Boy's Death Costs Modesto $2.55 Million

Modesto Bee ^ | June 20, 2002 | Michael G. Mooney

[Lexington Green]

If we're gonna have a war on drugs, there will be friendly-fire casualties..... will it be your kid?

[Boonie Rat]

Boy's Death Costs Modesto $2.55 Million

No it didn't. It cost the TAXPAYERS $2.55 Million. Not one single "law enforcement agent", either municipal or federal, paid a RED CENT out of their pocket. No personal responsibility, insurance company paid.

Boonie Rat

MACV SOCOM, PhuBai/Hue '65-'66

[KirklandJunction]

NO!

That's an easy choice.

The "War On Drugs" is not worth shotgunning a kid lying face down on the floor.

[parsifal]

But that's 2.55 million that the bureaucrats don't get to waste. Plus, their insurance company will try to make them behave better. parsy.

[Wolfie]

I guess that's why they settled. Could you imagine trying
to convince a jury of Modesto residents to essentially vote
for a tax increase on themselves to pay for the kind of high
dollar award that this case should have gotten?

[4America]

Stories like this truly break my heart. This could have been prevented, if the child's father wasn't involved with drugs one way or another.

[roadcat]

Investigations by the Police Department, the Stanislaus County district attorney's office and the state attorney general's office cleared Hawn of any criminal wrongdoing in what officials called a "tragic accident."

Wait a minute. If I accidentally shoot someone and they die, I go to jail for negligence. If a cop does it they get off the hook. This stinks. I learned early on not to point shotguns at anyone, so if there was an accidental discharge it isn't likely to accidentally kill someone. And this cop just happened to be pointing it at a kid laying face down on the floor? Gross negligence! The guy ought to be punished and not "cleared"!

[rodeocowboy]

And drugs are supposed to be dangerous to kids?! This isn't even an isolated incident. The War on Drugs has ruined more lives than drugs ever will. And the difference? People who use drugs choose to ruin their own lives; people who are victims, such as this poor boy, never got a choice.

Also, if this were an accidental shooting of a kid by a civilian, there would be hell to pay.

[fogarty]

Officer David Hawn will get off scot-free. No jail time, and not even a slap on the wrist.

The lesson learned here is: If the cops are going to shoot you anyway (without a warrant, and having committed any crime), then it is time to start taking these rogue cops down, as soon as they enter your property.

Use a shotgun and aim for the head.

[steve50]

Love the way you shift blame back to the parent for a LEO's mistake. Shows alot about a mans character

[Jhoffa_]

And now in a related story: "Tax Hike proposed in Modesto.. "

[DryFly]

City had a $500,000 deductible which it did have to pay out of its own pocket. Individual officers didn't, but don't fool yourself that Hahn got off "scot-free". I'm sure he'll never be the same.

[KirklandJunction]

May I politely disagree with might be assumptions?

1. Until the dad is convicted, he's presumed innocent.

2. The boy was not a suspect, regardless of others in the house. He, of all, probably had the least choice of domicile.

3. Street grade, consumer/grammaw/plainJoe gun safety classes, at least those familiar with NRA and other similar disciplines, start classes with DON'T PUT YOUR FINGER ON THE TRIGGER UNTIL YOU HAVE SIGHTED AND MADE THE DECISION TO DESTROY WHAT'S IN YOUR SIGHTS!

We can find tons of "what if" questions, including if the cop had recently studied gun safety, but IMHO any thing is extraneous except that decision, conscious, subconscious, dreams of promotion, Dirty Harry worship, to put a finger on that trigger.

I may be obsolete, but I've never made that shooters mistake, and I haven't had to bury my children.

I wouldn't share a range with this guy for Bill Gate's money.

[AAABEST]

This could have been prevented, if the child's father wasn't involved with drugs one way or another.

For God's sake, can't I just scroll a single thread without someone saying something completely stupid?

You think maybe "this could have been prevented" if the LEO wasn't a total brain dead, under-trained moron who had no business being there in the first place?

The friggin' dumbass already had "accidentally" shot a dead person in the past, yet they did nothing as they're doing nothing to the schmuck now.

[rodeocowboy]

All I know is, there are tons of stories in which these officers barge into the wrong house. I know that if they accidentally barged in my house, and I don't have any reason to look out for the police, I would accidentally shoot one. Any person in his right mind would out of fear that the person is an illegal intruder bent on killing, raping, or robbing their family. Until they finally get it through their heads that the War on Drugs is unconstitutional, as well as a silly example of a nanny government, they must find new ways of serving warrants.

[zarf]

More fun brought to you by:

THE WAR ON DRUGS!!!! (fade in patriotic music....enter a kick line of nude chorus girls and midgets)

[KirklandJunction]

Yeah, it broke my heart too.

Thus my emotional response.

To try to lighten a horrible subject, let's offer two retroactive choices:

1. The cops parents had used specific birth control, or

2. The cop had a passion for caligraphy and was a monk in Ireland copying old manuscripts.

Either way...............life is not fair.

[Wolfie]

Actually, Officer Hawn has a history of "accidental discharges",
so I'd say if it didn't get to him the first time, it won't
get to him this time either.

[rodeocowboy]

The friggin' dumbass already had "accidentally" shot a dead person in the past, yet they did nothing as they're doing nothing to the schmuck now.

I am in total agreement with you, but where did you read or hear this piece of news? Did I miss something in the original article?