Cleveland, US. Police kill boy, 12

[Obelix]

The kid's handgun was a Colt 1911 replica. That usually comes in .45 ACP semi-auto, and that's a bad round alright. I don't know about 'more firepower' than a police officer though, because these days the "standard" for US law enforcement seems to 40 S&W hollow-point (I am told very many officers favour the SIG 22x series), and in practical terms, that's way worse.

It really is, you know. With pistols, double-tapping is standard regardless of whether you are shooting to kill or wound (and I don't believe any officer who shoots is or could "shoot to wound": they'll be shooting to centre mass, hoping to only disable and wound, but that's one for luck and ballistics). You're shooting twice for redundancy, to get at least one shot on target.

 

Not a bragging post but I have shot with quite a variety of real handguns ("real steel" as airsofters call it) in varying calibres over the years, from .22 single-shot match-grade handguns to full-bore 45 ACP semi-autos, and the take-away point is that non-match handguns are difficult to aim and shoot precisely at even short range at the best of times, never mind in life-threatening situations.

 

10 meter range, P226 with 10mm round, five round clip I can put all of them in the X ring. No bother

 

Then the RCO drops some firecracker strings as I start shooting.... I got 3 snowbirds one complete miss and one on target. Makes you think how tricky it is in the heat of the moment....

[cgksheff]

Listening to the police chief, he says that officers first told Tamir to drop his weapon, before telling him to raise his hands.

Is it not possible that he was still following the first instruction when he was pulling the 'gun' out of his waistband?

Edited November 25, 2014 by cgksheff

[L00b]

Then the RCO drops some firecracker strings as I start shooting.... I got 3 snowbirds one complete miss and one on target. Makes you think how tricky it is in the heat of the moment....

Precisely. In my opinion, based on 30-odd years of shooting recreationally various lethal firearms (at moving and non-moving bits of paper, steel and clay, as well as furry and feathered critters) and non-lethal toys (at moving camouflaged adults shooting back, both woodland and CQB)...*very*.

Listening to the police chief, he says that officers first told Tamir to drop his weapon, before telling to raise his hands.

Is it not possible that he was still following the first instruction when he was pulling the 'gun' out of his waistband?

It is possible, absolutely. According to reports, one of officers was very junior (less than a year on the force), the other had 10 years on the job, so it may be revealing to learn which officer did the shooting. All the same, without casting the hindsight-laden stone at them yet. Edited November 24, 2014 by L00b

[Obelix]

Precisely. In my opinion, based on 30-odd years of shooting recreationally various lethal firearms (at moving and non-moving bits of paper, steel and clay, as well as furry and feathered critters) and non-lethal toys (at moving camouflaged adults shooting back, both woodland and CQB)...*very*.

It is possible, absolutely. According to reports, one of officers was quite "wet behind the ears", the other had 10 years on the job, so it may be revealing to learn which officer did the shooting. All the same, without falling into the trap of hindsight.

 

If two rounds were fired it's not inconceivable it was both of them I guess.

[charmer]

What else could they have done?

 

They could have stood off at a safe distance, under cover, and waited a few more precious seconds.

 

They could have fired warning shots into the air.

 

Worse case scenario, they could have shot the boy in the leg or somewhere none fatal.

 

Having said that, I can see why the police in the US don't like taking any risks. People this age have been on shooting sprees before. But I don't think "shoot to kill", was necessary here.

 

Why do you not think shoot to kill was necessary? I have explained why both the UK and US armed police have a policy to shoot to kill earlier in the thread. What makes you think differently?

[Mr Bloom]

Listening to the police chief, he says that officers first told Tamir to drop his weapon, before telling to raise his hands.

Is it not possible that he was still following the first instruction when he was pulling the 'gun' out of his waistband?

 

Good heavens. The possibility of that has just had me in tears.

 

Poor lad, poor family.

[Ellco]

As far as I can see there's one of the greatest cover ups or some people don't like the truth. Listening to the explanation last night... the officer had little option.

[Bonzo77]

Why do you not think shoot to kill was necessary? I have explained why both the UK and US armed police have a policy to shoot to kill earlier in the thread. What makes you think differently?

 

Because, from the articles I've read, I think more caution Could have been taken.

[perplexed]

If a real bullet emerges from a weapon, the age of the person pulling the trigger is academic. Tragic event.

[charmer]

Listening to the police chief, he says that officers first told Tamir to drop his weapon, before telling him to raise his hands.

Is it not possible that he was still following the first instruction when he was pulling the 'gun' out of his waistband?

 

Possible but unlikely. I do not see why a detour was made to his waistband when asked by armed officers to raise his hands.

 

Because, from the articles I've read, I think more caution Could have been taken.

 

So, you have read some articles about one highly emotionally charged incident and this is enough for you to disagree with policy made by experts in multiple countries developed over many years?

 

How hard do you think it would be to shoot someone and cause precisely enough damage to incapacitate them enough that they are no longer a threat, but not too much to kill them? This would be incredibly difficult.

 

The non lethal areas if the body (the limbs) are small targets that could easily be missed. Missing with your shot causes two major problems;

 

1) The flight path of the bullet continues unchecked, creating danger to those around.

 

2) If hit, the shot person is very likely to be able to fire a round themselves, either back at the officers or at bystanders.

 

Reading an article is not reason to form a conclusion, merely a vehicle by which a conclusion can be reached. What did you find in these articles that helped you form an opinion that is against the view of most experts (that shooting to kill in incidences like this is the correct policy).

 

I would actually like you to provide me with a good enough answer to convince me you are right. I genuinely want you to be right, but I don't think you are

Edited November 25, 2014 by charmer
stupid auto correct!