Cop pulls gun on 11 year old boy

I can't believe they did this, how awful and idiotic!

It's as if cops are stu...wait. ZOMG!!!! Pakistan fingerprinted a 9 month old boy for attempted murder!

This thread is now boring kthxbie.
 
Multivac said:
Exactly. There is no excuse for a cop to point a gun at an 11 year old kid.
Click to expand...

In fairness to the cop, and there are some bad ones out there, but first, do we know he really did point his gun at the eleven-year-old? I don't think we do. Second, if he did, did the officer know it was an eleven-year-old kid when he approached him? He might not have.
 
Megalodon said:
An 11 year old can wield a chainsaw and that wouldn't be a good reason for an officer to feel compelled to draw his gun. The unprofessionalism of the cops that keep making the news is appalling.
Click to expand...
A chainsaw-wielding 11-year-old absolutely can cause death or serious bodily injury. If he won't put it down and seems like he could start doing damage to people, any cop would be justified in clearing leather.

If you don't think so, well that's on you. But I wouldn't risk going home without fingers (or worse) just because you or some flowerpower hippie thinks an 11-year-old kid shouldn't have guns put in their direction.
 
Grizzly Adams said:
A chainsaw-wielding 11-year-old absolutely can cause death or serious bodily injury. If he won't put it down and seems like he could start doing damage to people, any cop would be justified in clearing leather.
Click to expand...

If an 11 year old is a threat to a police officer, then that police officer should find another job.

If you don't think so, well that's on you. But I wouldn't risk going home without fingers (or worse) just because you or some flowerpower hippie thinks an 11-year-old kid shouldn't have guns put in their direction.
Click to expand...

I've trained with both police and guardsmen in Portugal. None of them are the kind of wuss that would point a gun at an 11 year-old, independently of what gardening utensil might be in use.
 
Multivac said:
Exactly. There is no excuse for a cop to point a gun at an 11 year old kid.
Click to expand...

What about if the 11 year old kid had a firearm? Can firearms not hurt people if the person holding it is under a certain age?
 
Megalodon said:
If an 11 year old is a threat to a police officer, then that police officer should find another job.
Click to expand...
This is an insanely myopic and categorical statement that has no basis in reality.

I've trained with both police and guardsmen in Portugal. None of them are the kind of wuss that would point a gun at an 11 year-old, independently of what gardening utensil might be in use.
Click to expand...
If one were advancing and swinging a hatchet at people, drawing (at a minimum) is wholly justified, whether you think it's being a "wuss" or not. And I suspect if the kid were advancing at you, you'd feel differently, even if you won't publicly admit to being a "wuss."
 
Since I know for a fact that both 11 year old kids and cops have been known to lie - I think I'll withhold judgement until the facts are established.
 
Grizzly Adams said:
This is an insanely myopic and categorical statement that has no basis in reality.
Click to expand...

Unless the 11 year old has a firearm, no cop on the street should feel they are enough of a threat to draw a gun.

If one were advancing and swinging a hatchet at people, drawing (at a minimum) is wholly justified, whether you think it's being a "wuss" or not. And I suspect if the kid were advancing at you, you'd feel differently, even if you won't publicly admit to being a "wuss."
Click to expand...

You obviously have no idea what you're talking about. Once you draw a gun you closed yourself to all other possibilities to subdue an attacker but shooting. And if you need a gun to subdue an 11 year old the street is not for you.
 
One thing I learned from the show COPS: unless the suspect has a gun, officers, probably because they know they are being filmed, almost always draw their pepper spray first. Why wasn't this an option here? I doubt an 11 year old would maintain grip on a garden weasel with a face full of capsaicin.
 
The Norseman said:
How is an inanimate object the threat?
Click to expand...

Unbelievable.

What if? It wasn't a firearm in this case, so what's your point?
Click to expand...

I was responding to the following comment:

There is no excuse for a cop to point a gun at an 11 year old kid.

I was pointing out that there are legitimate reasons that a police officer would draw a gun on an 11 year old.

Black Hole Box said:
One thing I learned from the show COPS: unless the suspect has a gun, officers, probably because they know they are being filmed, almost always draw their pepper spray first. Why wasn't this an option here? I doubt an 11 year old would maintain grip on a garden weasel with a face full of capsaicin.
Click to expand...

"COP THREATENS 11 YEAR OLD WITH PEPPER SPRAY!"
 
squealpiggy said:
Unbelievable.
Click to expand...
I tend to think of myself as 'awesome' rather than 'unbelievable' but hey, any compliment is welcome!


I was responding to the following comment:

There is no excuse for a cop to point a gun at an 11 year old kid.

I was pointing out that there are legitimate reasons that a police officer would draw a gun on an 11 year old.
Click to expand...
Sure, depending on the totality of circumstances. It's trivially obvious that the cop felt, taking everything into consideration, that drawing his service weapon was justified. Apparently people now are saying that the cop didn't take everything into consideration in determining his response.

What did the child say or do which would have led a cop to reasonably believe his life was in danger or that he needed to draw his weapon to effect an arrest?
 
Black Hole Box said:
One thing I learned from the show COPS: unless the suspect has a gun, officers, probably because they know they are being filmed, almost always draw their pepper spray first. Why wasn't this an option here? I doubt an 11 year old would maintain grip on a garden weasel with a face full of capsaicin.
Click to expand...
Would you really think that was an improvement?

While a gun is more dangerous than pepper spray (a gun can kill, pepperspray cannot), if the kid WERE threatening the officer a gun might cause the kid to stand down immediately (without injuring the kid), whereas a blast of pepper spray would hurt the kid significantly.
 
Unless the 11 year old has a firearm, no cop on the street should feel they are enough of a threat to draw a gun.
Click to expand...
So, getting hit with (for example) an ax or hatchet isn't dangerous if the person swinging it is under 12?
You obviously have no idea what you're talking about. Once you draw a gun you closed yourself to all other possibilities to subdue an attacker but shooting.
Click to expand...
You know, I might not be involved in law enforcement, but I question your arguments...
- Is there some requirement that whenever a gun is drawn that the officer must shoot someone? Or can the officer, you know, put the gun away once the threat was clear?
- Weren't there 2 officers on the scene? If there WERE a threat, couldn't one officer keep the gun drawn while the other actually applies handcuffs?
Sure, depending on the totality of circumstances. It's trivially obvious that the cop felt, taking everything into consideration, that drawing his service weapon was justified. Apparently people now are saying that the cop didn't take everything into consideration in determining his response.
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that people saying "the cop didn't take everything into consideration" are making their judgement based on pretty much nothing. I wasn't there. You weren't there. Multivac (who made the blanket claim that a gun should NEVER be drawn on an 11 year old) and Megaldon (at least qualified it by saying it should never be drawn on an 11 year old who doesn't have a gun).

I (and several other posters) have pointed out that we need more information to make a judgement. The ones who have stepped in to condemn the actions of the police are jumping to conclusions.
What did the child say or do which would have led a cop to reasonably believe his life was in danger or that he needed to draw his weapon to effect an arrest?
Click to expand...
Again, we don't even know if the cop did draw his gun.

There are several possibilities:

1) The kid and/or the mother is lying. (Perhaps the kid was embarrassed getting escorted home by cops and wanted to deflect the blame).

2) The cops did draw their weapons unnecessarily, either as a power trip or in a misguided attempt to do a "scared straight", in which case they should be disciplined (perhaps even fired).

We certainly know that that's a possibility. (There was an episode of Penn & Teller: B.S. that showed that on security camera.)

3) The officers did draw their weapons, but they had a legitimate reason to (either because the kids actually did threaten the officers, or through a possible misunderstanding). This is probably the least likely scenario, but I don't think it can totally be ignored... While many have tried to poo-poo it away (e.g. someone talked about the kids having a 'garden weasle'), if the kids were cutting down branches it would be reasonable that they'd have a hatchet or ax. I believe those are dangerous objects (even in the hands of an 11 year old), and I certainly wouldn't want to be hit by one.

Here's a possible scenario... Kids have hatchets to cut down branches (a reasonable tool for them to have for that purpose). Cops show up and tell them to put down the hatchets. Kids (in a moment of bravado) start to mouth off to the cops, and since a group of kids is usually dumber than one, one lifts the hatchet as if to throw it. (I doubt it happened like that, but it would be a reasonable scenario for a cop to feel reasonably threatened.)
 
Segnosaur said:
So, getting hit with (for example) an ax or hatchet isn't dangerous if the person swinging it is under 12?
Click to expand...

And so it starts... Where did I say that being hit with an hatchet isn't dangerous?

What I said is that, firearms excepted, an 11 year-old can't pose enough of a threat to a police officer as to merit the drawing of the service weapon.

[/QUOTE]You know, I might not be involved in law enforcement, but I question your arguments...[/QUOTE]

No, you question the arguments you wished I had made... there's a big difference.

- Is there some requirement that whenever a gun is drawn that the officer must shoot someone? Or can the officer, you know, put the gun away once the threat was clear?
Click to expand...

If the kid didn't stop, the officer had no recourse but to shoot. Once your weapon is drawn your hands are quite literally tied. And the implication of your argument is that it is always ok for a cop to draw the gun, since it can be put away without firing. A fun world to live in, I guess.

- Weren't there 2 officers on the scene? If there WERE a threat, couldn't one officer keep the gun drawn while the other actually applies handcuffs?
Click to expand...

If the kid hadn't stopped they would have no recourse but to shoot. Again, drawing the gun prevents the use of other means of handling the issue. It's a ridiculous escalation of force, when your opponent is an 11 year old.

...if the kids were cutting down branches it would be reasonable that they'd have a hatchet or ax. I believe those are dangerous objects (even in the hands of an 11 year old), and I certainly wouldn't want to be hit by one.
Click to expand...

If your cops need to be worried that an 11 year old will hit them with a hatchet you need to crank up their combat training.

One thing you've got right, the whole story might be a fabrication. However, i find it appalling that anyone would defend the cops in such a situation, even if hypothetical.
 
Megalodon said:
So, getting hit with (for example) an ax or hatchet isn't dangerous if the person swinging it is under 12?
Click to expand...
And so it starts...
Click to expand...
No, it started many postings ago, with comments by you (and others) that suggested that a cop should never pull a gun on an 11 year old unless the 11 year old has a gun.

Where did I say that being hit with an hatchet isn't dangerous?
...
What I said is that, firearms excepted, an 11 year-old can't pose enough of a threat to a police officer as to merit the drawing of the service weapon
Click to expand...
So, getting hit with a hatchet is dangerous, but an 11 year old can't be a threat if he's holding one.

Do you notice the disconnect there?

Either a hatchet is a dangerous object (and the officer should be allowed to defend themselves) or it is not.

Do you think if it was a hatchet wielded by a 20 year old it could also be ignored? Or do you think that there is something magical about being used by someone under 12 that makes it unlikely to be dangerous? (And keep in mind that if this kid were using a hatchet to cut branches off trees, he's more than capable of throwing it or swinging it with enough force to cut a person.)

If your cops need to be worried that an 11 year old will hit them with a hatchet you need to crank up their combat training.
Click to expand...
I see....

So, what exactly do you think would be an acceptable method of "combat" when dealing with someone handling a weapon that you yourself said is "dangerous"?

Is this where you break out some sort of argument that officers should be some sort of Jackie-Chan martial artists who can engage in all sort of hand-to-hand (or hand-to-ax) combat without ever getting a scratch on them?
 
Last edited:
Segnosaur said:
So, getting hit with a hatchet is dangerous, but an 11 year old can't be a threat if he's holding one.

Do you notice the disconnect there?
Click to expand...

An 11 year old should not be a threat meriting the drawing of a gun by a properly trained police officer. I know that nuance is hard, but you either argue against what I wrote, or we cut it short.

Either a hatchet is a dangerous object (and the officer should be allowed to defend themselves) or it is not.
Click to expand...

An hatchet by itself is harmless

Do you think if it was a hatchet wielded by a 20 year old it could also be ignored? Or do you think that there is something magical about being used by someone under 12 that makes it unlikely to be dangerous? (And keep in mind that if this kid were using a hatchet to cut branches off trees, he's more than capable of throwing it or swinging it with enough force to cut a person.)
Click to expand...

Yes, I do think there's a "magical" difference between a 20 year old and an 11 year old. Seriously, re-read what you just asked me and try to realize how ridiculous you sound.

BTW, when I was 5 I used my dad's hatchet to cut some wood. Should police officers feel threatened by 5 year olds too?

I see....
Click to expand...

No, you don't seem to see at all.

So, what exactly do you think would be an acceptable method of "combat" when dealing with someone handling a weapon that you yourself said is "dangerous"?
Click to expand...

It's an 11 year old, for crying out loud. You walk to him and take the hatchet away. The reflexes, movement control and strength of an 11 year old are nothing compared to those of a grown man. We are not talking about a teenager here, we are talking about children.

If the kid moves like a shaolin monk, then by all means get the pepper spray out and threaten him, but you better have video of that phenomenal child.

Is this where you break out some sort of argument that officers should be some sort of Jackie-Chan martial artists who can engage in all sort of hand-to-hand (or hand-to-ax) combat without ever getting a scratch on them?
Click to expand...

No, this is where I say that an adult too chicken-**** to handle an 11 year old without pulling a gun has no business being a police officer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom