Sheriff's deputy will NOT be charged for shooting dead 13-year-old child.

Associated Press and Daily Mail Reporter ^ | Updated: 10:09 EST, 8 July 2014 | Staff

[Brooklyn Attitude]

“Of course you could be shot for turning around to face an armed person with a rifle in your hands...”

You seem OK with that even though the gun owner has done nothing wrong. You can be holding a gun without having criminal intent and a cops shouldnt be allowed to kill you just for turning to face someone who talks to you.

[Brooklyn Attitude]

“As far as the paper carriers, nice try, but no one could agree with that shooting and I certainly didn’t.”

You may not be aware that an internal review of that shooting showed no wrongdoing on the part of the cops. Hard to believe that level of irresponsibility is considered acceptable.

[Brooklyn Attitude]

I thought you might find this interesting.
http://www.steynonline.com/6317/gun-control

[ltc8k6]

I said you could be shot for doing that, I gave no opinion on whether it would be “okay”.

[ltc8k6]

I’m well aware that there are some very bad people out there wearing badges, and even holding the position of District Attorney.

[Moonman62]

The criticism is that the cops didn’t give the kid a chance to try and obey a lawfully given order. The cops gave the order and basically started unloading their weapons within a couple of seconds after the order. I’ve been yelled at by cops and I can tell you that it can take a second or two to process what you are being told to do, especially if you didn’t see the cops beforehand.

One of the witnesses warned Andy that the police were behind him and that he should drop the gun. Andy ignored the warning and kept walking with the gun slinged on his shoulder.

If the kid had raised the gun, apparently with the intent to fire, I wouldn’t be criticizing the cops. However, the kid knew he only had a pellet gun so it’s unlikely that he would have done that.

According to the DA's report, Andy did raise the gun as he turned. They hired experts to verify that was consistent with the evidence. Andy was also high on pot at the time, which probably affected his judgement.

[Moonman62]

I wouldn't disagree, but I would add there are a couple reasons I can think of why a teen would want his toy gun to look more realistic, some innocent, some not. Regardless, it's certainly not wise.

In California it isn't legal either.

[Jonty30]

In California it is taught in history class that people once had rights. 😊

[Jonty30]

If it was a case where the police really did think the kid was going to fire, I can accept that. In most reports that I did read on the issue made it seem more of a case of pretext.