was really going to shoot people, he would've done so before the police arrived. He had plenty of opportunity to shoot whoever he wanted but he didn't. That should've said something to how the cops would deal with him.
Click to expand...
"Officer Pitt, is it true that you shot him when you did not believe his actions warranted deadly force?"

"Yes."

"Officer Pitt, are you aware that there are arteries in legs and shoulders, and that hitting one could cause death?"

"Yes."

"Officer Pitt, are you aware that there are vital organs in the abdomen, and shooting the abdomen can sever the spine?"

"Yes."

"So you knew that there was a good chance that your shots would kill someone, yet you shot anyway. Guilty. Life in prison."
 
T

thatguy

New Member
MMDad said:
There's no such thing as shooting to disable other than in movies. If you don't intend to kill you don't shoot.
Click to expand...
thats exactly what i remember from talkign to state troopers, shooting to disable/disarm is only in the movies. the liability is too high if you aren't really trying to use "deadly force"
 
PsyOps

PsyOps

Pixelated
Larry Gude said:
And there's a flag on the play! 15 yards for mis-characterization and a personal foul to boot!

I think they do a great job most of the time. This one sounds fishy.
Click to expand...
Sorry if you've already explained this (I've been distracted).

Fishy how?
 
bulldog

bulldog

New Member
awpitt said:
Yes, think it through.

I shoot at his shoulders, legs, or maybe his abs in order to disable him.

As I already said, if the kid was really going to shoot people, he would've done so before the police arrived. He had plenty of opportunity to shoot whoever he wanted but he didn't. That should've said something to how the cops would deal with him.
Click to expand...
Cops are not taught to shoot at shoulders, legs or abs. They are taught to shoot center mass until the threat is stopped. That may take one shot, it may take more, but center mass is the point of aim.
 
Vince

Vince

......
awpitt said:
No.

They should disable him so he can be taken into custody. One shot is an attempt to disable. Two shots at once is shoot to kill. I don't think that was called for here. Especially since the kid did have plenty of opportunities to shoot people before the cops arrived but HE DIDN'T SHOOT ANYONE. He punched a kid.
Click to expand...
Kid had a gun. Kid didn't put gun down when warned. Kid got shot as a result of his stupidity. It's ashame, but better him than 6 other kids or cops shot dead and that is if the gun were something other than a pellet gun. Stupidity will get you killed whether you're 15 or 50.
 
awpitt

awpitt

Main Streeter
PREMO Member
bulldog said:
Cops are not taught to shoot at shoulders, legs or abs. They are taught to shoot center mass until the threat is stopped. That may take one shot, it may take more, but center mass is the point of aim.
Click to expand...
Okay. That makes sense.

Center mass would not include the back of the head, correct?
 
bulldog

bulldog

New Member
awpitt said:
Okay. That makes sense.

Center mass would not include the back of the head, correct?
Click to expand...
Not unless it were a hostage (or similar) situation and the back of the head were the only shot to take.

Was this kid shot in the back of the head?
 
T

thatguy

New Member
awpitt said:
Okay. That makes sense.

Center mass would not include the back of the head, correct?
Click to expand...
its called missing the bullseye but hitting the target, and its exactly why LEO are not taught to shoot to disable. A shot at the shoulder, as you suggested, would be much more likely to drift and end up as a head shot than a shot to center mass.
 
awpitt

awpitt

Main Streeter
PREMO Member
bulldog said:
Not unless it were a hostage (or similar) situation and the back of the head were the only shot to take.

Was this kid shot in the back of the head?
Click to expand...
The WTOP article mentions a wound in the back of the head.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top