Posted on 06/22/2017 9:40:19 PM PDT by Navy Patriot
As Los Angeles County sheriff's deputies were shooting at a pit bull that was charging at them, a 17-year-old boy was apparently struck in the chest by one of the bullets and died, the sheriff's office said.
...
The deputies went to the back of the complex "in an attempt to corral the dog to prevent additional victims," the sheriff's office said, and as they walked to the rear carport area, they found a teenager on the ground who appeared to have been shot in the chest, the sheriff's office said. The teen was hospitalized and later died.
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
The kid definitely was not aware of his surroundings. He jumped out to catch the loose dog and did not notice the officer had drawn his gun to shoot.
Until we know the exact circumstances when the officer fired his weapon all comments an analysis are of no merit.
I myself have been shooting for 60 years and do not understand how this happened. As prior posted any analysis with out full knowledge of what was happening is worthless as was my comment.
We do not know what really happened. It may be gross negligence or a horrible legal error.
We do not know.
If you are aiming at a dog and hit a kid in the chest (assuming that is what happened here) it is not a tragedy, it is a crime.
I think there is probably something missing in this story though - perhaps the kid ran into the line of fire or the dog was attacking the kid. We may never know.
If you decide to discharge your firearm, you are responsible for that round - this cop should be subject to the same penalties as you or I - at the very least a negligent manslaughter charge. Let a jury sort out the merits of the case.
According to the article, the kid was apparently hit by a bullet that ricocheted off the ground.
1. An innocent, unwarned young man was killed because police officers chose to use pistols to kill a dangerous dog. Anyone who ever uses a pistol or a rifle knows that the lethal range of projectiles fired by those weapons extends miles.
2. Almost everyone who knows even the most basic fact about firearms would choose a shotgun, loaded with birdshot to engage a dangerous dog in situations where bystanders are in danger. Number 7 1/2 to 9 birdshot loses energy very rapidly past 40 meters to the point where it is harmless.
Negligent homicide is negligent homicide whether it is committed by a civilian or a cop.
This concern over an obviously viscous dog is another example of the obsession with animals that has taken over society. It’s always the human’s fault. We have comfort animals. If you didn’t get your animal by rescue, you are a mean person. You are a pet parent not an owner. If you don’t have a pet there is something wrong with you. Oh and what about when people bring their dog to your house and you had made it clear not to, you are the weird one. The pet industry has created this mass hysteria and are laughing all the way to the bank. Meanwhile people are mauled to death and there’s a never ending supply of stray animals..
A pitbull would laugh off birdshot. A few years ago, a cop in Detroit shot one 2-3 with a .375 Magnum and the animal ran away.
I guess the other option is to disarm the cops...so they run away at the first sign of trouble, as in London.
No matter what you say no matter if they jumped in front of the gun (as happened here) there will always be anti cop. Me thinks some disgruntled spent time in the pokey.
Have they stopped training cops in firearms safety?
When I hunt, I go with a group of military veterans, I know that not a one of my buddies will take a shot until they know the location of every other member of the group and have thoroughly evaluated the situation.
I had to let a nice 10-point buck walk once, because I couldn’t locate one of my team.
Then the officer used the wrong level of force. Pepper spray would have done it without putting the civilian at risk.
You do not understand what involuntary manslaughter or negligent homicide is.
Anyway, how does shooting at a pit bull end up striking a human in the chest?
Not really; I take it that you've never seen anything shot at close range with bird shot - hits like a single slug. It's a preferred load for house defense - kills effectively at close quarters, doesn't go far into neighboring rooms.
And during those 60 years of shooting did you ever pull the trigger when you couldn't see where your round would go downrange?
I have been in heavy combat. Despite fear, fatigue, incredible volumes of fire I never pulled the trigger when I wasn't sure that I would hit only what I was aiming for.
Cops are responsible when they take a life.
Most cops can’t shoot for shite. That’s why you read all these stories.
Is the “teen” who was shot and killed the same “young person” who initially restrained the dog? Was this person also the owner of the dog? If this is all affirmative then the aspect of “tragedy” is greatly diminished. This is a garbage article. My summary is: While attempting to defend themselves from a second attack by a vicious dog the police accidentally killed the dog’s owner.
Same here, just he wasn't near ten points.
Unfortunately true, and they don't have proper training on when to shoot or the projectile options that exist.
And, HOW does one do that when an animal is charging at one? I think hunting and defending oneself are two very different things.
How do you shoot at a dog and accidently hit a kid?
That’s CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE and you or I would be arrested, charged, and probably convicted. But not a boy in blue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.