It would have been nice if the original post had included a link to the article.
Several of us knew about and had been discussing the story at least a day before this thread was started. There may be others, but the thread
of which I speak is here, and there is more than one link posted in the thread.
I know very well the damage that a pellet rifle can do. I used to hunt rabbits and shoot stray skunks, opossums, and raccoons with one; and several years ago one of my sons was shot in the arm by a friend at a range of about 30 to 40 yards. The pellet struck him in his bicep and almost went through his muscle. There was a bump on his arm where the pellet was. The doctor only had to cut down about 1/4 inch to extract the pellet. The bad part was that he had to swab the wound canal.
That's all very cute, but pellet guns aren't the nearly-harmless, near-toys that they used to be.
Link Removed that spits out .177 pellets at 1200 fps. From 30 to 40 yards, a shot from that rifle would've required a bit more first aid for your son than having the wound channel "swabbed."
Still, if you have seen the picture of the rifle, it was indistinguishable from a real AK 47 variant. It likely is nowhere near as powerful a firing mechanism as my Gamo Whisper is, but the point is not how powerful a pellet gun it is - the point is were the cops reasonable in thinking that it was a
real rifle? Looking at the picture, I believe they were. Have you seen the picture of which I speak? Here it is in case anyone in this thread hasn't seen it:
As much (and as often as I've said it on this site) as I distrust cops these days, I do not expect them to allow someone holding what they reasonably believe to be a real center-fire rifle to turn towards them before stopping the movement. I believe that is an unreasonable demand to put on
anyone, whether LEO or not.
The original post misstated the facts: a pellet gun is NOT a toy.
Actually, most of the early reporting got it wrong, so depending on where the OP got his/her info from, s/he may well have relayed exactly what s/he read. I probably made the mistake of assuming that most people would try to track down fresh info and would have seen the picture by now, and maybe found out that the early reports of it being a "toy" were erroneous. Even if it
was a toy though, do you see any blaze orange caps or markings anywhere on that "toy?" There is none to see, so the "toy" or "replica" (which it was also referred to as in the media) or the pellet gun or a real AK variant would be completely indistinguishable from each other.
The fact still remains that 7 shots in the back seems to be overkill.
Like I said, there are links in the other thread, and I have yet to see reports that say that the victim was shot in the back.
Here's the link from the OP in the other thread. Nothing there about it.
Link Removed linked in that thread - nothing about back-shooting.
Here's another media report (local to the incident BTW) that I found on my own and posted in the other thread. The only mention of the kid's back is here:
After the deputies spotted the boy Tuesday, they called for backup and repeatedly ordered him to drop the gun, sheriff's Lt.
Dennis O'Leary said in a news release.
His back was turned toward the deputies, and they did not realize at the time that he was a boy.
According to the Santa Rosa police, the boy was about 20 to 30 feet from them
when he turned toward the deputies with the gun and they opened fire.
Still nowhere does it say he was shot in the back.
Link Removed published on the same day this thread was opened that says the following:
A preliminary autopsy report released Thursday said Andy Lopez was shot seven times, and the two fatal wounds were in his right hip and the right side of his chest.
This is consistent with the cops' stories; they said the boy had his back to them when they first "repeatedly" ordered him to drop the "weapon" and that they opened fire when he started turning towards them.
Sorry to be repetitive, but....
The fact still remains that 7 shots in the back seems to be overkill.
Knowing what little we actually
know now, would only one shot and a dead kid make any difference? Two shots? Three? What's the magic number between just plain kill and overkill? And while I sincerely hope and pray that you never have to shoot anyone for any reason, if you choose to answer that question, make sure it's a high enough number to cover any reaction you may have to facing what you reasonably believe is a real rifle, but far enough below the number 7 to make your "overkill" evaluation not be completely ridiculous.
Surely there was a better way of handling the situation.
In this specific instance, using only hindsight from a distance, you are predictably 100% correct, but that's
only because we now know that it wasn't a real rifle they were facing.
If that teacher in Sparks, NV, the retired combat-veteran-Marine, had been allowed to be armed and dumped seven rounds into the 12 year old who was carrying a real rifle and killing people, nobody would have called that overkill. Sparks probably would've put on a parade for the guy, which is not to say that he wouldn't have deserved it, just to say that seven rounds is relevant to your evaluation
only because you know
after the fact that the rifle was some degree less than "real." The cops did not have the benefit of that knowledge, and it could have just as easily been a deadly mistake (to them) to wait long enough to get it.
I find the accusation of "overkill" to be patently unfair with so little real knowledge of what actually happened.
Thanks for the clarification.
I just relayed what I read, some of which I had to search for myself. It's always weird to me how a story can foment so much anger and emotion, and yet so few will actually try to find as much as they can of the real story on their own. As of the time that I started this post, it was #15 in this thread, and contains the first link(s) to anything concerning the story. But I'm interested in it anyway, so it's not like I went and found the links just so I could reply to your rather sarcastic reply. No thanks necessary. I linked to stuff I would have looked for anyway.
Blues
