Parents Question Lethal Force on 8th-Grader With Pellet Gun

I think you are trying to confuse the issue. Of course he was in the hall at some point. He started in a classroom where he physically assaulted another student and pulled the gun. He then proceed down the hallway at some point in the main office. I have yet to find anything that confirms your assertion he was in the principles office.

He was told by the police to drop his gun, several times, he refused. The police had to take him down to insure no one would be harmed.

What is the premise of you belief all three didn't occur?

Prove they ever had him cornered in a secure area where he could not harm anyone.

You assume a lot you know.

They did negotiate, they told him to drop his weapon, several times, he pointed it at them and they fired. They don't have to take fire from an armed suspect. They don't have to wait for him to shot. If any hostages or others are in his line of sight they are in immediate and imminent danger.

They shot.

 

Not sure what discrepancies you're talking about? Was the boy somehow crippled so he was unable to change locations? From the 9-1-1 eye-witness account it appears he left the office with gun drawn and started running down the hall. At that point the police have no choice but to take him down. Two shots to the body and he banged his head when he fell. This was suicide.

 

Your question makes no sense. The parents are responsible for their children from the moment they are born and until they moment they leave their care. It's really no more complicated than that.

 

I know of a few men in their 30s that still live with their parents and never moved out.

Are their parents still responsible for these adult kids?

 

I think Ethereal was speaking about kids that leave when they become adults (i.e. age eighteen) as being the point when parents cease to be responsible for their children's actions, as that is the point when they are considered adults, and can be held fully liable for their actions...

 

...as soon as the child is born, what kind of &*()(*&&^%$ moron are you?!?!?...



Kabuki Joe

 

You need to stop watching so much television. There is no such thing as "shoot to disable." It is "shoot to kill" or don't shoot at all. Bottom line, if you are going to fire your weapon, it is to to kill.

And how exactly, do you propose to "train" people to distinguish between a troubled school kid and a hardened criminal? You do realize that one can go from school kid to criminal in a matter of seconds, right? And how to do distinguish that when you have never met someone before? is there criteria? Do they have to have X amount of tattoos? Pants hanging below their ass? Do they have to curse a lot? Do they have to say "(*)(*)(*)(*) the pOlice?"

This is your brilliant idea, help me out here. /sarcasm.

I am sorry... "frightened?" You do know that they have families to provide for and go home to don't you? Why should they have to stand for having a gun pointed at them? And what "swat team" mentality are you talking about? A few cops rushed in because they were told a 15 year old has assaulted someone and was running around brandishing a weapon... ummmmm don't you think the situation is kind of urgent so the kid doesn't errr.... kill people?

I thought that was obvious, but I guess not.

Well aren't you just the best thing since sliced bread.

That is irrelevant, the point is to address the situation BEFORE he shoots someone! He had the chance to walk away when he was told to put the weapon down. Instead, he chose suicide by cop.

What is with you and counselors? What makes you think this kid would have talked to a counselor?

So upon entering the building the boy was near or in the office? By the time they got in he was in the hallway... and...

Sure! No problem! Just tell the child to hold on for 45 minutes while they try and remove all the children form the school. SURE! Maybe he and the police can just "freeze in place" till everyone is gone... THEN they can continue their situation.

Your posts in this thread are so asinine, I am embarrassed for you.

 

The gun looked real from 10 feet away.....

 

Tasers aren't used against people with guns. It's too unsafe for the police. If you have to take down a person with a gun, you need to do it with lethal force.

 

I note you ignored the fact that the school has three counselors. They didn't seem to recognize a problem. Maybe this kid was just bad.

 

I blame the media. Reporters, in my observation, are very cavalier with facts.

 

If they are mentally disabled (i.e. mentally retarded), yes.

 

Most are just unmotivated. But in those cases, I still blame the parents. They should have kicked the kid out within a year of finishing or quitting school - no matter how difficult of a decision that seems.

The parents enable this behavior and are at least partially to blame.

 

To some extent. They are responsible for them turning into such a loser, that's for sure.

 

This sounds like another incident that would have been prevented if students were allowed to carry guns and bust caps in the asses of would-be bullies. Instead, we got leftard logic + deaths. How surprising.

Yes. Some kids skip a grade or get held back a grade.

 

Now that is 100% the truth. I don't really understand how folks think the police should have known he had a pellet gun. It is a tragic incident, but in no way can anyone fault the police for their actions in this case.

 

Gun fights are fluid. From the time you pull the trigger until the gun goes off someone can turn. Arm chair commandos should really bone up on facts.

 

Sure, shooting someone in the back of the head could be the result of that, but that's what the court needs to figure out.

 

The OP may have an explanation...

 

Since this is a necro-thread, I had to go back to see what actually happened. We established earlier that the reason he had a head wound was from a fall, and not a shot.