The critical issue on which this case should, IMHO, turn is whether the snake was poisonous. Such a snake could easily become a threat to health and/or life of the property owner.
The property owner should have been able to take care of such a simple thing as killing a snake. Second Amendment, anyone?
But, for whatever reason, the cops were called, resonded in what seemed a reasonable manner, and dealt with the snake by sending it to the Great Snake Hole In The Sky.
Unfortunately, a freak accident killed the boy. To blame or charge the officer would, again IMHO, be accepting the Nanny State ASSumption that it is teh role of the government to keep us safe from all harm.
The goverment isn’t G*D. We are Americans, and much of what the government does it should not be doing. Shooting snakes is one of them.
Having brought up the issue of individual responsibility v. government assumption of “risk abatement”, nothing I or anyone else can say will diminish the loss that family suffered.
But, if the facts were as described, the officer would seem to not have been at fault.
What?!? The critical issue is whether the officer reacted in a reasonable manner. Did he employ appropriate force? When he decided to discharge his firearm, did he act in a responsible manner?
The property owner should have been able to take care of such a simple thing as killing a snake.
Probably true. However, that in no way mitigates the officer's actions. The two are totally unrelated.
Having brought up the issue of individual responsibility v. government assumption of “risk abatement”...the officer would seem to not have been at fault.
Those two statements are directly at odds. If we are to enforce individual responsibility, then we must hold this individual responsible for his negligent actions.
I strongly disagree. An officer fired his weapon in the absence of an imminent threat to human life. That shot killed a child. That the bullet could pass through the thin plywood of a house roof is something the cop should have foreseen.
I'm not saying tat the cop is criminally liable -- i don't know a lot of detail, but I'm leaning toward the position that he isn't -- but the folks in charge should look at this event and rethink their procedures to make sure that it doesn't happen again.
>But, if the facts were as described, the officer would seem to not have been at fault.<
If you as a civilian had done the same thing, would you be at fault? Yes or no?
Oh BS. The snake, poisonous or not, didn't present an immediate threat to human life. Cops can't just blast off rounds into the unknown world, because of a damn snake----venemous or not.
Bullchip
A civilian would be already charged with reckless indifference