[SoCal Pubbie]

“The cop needs to prove the boy was an immediate life endangering threat.”

Don’t mean to pick too many nits but that’s not quite correct. I believe a shooting can be justified even if there was no actual threat but rather would it be reasonable to think the threat was real. A cop could be justified for shooting a kid when he pulls a toy gun out of his pocket in a dark situation, but not if the kid is caring a teddy bear in broad daylight and the policeman says he thought it was a weapon.

That’s where this case will come down to. Was it reasonable that shoot the guy just because he jumped out of the truck and pulled something out of the bed.

[eyeamok]

Don’t mean to pick too many nits but that’s not quite correct. I believe a shooting can be justified even if there was no actual threat but rather would it be reasonable to think the threat was real. A cop could be justified for shooting a kid when he pulls a toy gun out of his pocket in a dark situation, but not if the kid is caring a teddy bear in broad daylight and the policeman says he thought it was a weapon.

This maybe the case nowadays, but up until the early 70's when the Public Employee Unions got started, if a Cop Shot an Unarmed Person, it was immediate termination and 5 years for manslaughter. It was the same for Ordinary Citizens too

[FreeperinRATcage]

Agree, provided the cops perception of the threat meets the same standard that would apply to you or I.