MedVision ad

Parents angry as police kill boy, 15, carrying pellet gun (1 Viewer)

Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
3,272
Location
The Pub
Gender
Male
HSC
2007
The parents of a 15-year-old who was fatally shot by US police inside his South Texas school are demanding to know why officers took lethal action, but police said the boy was brandishing - and refused to drop - what appeared to be a handgun and that the officers acted correctly.
The weapon turned out to be a pellet gun that closely resembled the real thing, police said late on Wednesday, several hours after 15-year-old Jaime Gonzalez was repeatedly shot in a hallway at Cummings Middle School in Brownsville. No one else was injured.
"Why was so much excess force used on a minor?" the boy's father, Jaime Gonzalez Sr, asked outside the family's home. "Three shots. Why not one that would bring him down?"
Advertisement: Story continues below
Killed ... Jaime Gonzalez. Photo: AP

His mother, Noralva Gonzalez, showed off a photo on her phone of a beaming Jaime in his drum major uniform standing with his band instructors. Then she flipped through three close-up photos she took of bullet wounds in her son's body, including one in the back of his head.
"What happened was an injustice," she said angrily. "I know that my son wasn't perfect, but he was a great kid."
Interim Police Chief Orlando Rodriguez said the teen was pointing the weapon at officers and "had plenty of opportunities to lower the gun and listen to the officers' orders, and he didn't want to".
Pellet gun ... Jaime Gonzalez was holding it when he was shot. Photo: AP

The chief said his officers had every right to do what they did to protect themselves and other students even though there weren't many others in the hallway at the time. Police said officers fired three shots.
Shortly before the confrontation, Jaime had walked into a classroom and punched a boy in the nose for no apparent reason, Rodriguez said. Police did not know why he pulled out the weapon, but "we think it looks like this was a way to bring attention to himself", Rodriguez said.
About 20 minutes elapsed between police receiving a call about an armed student and shots being fired, according to police and student accounts. Authorities declined to share what the boy said before he was shot.
The shooting happened during first period at the school in Brownsville, a city at Texas's southern tip just across the Mexican border. Teachers locked classroom doors and turned off lights, and some frightened students dove under their desks. They could hear police charge down the hallway and shout for Gonzalez to drop the weapon, followed by several shots.
Two officers fired three shots, hitting Gonzalez at least twice, police said.
David A. Dusenbury, a retired deputy police chief in Long Beach, California, who now consults on police tactics, said the officers were probably justified.
If the boy were raising the gun as if to fire at someone, "then it's unfortunate, but the officer certainly would have the right under the law to use deadly force".
A recording of police radio traffic posted on KGBT-TV's website indicates that officers responding to the school believed the teen had a handgun. An officer is heard describing the teen's clothes and appearance, saying he's "holding a handgun, black in colour". The officer also said that from the front door, he could see the boy in the school's main office.
Less than two minutes later, someone yells over the radio "shots fired" and emergency crews are asked to respond. About two minutes later, someone asks where the boy was shot, prompting responses that he was shot in the chest and "from the back of the head".
Superintendent Carl Montoya remembered Gonzalez as "a very positive young man".
"He did music. He worked well with everybody. Just something unfortunately happened today that caused his behaviour to go the way it went. So I don't know," he said.
Gonzalez Sr said he had no idea where his son got the gun or why he brought it to school, adding: "We wouldn't give him a gift like that."
He said he last saw his son about 6.30am on Wednesday, when the boy said goodbye before leaving to catch the bus to school. And he said nothing seemed amiss the night before when he, his wife and their son went out for nachos then went home and watched a movie.
Gonzalez Sr was struggling to reconcile the day's events, saying his son seemed to be doing better in school and was always helpful around the neighbourhood, mowing neighbours' lawns, washing dogs and carrying his toolbox off to fix other kids' bikes.
Two dozen of his son's friends and classmates gathered in the dark street outside the family's home on Wednesday night. Jaime's best friend, 16-year-old Star Rodriguez, said her favourite memory was when Jaime came to her party on December 29 and they danced and sang together.
"He was like a brother to me," she said.




Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/parents...-pellet-gun-20120106-1pndb.html#ixzz1icjeRZ00
 

Flaming Monkey

New Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2012
Messages
11
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2011
I sometimes wonder why they carry guns, bullets are deadly, stun guns are not and much more effective as your more likely to use it before the gangster blows your head off.
 

OzKo

Retired
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
9,892
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
Uni Grad
2013
I sometimes wonder why they carry guns, bullets are deadly, stun guns are not and much more effective as your more likely to use it before the gangster blows your head off.
Perhaps it's got something to do with range. There's a limited range to which you can use these devices and with a individual carrying what was purported to be a lethal weapon, it isn't as if the police officers were that close in the first place.

Nonetheless, the cops made the right decision.
 

Flaming Monkey

New Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2012
Messages
11
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2011
I think its neither a right nor wrong decision but can be seen as a decision made out of fear.

If range is a problem, I suppose there other less deadly alternatives such as shooting darts/tranquilisers, which allows to attack pre-emptively without the consequence of death for which there is No Return :alone:
 

OzKo

Retired
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
9,892
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
Uni Grad
2013
Do darts or tranquilisers act fast enough? If a legit criminal with intent to murder and a loaded gun saw that they were going to be tranquilised, do you think they would just take it? They would most likely fire back.
 

zombies

Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2011
Messages
663
Location
Riften
Gender
Female
HSC
2013
Yeah, tranquilisers are not instantaneous, the person would still have time to react and fire back.
 

Flaming Monkey

New Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2012
Messages
11
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2011
I;m sure some nerdy scientist can develop the technology. Death to evil doers!
 
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
177
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
1998
I sometimes wonder why they carry guns, bullets are deadly, stun guns are not and much more effective as your more likely to use it before the gangster blows your head off.
they arent effective
short range

tranquilsers are not immediately effective

please stop
 

Pfortune35

Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2011
Messages
270
Gender
Male
HSC
2013
We have to keep in mind the threat of a gun has benefited police infinitely more then the gun itself.
Yes guns are dangerous and stun guns would be a safer option. But criminals know police have guns and are more likely to comply with them and
surrender then try anything rash in certain situations (out of fear of getting shot).

So yes police should carry and use tasers but its important they have guns aswell
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top