This is topic Another Situation For You Guys: TeenBoy Shot by Police in forum Member forum at The New Huntmastersbbs!.
To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://www.huntmastersbbs.com/cgi-bin/cgi-ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=002345
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 07, 2010, 03:34 AM:
I got this off another forum, sorry there was no link:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hudspeth County(TX) sheriff's deputies and state game wardens shot and killed a 14-year-boy after he ran away from home, stopped at a ranch and then allegedly fired at officers who wanted to take him home.
Hudspeth County Sheriff Arvin West said the deadly confrontation started as a simple search for a runaway. The boy had left his family's ranch in Hudspeth County on Saturday and was reported missing by his parents Sunday.
West said authorities had problems with the boy at school in the past in the desolate county east of El Paso County. The boy's name had not been released.
A Texas Department of Public Safety news release stated an initial investigation by the Texas Rangers found the teen had broken into a deer camp at Gunsight Ranch, about 20 miles north of Sierra Blanca.
West said one of his deputies and a Texas Parks and Wildlife game warden found the boy at a hunters' camp at Gunsight Ranch.
"They told him (the boy) they were looking for him," West said. "He said 'That's me.' They said, 'Your parents are concerned about you. You need to come with us.' The boy then drew a weapon."
The boy had a rifle and a handgun and refused to go. The teen then allegedly fired shots as the officers retreated.
According to the Texas DPS account, the boy fired several shots and fled to another camp. Officers followed him to the second camp, urging him to put down the weapons but the boy continued firing. He ran to a third spot, where he climbed to the top of a barn and shot at officers.
Dozens of shots were fired in an area spanning a mile and a half, West said. At one point, deputies brought the boy's mother to the scene to try to get her son to surrender, but the teen took a shot at her, West said.
"The officers backed off, backed off and backed off. He finally got them where they couldn't back off anymore," West said.
The end came while the boy was atop the roof of the barn and took aim at a game warden.
"He had a clear shot at a game warden," West said. Fearing for the game warden's life, law enforcement officers fired and shot the boy, who died at the scene. The officers were not hurt.
Five law enforcement officers -- two deputies and three game wardens -- were involved in the confrontation, West said.
The names of the deputies were not immediately released. One of the deputies involved in the shooting has been with the Hudspeth County Sheriff's Office for five or six years. The other deputy has been with the agency for about a year.
The shooting is under investigation by the Texas Rangers, the Texas Department of Public Safety and the El Paso District Attorney's Office. The El Paso district attorney investigates all officer-involved shootings and has jurisdiction on felonies in El Paso, Hudspeth and Culberson counties in far West Texas.
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 07, 2010, 03:35 AM:
Another Article:
Teen shot by deputies was gun expert
By Maggie Ybarra \ El Paso Times
Posted: 04/07/2010 12:00:00 AM MDT
The 14-year-old boy killed in a shootout Sunday was an experienced hunter with dreams of becoming a West Texas rancher, his mother said.
Anthony Lucas was raised to respect guns and hunting laws, Kay Lucas said Tuesday.
Lucas said her son had a strong moral compass that he used when he hunted. He shot only bucks and learned everything he could about hunting from magazines.
"He wasn't a reader," she said. "He hated school, but he would get those little hunting magazines and he'd read everything on those."
Anthony learned to use guns at a young age, Kay Lucas said.
"He got his first BB gun when he was 7 years old, and then we moved him up to a .22 (pistol)," she said. "We have a gun safe and an adult was with him the majority of the time."
Anthony had three stolen handguns with him the day he was shot by sheriff's de puties and state game wardens at Gunsight Ranch in Hudspeth County, Kay Lucas said.
But he was only using those guns to keep the officers at bay, she said.
"If he had wanted to shoot those officers and hit them, he would have," she said. "He knew he was a good shot, and a majority of those officers knew him and knew he was."
Hudspeth County Sheriff Arvin West said Tuesday that Anthony had been shooting at the officers from the roof of a barn, and that officers fired back in self-defense.
Anthony had been reported missing by his parents earlier that day.
Reports varied on the types of guns the teen used during the shootout. West said Monday that Anthony had a handgun and a rifle. On Tuesday, West said Anthony had "several guns." Kay Lucas said her son had two .22-caliber pistols and a .25-caliber handgun.
Kay Lucas said that no other people were endangered during the shootout and that if the officers had left Anthony alone, he would have eventually become hungry, tired or taken his pills.
Before the shooting, Anthony had broken into two homes at the Gunsight Ranch, Kay Lucas said.
"He broke a window and he went into Kevin Jessup's house, took a shower and ate a peanut butter and jelly sandwich, and tried to watch a Western movie but couldn't get the VCR to work," she said.
Anthony took the guns during the break-ins, she said.
When law enforcement officers found her son, he pointed one of the guns at them and told them to get away. He shot at them to scare them off, Kay Lucas said.
West said the officers backed away from Anthony and returned to their patrol cars, and that's when Anthony started shooting at them.
The decision to kill Anthony was made only after he endangered an officer's life, West said.
Anthony was standing on a barn roof and the officers were on the ground near a horse trailer about 30 yards from the barn when he was killed, West said.
"They decided they had to stop him before he shot that officer," he said.
West said his officers were devastated by the shooting death.
"They're not OK," he said. "That's not something any officer wants to do -- take the life of a child."
Before the shooting, officers had taken Kay Lucas out to the site in an attempt to calm Anthony.
Anthony's mother pleaded with him over a PA system, but he eventually fired a shot at her, too, West said.
Kay Lucas said her son's hearing impairment might have hindered his ability to understand what the police wanted from him.
He had tubes put in his ears twice and sometimes had to focus on lip movements to get the gist of what someone was saying. He also had bad vision and took medicine for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, Kay Lucas said.
She said he was not taking his medicine before the shooting.
Perhaps if Anthony had been on his medicine, the situation would have ended differently, said Joseph Elder, a local store owner.
Elder, 33, said Anthony was a "wild little country boy" who liked to hunt rabbits and live on the land.
But without his medicine, he was unpredictable, Elder said.
"In a way, he was like a little coyote," he said. "He knew how to take care of himself ... but he got off his medication, and he had been off his medication going on two days, and that's too long."
Elder said the circumstances surrounding the shooting death of Anthony were tragic.
"He was scared to death," he said, "and the officers were probably scared to death, too."
Posted by Andy L (Member # 642) on April 07, 2010, 05:21 AM:
I dont see the problem. They gave the boy every chance. He shot at his mom for god sakes. Whether he meant to hit them or not. Good call by the cops. What the hell were they supposed to do?
I know with my mom it would have been different. If I shot at her, she would have yelled you little bastard, your gonna get it now, and marched into that barn and put a ass whuppin on me. Thats the difference between a midwestern mom and a western mom.
49, how many websites do you cruise? You and TA17 run the same circuit?
Posted by Possumal (Member # 823) on April 07, 2010, 06:18 AM:
I agree with Andy on this one. What other choice did the officers have, with bullets whizzing by them? A tragedy no doubt, but unavoidable.
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 07, 2010, 06:22 AM:
Andy this was from Glocktalk:
http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1206137
I reposted the articles here because I was wondering what you guys thought of the incident, and the way it was handled.
I only frequent here, GT, PM, and occasionally NPHA. I have a login at Cabelas talkforums but I only have a few posts there.
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 07, 2010, 06:25 AM:
I agree the officers didn't have much of a choice. I think they used great restraint actuslly, and they gave the kid enough chances to surrender.
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 07, 2010, 08:16 AM:
It was obviously unjustified; white hooded officers shooting a poor black kid just trying to defend himself. They should have tried that trick I've seen in the movies, and shoot the gun out of his hand.
Seriously, sometimes a company of Rangers on bullhorns can masturbate the situation unnecessarily .
That's it! Dart him with tranks! Why do I have to do all the thinking for this group?
Good hunting. LB
Posted by Dan Carey (Member # 987) on April 07, 2010, 10:21 AM:
To hell with it, it's too big a problem for pea brains, just kill him.
Posted by Az-Hunter (Member # 17) on April 07, 2010, 01:11 PM:
Sounds like the only danger the kid posed, was to the fridge at the place he broke into?
They are miles from nowhere, so he poses no threat to a local population, not like he can climb the tower and start shootin' people. The officers could have just backed out of there, they forced the situation, christ all mighty, it was a 14 year old kid?
Leonards not to far off the mark really, they could have left a tranqed PBJ sandwhich at the door with some spiked milk if they wanted to...stupid fucking decision by the officers in my opinion.
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 07, 2010, 02:37 PM:
Well Yeah. I'm being asinine, but I am of the opinion that those cops faced with a friggin' kid on the roof, COULD HAVE BACKED OFF, HID BEHIND A TREE, OR SOMETHING? WHY IN THE HELL WAS ONE OF THEM OUT THERE EXPOSED TO THE POINT WHERE ANOTHER DUMB SHIT FELT THE NEED TO SHOOT IN SELF DEFENSE?
Rather than some comments we see posted above; I do NOT think the police handled this thing very well, at all. Of all the possible outcomes, shooting the kid is the goddamned dummest thing that an entire gang of "trained professional" officers could have come up with!
They should all be fired and none of this suspended with pay, pending outcome of investigation. I don't care if he broke into a cabin and that he had a gun. That right there has all the elements for a justifiable shooting, for some trigger happy policemen. Sorry, I can't see that I agree with what they did. At all.
Good hunting. LB
Posted by CrossJ (Member # 884) on April 07, 2010, 03:32 PM:
,".... but he would get those little hunting magazines and he'd read everything on those."
Excuse me, but its obvious that some of these magazine writers own some of the responsibility here.(just kidding Lance)
Whats the deal 49? Do you believe you are going to change everyones opinion?
Maintain
Posted by tlbradford (Member # 1232) on April 07, 2010, 03:57 PM:
I'm with Az-hunter on this one. Kind of reminds me of the FBI stand-off at Ruby Ridge, Idaho where law enforcement forced the issue and it escalated to deaths.
Posted by Paul Melching (Member # 885) on April 07, 2010, 04:06 PM:
Was Janet Reno in the area ? I hear shes got a lot of experiece with them Texans!
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 07, 2010, 07:28 PM:
quote:
Whats the deal 49? Do you believe you are going to change everyones opinion?
No deal Crossj. I was just looking for opinions from some independent thinking men. You guys have your opinions and be it far from me to try and change them.
I do think the police used restraint however. They waited a long time before they fired back on the kid. As Rich pointed out in my other thread, it can be hard to judge what you would do from the safety of the internet.
But let me pose a question here....what do you think would have happened if the rangers did back off, and the kid got away with a rifle and in an unstable state without taking his medication? How do you think those rangers would have felt if he shot some innocent person on his unmedicated rampage?
Sometimes decisions have to be made at the moment without the benefit of hindsight.
Just some food for thought.
That having been said,prayers sent on behalf of the kid's family and the officers who were faced with a most difficult decision.
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 07, 2010, 07:32 PM:
quote:
I'm with Az-hunter on this one. Kind of reminds me of the FBI stand-off at Ruby Ridge, Idaho where law enforcement forced the issue and it escalated to deaths.
There was some poor leadership at Ruby Ridge. The rules of engagement were changed by those in charge. I won't name agencies but all you have to do is an internet check.
Unfortunately mistakes were made that caused the death of innocents as well as a sheriff;s office SWAT team member.
Posted by Briguy (Member # 3471) on April 07, 2010, 11:09 PM:
Are you freakin kidding me??? They should have backed off and feed him a tranqualized PB&J??? That's crazy talk there. And his momma saying he's a good shot and wasn't trying to hit them...what else do you expect his mother to say?
Sorry, I'm not a LEO, never have been, and never will be, but I'm smart enough to know that if some kid -- who's hardly a kid at 14 in this day and age -- has such little respect for the law; not to mention his own mother, then it's only going to end one of a couple ways for him. Lethal injection after he kills some other people, or with a bullet.
Let's turn this around a bit. You got a couple kids on your block about the same age and you walk in on one of them robbing your house. The kid has a gun, and so do you. He starts shooting at you. (Fortunately, he's a really good shot and wasn't trying to actually shoot you). Now, you also let him know that if he throws his down he can just go to jail for a bit. Well, he decides to shoot at you some more...
Okay, big question...armed robbery at your house, who's making the peanut butter and jelly sandwiches???
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 07, 2010, 11:27 PM:
Oversimplification. Not only that, guess who gets to tell the official account of what happened?
Good hunting. LB
Posted by Briguy (Member # 3471) on April 08, 2010, 12:22 AM:
Not buying that...there comes a point where a decision has to be made. If you're lucky, you can manipulate the situation into a circumstance where that decision and action is well thought out and planned. If things don't go as planned, you have to make the next decision or action, and sometimes that's the gamebreaker.
There is no indication of how long this whole engagement lasted, but I would have to guess it lasted a bit with them bringing his mother in and all that. It appears to me they did try to reason and bring it to a peaceful end. Somewhere in there, a couple decisions were made by both parties that prevented that.
Oversimplified? Maybe. But to just say they should have done this, or they should have done that is myopic. We don't know what decisions were made that lead to what actions. I stand by my initial assessment; they did what they felt like they had to do at the time, and I couldn't blame 'em for that...at least not based on the information provided.
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 08, 2010, 03:43 AM:
I discussed this with a good friend of mine at work yesterday. This friend works on a counter terrorism unit and has 23 years on the job. He also is in the military and has done some time in Guantanamo Bay and Iraq, and will be headed to Afganistan in two years. He has three boys, two of which have graduated high school and one who is still a sophomore.
His response was very similar to Briguy's...the kid made a decision that cost him, and the police made a decision based upon his actions.
But my next question for you guys is this: Being that the kid took a bead on a police officer, how long were those police/rangers supposed to wait for this to happen? Can anyone predict when this will occur? Just like we can never really predict what a coyote will do when coming to a call, we can't predict the actions of a deranged individual with a rifle. All we know is that he is firing a rifle, and at an time could take one of us out.
A 14 year old with a rifle is just as dangerous as a 34 year old with a rifle.
Crossj, let me again interject that I am not trying to change your opinions. I just would like to offer different viewpoint from the "other side."
Posted by CrossJ (Member # 884) on April 08, 2010, 05:45 AM:
OK, so you're the devils advocate. Great. It is fairly apparent which side of the fence you fall on based on your LE vocation. Fair enough I guess.
The thing is, all these scenerios(the 3 you have posted) have all used the words "IF" and "BUT"; atleast when used to describe or defend possible LE reaction. Hell, theoretically, pigs can fly when explained with enough 'ifs' and 'buts'.
My whole point is that LE et al has an image problem. I think most everyone on here who has responded to the last few threads had a 'johnny law' horror story....and thats the ones who responded. Phrases like 'eat pavement' and 'proned out' continue to fuel the problem.
That said, as far as the 14 year old, I have always been of the opinion that when you shoot at someone who is armed.....expect them to shoot back. Now, the two 'Barney's' in NM, well, everything that needed saying has basically been said. But,heres my two cents. We saw two LAW enforcement officers who don't know the LAW, but would rather lie about and or make up the LAW.....well you get my point.
Maintain
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 08, 2010, 06:31 AM:
No problem CrossJ. My loyalties lie with my LE counterparts. I don't think I have been trying to hide that fact at all. But if they are 100%wrong I will say so, like in the changing of the rules of engagement at Ruby Ridge.
And if you recall, I never defended the actions of the two New Mexico officers. In fact I stated I would have counseled them.
Having heard the opinions of some of the membership here, I feel I can offer a different perspective. Sort of broadening the horizons of the members, like you guys have been saying you are trying to do with me (hence my title).
Posted by Cdog911 (Member # 7) on April 08, 2010, 07:14 AM:
This one is a tough call for me. In '07, my then 17 year old son sustained a traumatic brain injury playing football which has, since then, literally redefined nearly every aspect of my family's life. Most of you know that I've been dealing with this since back then, and continue to deal with the issues today, except to a much lesser extent (he's improving). My own birth family and many of our friends look at how we handle our son as being incorrect when they don't know what we've dealt with with him. We don't share the stuff we don't want people knowing. Several lessons have been put to my wife and I, about our son, about head injuries, and about raising teenagers. The most relevant here is that teenagers have little to no comprehension of consequences. They don't think ahead to what will be the result of their actions. They are purely narcissistic, and in my son's case, just as with this young man, it's to the "nth" degree.
Chances are that this young man simply wanted to be left alone to deal with what was, to him, a major life problem. In time, I can almost guarantee you that he would have come wandering home on his own, having lost interest in the drama d'jour. Law enforcement felt compelled to do what they did because it is their job. Their interests were more in efficiency and expediency in dolling out justice rather than stepping back and engaging a little empathy for the subject they were pursuing. I don't recall any remarks about the young man posing a threat to himself or anyone else except for the officers, and only after they put pressure on him. Maybe I missed that in the first and only reading.
I have learned, in my son's case, that when dealing with someone who is moderately to severely ADD, the turtle always wins the race. You cannot push a person like this. You have to take slow measured steps and bring them around quietly and calmly. If emotion becomes a part of the dynamic, you need to stand down and back off. These LEO's violated that very simple rule. They maybe should have taken a defensive posture at a distance and simply monitored the young man until his mood changed, and I can all but guarantee you that it would have in time. My son has done things that have taken me to an emotional place where I could fully understand how people can become so violent as to hurt and even kill one another. I am not proud to admit that, but the admission is necessary to be able to fully understand what I mean when I say that today, when I even begin to see things going that way, I step back, go find something else to do, and give him a chance to settle down, too. An hour, or even minutes later, he can be dealt with without the emotion and the rhetoric.
This is also a close issue for me because some of the run ins my son has had with the law have been because his thinking was skewed by his way of thinking since the head injury. Same situation with this young man. And, like is the case with this youngster, LEO's have chosen to look at my son through myopic glasses and viewed him through the one singular perspective they hold in that all people fit one mold and they only know how to deal with people who fit that one mold and can't adjust or modify their approach to anything else. Justice is not served when it fails to take into consideration the causal factors leading to an individual's behavior. When someone acts a certain way because of a medical condition, it would be ideal to include helping them to deal with solutions to the problem to avoid recurrences of the misbehavior, but many judges and prosecutors choose to simply punish them for things over which they have no control. In this incident, the officers on the scene - even though fully aware of the child's medical problems - chose to scrunch him into their predefined "normal" box, and to deal with him in that context. Anyone who has worked with people like this will tell you that this strategy will not end well, and in this case, it didn't. BTW, I was at first concerned about the relevancy of the mother's remarks that he'd been off his meds for two days and was trying to blame his behavior on that. Like many, I didn't buy it, but having thought about it now, it isn't unusual for you to see an exacerbation in maladaptive behavioral traits when medications are abruptly discontinued. In other words, the problems the meds treat grow far worse before leveling out. It's a backlash effect.
Those officers should have stood back and not cornered him. In his mind, he was right in doing what he was doing, he simply wanted to be left alone to try and sort out what his brain was telling him, and their continued pressure just made him feel cornered. He was only trying to do what his instincts told him to do - defend himself. His mother tried to explain and they chose not to listen. I'm sure they feel badly for what happened here, and in my opinion, a civil court should settle this matter.
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 08, 2010, 07:46 AM:
Cdog, let me start out by saying I am sorry for the problems with your son. As a parent, I can't begin to imagine what you must be dealing with. My prayer list grows longer every day but I will add your son to it just the same.
I agree with your post in many respects. I don't agree completely, because we don't know how much those law enforcement officers went through in trying to exercise restraint and give the boy a chance. It sounds like they made quite an effort, in my humble opinion.
That having been said, had I been the supervisor on that scene, I don't think I could walk away from the incident completely in the hopes the boy would just become tired and return home on his own. There is a concern for innocent citizens present. To just leave and let the boy sort it out on his own might also give him the opportunity to take an innocent life, and I don't think as a law enforcement officer I would be able to allow the possibility for that to happen.
Perhaps the officers could have secured the area, called in a negotiator, and waited the kid out. Though by bringing the mother in I do believe that is what they tried to do. I agree this is a tough one especially after having read your post.
On the other hand, as a supervisor I would also have to look out for the welfare of my men. I never wanted any of my guys to be hurt, and I never wanted to have to tell their wives or parents that their husband/son is dead because of my actions or inactions as a supervisor.
Your post is indicative of the fact (at least to me) that this incident is a tough one to MMQB from afar, withoout having been present. I have a 14 year old son myself, and I know I would want the responding police to give him a chance had it been him involved.
Edit for clarification.
[ April 08, 2010, 07:48 AM: Message edited by: 4949shooter ]
Posted by Cdog911 (Member # 7) on April 08, 2010, 10:09 AM:
Thanks, 4949,
My sister is one of the people who think we should handle our son with a firmer iron fist, if you will. When she offered that bit of advice in as nice a way as she could, prefacing her remarks by saying that she didn't want to make me mad, I told her of a lesson I've learned in life and relearned a number of times: When you look upon a situation that you think could be handled better because the way it is being handled is, in your opinion, illogical, it's likely that the reason it appears to be illogical is because you are not privvy to critical bits of information.
The same goes here. There are things none of this know and all of us can Monday morning quarterback as much as we want but no one here was there, thus no one here's opinion is any more valid than anyone else's. I agree that they seemed to be very patient and that they certainly appeared to give him every opportunity to concede, but I never said to just leave and let him have his way. I suggested that they stand back, monitor defensively rather than offensively intruding, and give the boy the perception that he wasn't being pushed unnecessarily. Ultimately, the boy needed to be taken into custody and gotten the help he needed. He wasn't going to walk away unrestrained from there by any means. Yeah, it may have taken a day or more to get to that point, but I think they might have considered trading a day of effort in exchange for the rest of that boy's life. As far as the safety of the supervisor's men, I can see your point there, too. As a Fire Captain, I sent men and women into burning houses on a number of occasions in my life, and knew that their welfare rested solely on my judgment and experience that had determined that they needed to go inside rather than fighting the situation from outside. It's a huge responsibility that I understand clearly. But, those men, again, could have pulled back a bit and not maintained the circumnstance that ultimately led to the final outcome. They were where they were because of tactical decisions to do so. I wasn't there, again, and don't know what all factors were considered in making those decisions, but I think that bad decisions were made, nonetheless. Also, there's a possibility that his mother was a contributing factor to his disappearance to begin with. IMO, and again, this is not my field of experience, they maybe should have considered the negotiator before bringing in the mother to make sure her presence would be a positive rather than exacerbating things and making them worse. Even here in nowhere Kansas we have trained negotiators within an hours drive of just about anywhere. Just my .02.
Posted by tlbradford (Member # 1232) on April 08, 2010, 10:11 AM:
I don't disagree with the decision to kill the boy when he had a direct shot at a game official. I do agree that they tried a lot of things to contain the situation and resolve it peacefully. Where I have a problem is that they made a mistake in their strategy when that gamey put himself in harms way. What was he doing in that situation? I haven't heard.
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 08, 2010, 11:46 AM:
Cdog and tlb....fair enough, I am sure there are things they could have done better. I have never seen any of these things run perfectly. I would like to think the officers did everything they could to bring the boy in peacefully. CDog brings up an excellent point, in that perhaps the mother was the crux of the problem for this boy. As was ststed, we don't know because we weren't there.
tlb, I am wondering if the ranger exposed himself from cover in order to try and talk the boy in. If so, this was a brave but tactically unsound thing to do.
Maybe more will come out over time.
Posted by Ridge Runner (Member # 3477) on April 08, 2010, 02:34 PM:
I feel the officers acted appropriately, how many chances should he get, he had commited felonious acts, he was 14 and a runaway, what else should they do, let him run out of bullets? ask any na'am vet if a 14 yo can kill you?
should there be a precedent set that allows say 18 shots fired before the cops can react to the situation? what if the homeowner would have came in while he was there? what if it would have been anyone besides the police? To much liability there for the cops to walk off.
another thing where did this ADHD come from, never heard of it when I was a kid, ya acted up ya got your ass beat and learned respect. there is no respect unless there is first fear of consequences.
I've watched kids grow up being diagnosed as ADHD, mostly its caused by parents who are too busy or too lazy to raise kids up to be held accountable, so the schools or other "authourities" reccomend a visit to the dr, the kids are allowed to be unruly to a point, once they cross the line they're put on ritalin or something simular and spend they're adolescent life in a drug induced state. its rediculous!
RR
[ April 08, 2010, 02:36 PM: Message edited by: Ridge Runner ]
Posted by Cdog911 (Member # 7) on April 08, 2010, 04:19 PM:
Ridge Runner,
In the case of my boy, it was caused by a bleed in the frontal lobe of his brain resulting from a late hit in a football game, not unlike that Tebo (sp?) kid took playing for Florida earlier this season. That part of the brain is where your personaility, your executive thought processes, your mood, and your ability to stay on task are controlled. Maybe all these retired pro football players and Mohammad Ali are just faking it and all they need to do to get their heads straight is have their asses kicked. Kicking his ass wouldn't really accomplish much for him, and the young man in question in this incident may very well have had a similar history.
Newflash: The boy wasn't in the 'Nam. The officers did not have a concern for being shot by other armed individuals. All of their attention was on one 14 y/o male. As much as I respect our Vietnam veterans, this is no where near the same and it's ludicrous that you would make the comparison. Maybe we should take your remark to heart and start gunning down people assembling in the street like in the earlier debate. Ludicrous, but a closer comparison than what you brought to the table.
BTW, there are a litany of other medical conditions that we hadn't discovered yet in the late '60's and early '70's. Hell, most of what we now know is cancer used to be written off as people just dying of being old. Do we just abandon treating these conditions because Ridge Runner doesn't understand the cause and effects of the conditions? Might be a good way to invoke those death panels we keep hearing about. They'll just appoint people like you that think mental illness is a cry for attention and the result of poor parenting and you can stamp "REJECTED" across every app that crosses the table.
[ April 08, 2010, 04:21 PM: Message edited by: Cdog911 ]
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 08, 2010, 04:34 PM:
I'm normally a hard ass, except when police brutality, or overzealous use of force is suspected. Did Rodney King deserve to get his ass kicked. Yes, but he survived. In this case, the plan got way out of hand, and as I said in my first comments, what the hell was that game warden doing, exposing himself to a whacked out kid with a gun? Necessitating offing him in self defense.
Good hunting. LB
Posted by Ridge Runner (Member # 3477) on April 08, 2010, 05:03 PM:
quote:
Ridge Runner,
In the case of my boy, it was caused by a bleed in the frontal lobe of his brain resulting from a late hit in a football game, not unlike that Tebo (sp?) kid took playing for Florida earlier this season. That part of the brain is where your personaility, your executive thought processes, your mood, and your ability to stay on task are controlled. Maybe all these retired pro football players and Mohammad Ali are just faking it and all they need to do to get their heads straight is have their asses kicked. Kicking his ass wouldn't really accomplish much for him, and the young man in question in this incident may very well have had a similar history.
First, I don't know you or your son, so no comment was made that direction, I've read alot of your posts, enough to know your pretty straight up and I believe what you say, don't always agree with it but I believe it.
Now from my experiences, I can say that I stick to my previous statement. I've saw it when I knew the kids and the parents, watched them let the kids trash someones house and not even raise an eyebrow, but if they annoyed the parents they got the hell beat outta them. I've not saw it once but dozens of times. I believe what I believe because of what I've saw, why else do the same parents have 2-3 kids and each and every one is ADHD?
quote:
Newflash: The boy wasn't in the 'Nam. The officers did not have a concern for being shot by other armed individuals. All of their attention was on one 14 y/o male. As much as I respect our Vietnam veterans, this is no where near the same and it's ludicrous that you would make the comparison. Maybe we should take your remark to heart and start gunning down people assembling in the street like in the earlier debate. Ludicrous, but a closer comparison than what you brought to the table.
The kid had 3 pistols according to one report, a pistol and a rifle according to the other. he was a danger to the officers, he threatened them by firing, this also would be enough evidence to consider him a threat to innocent people in the area, he fell well within the required parameters for the use of deadly force.
I understand your point of view, but did the cops spend enough time around the boy to know his personality? what he would do in a given situation? If you walked in your house and the kid was in there and started shooting, how many shots would you give him?
quote:
BTW, there are a litany of other medical conditions that we hadn't discovered yet in the late '60's and early '70's. Hell, most of what we now know is cancer used to be written off as people just dying of being old. Do we just abandon treating these conditions because Ridge Runner doesn't understand the cause and effects of the conditions? Might be a good way to invoke those death panels we keep hearing about. They'll just appoint people like you that think mental illness is a cry for attention and the result of poor parenting and you can stamp "REJECTED" across every app that crosses the table.
they knew about cancer in the 20's, they knew about mental illness in the 30's, but this ADHD just popped up with the baby boomers grandkids, I'm not talking about people who have had brain trauma, I'm talking about the kids who weren't shown any behavioral boundries, I see it every day, I live around it. I've saw the change dicapline can make in ADHD kids.
RR
[ April 08, 2010, 05:04 PM: Message edited by: Ridge Runner ]
Posted by TOM64 (Member # 561) on April 08, 2010, 06:46 PM:
Break into my house and steal my guns and see if you get talked to or killed.
I have no idea what's going on in anyone else's mind but when they make a decision like this kid did, he paid the price. The cops gave him every oppurtunity, even his mom tried. If he's gonna shoot at mom, he's gonna shoot someone, it's a matter of time.
Call it suicide by cop or whatever but I say they did all they could.
[ April 08, 2010, 07:19 PM: Message edited by: TOM64 ]
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 08, 2010, 07:12 PM:
Okay, case closed.
But, as it always does, there will be leaks and details not included in the newspaper report. And, there could be stuff they did report that may not have happened?
Yeah, he had it coming. That conclusion protects a lot of reputations, individuals and agencies alike.
Good hunting. LB
Posted by TOM64 (Member # 561) on April 08, 2010, 07:33 PM:
Running with the info given, the cops had a duty to find the runaway and appease his mom. They had a duty to check into the breakins/tresspassing whatever. They had a minor who had stolen guns. They had a minor who not only pulled a gun on them, he shot at them.
Given Barney's "eat pavement" attitude on the last legal carry guy and everyones general concensus that he was pushing his luck, how can anyone not see self defense if someone is actually shooting at you? Would it be different if he was a mixed up 18 YO?
Personaly I don't care what the medical conditions or situations are, I took my lessons from the Highlander, "there can be only one" and I'm gonna make every effort to make sure that one, is me.
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 08, 2010, 07:37 PM:
Thank you Tom. Coming from you and Andy that means a lot. 'Nuff said. By the way, my buddy in the counter terrorism unit is also Tom. Edit: This Barney is gonna continue to make belligerents eat pavement as necessary for safety purposes. That's not a popular attitude here but too bad I say.
Cdog my 12 year old son took a nasty illegal hit to the head in a lacrosse game tonight. He was down for the better part of a minute. Of course I was yelling at him to get up. He came out of the game for a bit and then went back in.
It wasn't my intention to cause an argument here between any parties. I was merely getting some opinions and shedding some insight as to how and why police officers react to certain situations. Regardless of the course of events that took place concerning this shooting, it is my belief that when the Texas Rangers complete their investigation this shooting will be ruled legally justifiable. Throwing rounds in the direction of, and aiming at police officers (or anyone else for that matter) does not come without a consequence. The law does not give consideration to alcohol use, drug use, mental state, or mental state combined with lack of medication. Firing on a fellow human being will cause you to end up in jail, or in a cemetary.
I feel sorrow for the boy and his family. Perhaps the police could have done a better job, or maybe they did the best they could under the cirumstances. Hindsight is always 20/20.
Edit typo.
[ April 08, 2010, 07:50 PM: Message edited by: 4949shooter ]
Posted by TOM64 (Member # 561) on April 08, 2010, 08:00 PM:
Thinking about this and it brought up another story.
I was 15 and a 14 YO "tuff guy" who was known to have issues, decided to try and whoop me one night. I abliged the oppurtunity and he became aware that I was not who he was after (his GF's ex).
The next day he was skateboarding in front of his uncles house, who's wife was pregnant. His uncle told him to go home, he was making too much noise. He did and came back with a shotgun, shot his uncle dead on the front porch.
But since he was a minor with "issues" he was released on his 18'th BD. He actualy wound up in the town I live in now when he was released and killed a couple by stabbing them.
Age is no reason to dismiss a threat, no matter how mixed up someone is.
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 08, 2010, 08:08 PM:
Officer Tom told me he faced 14 year olds with AK's when he was in Iraq. An AK is still deadly in the hands of a 14 year old.
Thekid kills his uncle with a shotgun, and they let him out of jail, or juvenile detention, only to kill again? Amazing. Simply amazing.
Posted by TOM64 (Member # 561) on April 08, 2010, 08:35 PM:
Dang cops!
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 08, 2010, 09:34 PM:
Warms the cockles of my heart to see that 49er and Tom64 have bonded. <sigh>
Some good has come out of this thread after all!
Posted by Nikonut (Member # 188) on April 08, 2010, 11:09 PM:
quote:
I feel sorrow for the boy and his family. Perhaps the police could have done a better job, or maybe they did the best they could under the circumstances. Hindsight is always 20/20.
None of us were there... how will we ever know. Simple. WE won't.
I do wonder why they couldn't have shot him with a shotgun? I think someone made a mistake... plain and simple. The kid was definitely in the wrong and as sad as it seems his death is justifiable in this situation.
Nikonut
Posted by Locohead (Member # 15) on April 09, 2010, 03:26 AM:
Silly as it may sound, I'm still wondering why tranquilizers aren't used? Never would of thought about it on my own, but it seems like a dang good idea to me. I knew a guy that was running from police and got shot by rubber bullets to make him stop, why not tranqs. for an armed fellow? LOL Makes me laugh a little thinking about it, but seriously, there's got to be a reason, why not?
Posted by Nikonut (Member # 188) on April 09, 2010, 04:28 AM:
I think I can answer that one...
Tranq guns are basically like shooting a dart from a paintball gun. They aren't really accurate or long range delivery systems.
A load of bird shot would have brought him down from that barn roof pretty quick and so would rubber bullets. Maybe they didn't have anything like that available. If the rifle guy was even a little proficient he could easily have taken a non-lethal shot. Problem would be if he sustained disabling injuries... the liability would bankrupt the local police department!
Bottom line is: The kid was in the wrong and it wasn't handled as well as it should have been.
The kid paid the ultimate price for his craziness and I'm reasonably sure the officer that shot him will have lasting remorse to deal with for the rest of his life. No one will ever know if this didn't save even more lives later on...
Nikonut
Posted by Andy L (Member # 642) on April 09, 2010, 05:06 AM:
Im not sure what to think of ADHD. My oldest was diagnosed with it when he was 7. He was out of control and no amount of spanking did any good. It threw gas on the fire. I let them put him on some meds. It did the trick, but I could not stand the catatonic like state that it put him in. He didnt want to eat. But the teachers liked it. It wasnt but a short while and I played doctor and pulled him off that shit. I would rather deal with it myself than to see that. I found some other meds that didnt do that. He couldnt even tell he was taking anything, and it helped him focus a little better. After a couple of years I took him off and he is fine. Im not sure I did the right or wrong thing. I did find one other remedy. Take the god damned liberal teachers out of the picture and teach him myself.
While on controversial disease, Bi Poloar is pretty wild. I think everyone is Bi Polar to a degree. Growing up, you were just fuckin nuts. Now your Bi Polar. You get Xannnax and a host of other dope to keep you smoothed out and a check from Uncle Tom, I mean Sam, if you play your cards right.
I still think the cops did the right thing. However, we dont know all the story. I still think if it had happened here, he might be alive. You think Im jokin, but my mom, or even my wife if it were one of our kids, would have had no problem marching into the barn, takin a shoe off and dealin out an ass whuppin.
Posted by CrossJ (Member # 884) on April 09, 2010, 06:29 AM:
quote:
.... would have had no problem marching into the barn, takin a shoe off and dealin out an ass whuppin.
LOL Andy! That was such a clear mental image it was scary. My moms prefered tool was a big wooden spoon or a wooden hair brush.
Posted by Andy L (Member # 642) on April 09, 2010, 07:14 AM:
LOL, one grandma used a wooden spoon and the other a hair brush.
Tell em Geordie, these women dont fuck around. Ass whuppins are severe!
Posted by Andy L (Member # 642) on April 09, 2010, 07:21 AM:
Just to add, my mon wasnt particular about tools. Its funny now, but she would get pissed and grab somethin and start beatin my ass and talk to me the whole time. And it didnt stop when she was done talkin about what I had just done. Hell no! While on a roll, I got my ass beat for several things that I had done that she either couldnt get to me at the time to whup my ass or hadnt heard about until recently.
Posted by Nikonut (Member # 188) on April 09, 2010, 07:30 AM:
My Mom would have just yelled at me by name(first name,middle name,and last name)and that would have been more than enough!
Then when Dad got home the belt would have come off and the whopp'n would have started!
Not enough of that goes on in this country anymore and that's a big part of the problems we face.
Posted by TOM64 (Member # 561) on April 09, 2010, 08:22 AM:
My Grandma raised 6 boys who all would just laugh at her "spankings" then one day she blew a gasket and commenced to spanking one of them with what she had in her hand. It was a giant butcher knife and from then on she took control of the rest of them.
Fortunately I was the first Grandson and never did no wrong... ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Posted by Andy L (Member # 642) on April 09, 2010, 09:22 AM:
Hell no it dont go on anymore, not near enuff. You can ask either of our boys, it does here. Either one of us will whup an ass in the drop of a hat. But dont have to much anymore. I think they sunk in. And they both look you in the eye when the shake hands and they both use no sir (or mam), yes sir, thank you and please more than most kids.
Most folks are afraid of the gawd damned laws that they will go to jail for whuppin a kids ass. Im lucky that the local cops here were raised the same way. When my oldest got old enuff to bull up to me and act like he wanted to fight, I asked the Sheriff one day what to do. I cant afford a felony, it would cost me my license. He said what would your daddy have done? He said to knock the little bastard into next week and he would take care of it. Save him from having to deal with him when he gets older.
We need our families to deal out the old time corpral punishment on kids. Thats exactly what is wrong with out society as a whole. They run roughshod.
Edit: Just so you know. I have neve punched a kid. The closest it came was one time we were in the driveway and getting ready to leave. He was mouthing and bullin up. Now, this boy is 6'3" and weighs about 165 lbs. And, he trains Brazillian Jiu Jitsu and MMA three nights a week, and is good at it. Anyway, he bulled up and pushed me. I saw the surprise in his eyes when I didnt budge an inch and pushed back, sending him about 5 feet slidin in the gravel. He had to go in and wrap his hands and elbows and change clothes. Had some road rash. But the bullin up stopped right there. (Im 6'3", 265 lbs and I train three nights a week with him. LOL)
[ April 09, 2010, 09:31 AM: Message edited by: Andy L ]
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 09, 2010, 09:48 AM:
My son's boys both have or had that ABC shit. I guess the schools advocate and send the kids down to a nurse to make sure they take their trank, on time?
But, this I think is funny as hell, and it developed strictly by accident. One day, my wife grabbed a flyswatter and whacked the oldest. (richly deserved, I might add, as she was not the physical type, at all) This resulted in a display of revulsion you might expect had she dumped a coffee can of human shit on his head.
Unbelieveable! Thereafter and forever more, all it took was to grab and threaten either of them with a nasty flyswatter and they screamed like little girls. Funny as hell.
Good hunting. LB
Posted by Ridge Runner (Member # 3477) on April 09, 2010, 01:16 PM:
Alot of the problem comes from school, my daughter came home from first grade once and told me, "You can't whip me any more, if ya do you'll get arrested"
I said oh yeah, why ya say that?
"Out teacher told us, said if we got spanked, tell them and they would take us away where we wouldn't ever be spanked and our parents would be arrested"
I immediately grabbed her up, spanked her bottom, set her down and said "tell your teacher if she ever tells you that again, you'll both get one next time" never heard of it again!
RR
Posted by Andy L (Member # 642) on April 09, 2010, 02:27 PM:
During one of our go rounds, my oldest threatened to call Family Services Hotline on my one time. I told him to call 911 when he was finished and get a ambulance on the way, he was gonna need it.
Posted by DanS (Member # 316) on April 09, 2010, 02:51 PM:
Sadly,
A guy who used to shoot with us when I was an archery 3D nut, got arrested. He stopped his 14 year old daughter on her way out of the house at 10:30PM or so on a school night, asked where she thought she was going, she said "out". He said no way or something of that nature, she told him to "Fuck Off". He gave her a slap and she ran crying to her room. A few minutes later the local police came and arrested him.
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 09, 2010, 03:43 PM:
Whatever came of it Dan? Was he convicted of anything?
Posted by DanS (Member # 316) on April 09, 2010, 04:49 PM:
49
Funny thing is he told the LEO's exactly what he did and why he did it. Then asked them what they would have done. I don't remember there exact answers as was told to me.
As to Jim, BTW we called him Crusty, really not a bad fellow, he just never felt the need for a toothbrush or deodorant. Hence his nickname.
I think he got probation or something very light. No jail. Perhaps it even got dropped. I honestly don't remember.
Some of this stuff, amazes me. I never dreamed of raising a hand to my father. He was one of those WWII guys who landed at Normandy, seen too much shit, and he never bluffed. I'll never, never forget that "look" he would give us when we were screwing up. He didn't have to say anything other than our names to get our attention. Once you got that "Look" you stopped all BS, cause you knew you were going to regret it if you didn't. BTW, Did I tell you, Pop never bluffed? ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Posted by DanS (Member # 316) on April 09, 2010, 04:53 PM:
Oh yea, Grandpa introduced me to the Razor strop. He used a straight razor and that strop/strap whatever it's called.
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 09, 2010, 06:35 PM:
My father had one of those as he was a barber and used to sharpen razors.
He didn't use it on me though. He just took off his belt and smacked me with that.
My younger brother never got hit. Go figure.
Posted by Locohead (Member # 15) on April 09, 2010, 08:45 PM:
You guys were lucky. My mom would sit us down, cry, and lay guilt trips!!!! ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Posted by DanS (Member # 316) on April 10, 2010, 07:19 AM:
4949
Another story here, pull up a chair.
Still dealing with teenagers and Police. Someone I know, who's boy was experimenting with illegal chemicals, got pretty whacked out one day. His boy, a high school kid at the time, like Andy's is a large kid. No fat, 6-1, about 170 lbs, and very athletic. Now the boys father is an even larger version, a LEO, with a young daughter and wife in the house with this kid, going nuts for lack of a better term, and he doesn't want any harm happening to any of his loved ones.
Now when he was giving commands to his son, the boy would not listen. I guess it's one of those familiarity breeds contempt things. So he felt the best thing to do at that time, was call in and get a couple officers, unknown to the boy, to handle the situation.
He obviously told the guys to "do what you have too, but try not to hurt my boy" and all that. Long story shortened, when those guys told the kid, basically, this is what's going to happen, like it or not. Cuff him and take him to the hospital to get checked out, he did as they commanded. Guess he realized they weren't going to put up with any BS, unlike his father would have.
Now to speculate, I'm guessing that those guys probably would have been gentler to an extent to this kid, than they would have been to Joe Shit the rag man down the street's kid. But that's not the point. It's the familiarity and contempt thing. I know that when I was a young goofy teen, my mom would let me get away with crap, my school teacher or principal would not have.
Posted by Kokopelli (Member # 633) on April 10, 2010, 08:02 AM:
Hey Dan;
Not trying to be a smart ass, but just how far IS '1.5K miles' anyway???? ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 10, 2010, 09:13 AM:
My guess is he means 1,500 miles, with the "K" acting as a symbol for "thousand", therefore 1.5K miles seems fairly easy to understand? How'd you get in here, did you pass the entrance exam?
Good hunting. LB
Posted by DanS (Member # 316) on April 10, 2010, 11:42 AM:
LB is correct.
Posted by Kokopelli (Member # 633) on April 10, 2010, 01:18 PM:
I didn't take the exam.......I snuck in thru a hole in the fence out back.
So where does this 'K' come from?? It's not a Roman Numeral that I know of.
Edit to add; So a 5K Run would be ...............??
[ April 10, 2010, 04:21 PM: Message edited by: Kokopelli ]
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 10, 2010, 05:23 PM:
Dan,
You may be right about the police being a little more gentle in handling a fellow LEO's kid. I wasn't there so I can't say for sure.
Let me think about it some.....well, I have told you my father is a barber. He is mostly retired now but still owns a shop. Now if my father, who doesn't cut my hair anymore, took me to another barber and told him, "this is my kid, do me a favor and take extra good care of his hair," do you think his fellow barber would?
How about Andy's kid? Since Andy knows the sheriff do you think the responding deputies would take extra care of his kid?
I have a friend (non LEO) whose wife and daughter were involved in a car accident. They were injured and had to be transported to the hospital. It just so happened that one of the responding officers knew my friend, and gave him a call from the scene to let him know his wife and daughter were injured, but not seriously, and were en route to such and such hospital. Do you think the officer would have done this for someone he didn't know? Most likely not. Most definately not in every case.
I guess what I am trying to say is it never hurts to know people in helpful positions. If I didn't get to know Leonard from interacting with him on another forum, I would never have found out about Huntmasters site.
Dan I know this is not the answer you wanted to hear, but it is an honest answer.
As for familiarity breeding contempt....I agree 100%.
Edit typo.
[ April 10, 2010, 05:24 PM: Message edited by: 4949shooter ]
Posted by DanS (Member # 316) on April 10, 2010, 08:19 PM:
4949,
I think that you read into my last post, something that I wasn't trying to say.
Posted by DanS (Member # 316) on April 10, 2010, 08:23 PM:
KOKO,
5Km =
5000 meters = 5 kilometers, but you already knew that.
[ April 10, 2010, 08:30 PM: Message edited by: DanS ]
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 10, 2010, 11:52 PM:
quote:
4949,
I think that you read into my last post, something that I wasn't trying to say.
Okay then my mistake Dan.
Posted by Kokopelli (Member # 633) on April 11, 2010, 07:45 AM:
DanS;
Actually, no. I did not know that. I was serious for once when I said that I wasn't trying to be a smart ass. The whole 'metric' thing is something that I never had exposure to or reason to learn. I dealt with tenth's, being ten thousand's of an inch, inches, yards, miles, a fer piece, & over yonder a ways.
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 11, 2010, 09:01 AM:
Just go and buy a new battery before you get stranded somewhere out in the boondocks. Ya old fossil.
Good hunting. LB
Posted by Kokopelli (Member # 633) on April 11, 2010, 12:37 PM:
Funny thing............I've jump started two people recently & both of their batterys looked a heck of a lot better than mine. I had it checked with my last service & was told that it was fine. Just needed to be cleaned up. ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
Posted by Dan Carey (Member # 987) on April 13, 2010, 07:21 PM:
www.aolnews.com/crime/article/police-beating-of-u-of-maryland-student-caught-on-video/19437356?icid=main|htmlws-main-w|dl1|link3|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aolnews.com%2Fcrime%2F artic]http://www.aolnews.com/crime/article/police-beating-of-u-of-maryland-student-caught-on-video/19437356?icid=main|htmlws-main-w|dl1|link3|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aolnews.com%2Fcrime%2 Fartic[/URL] le%2Fpolice-beating-of-u-of-maryland-student-caught-on-video%2F19437356
You'll have to copy it and paste it, to see the video. Its too big for this site.
[ April 13, 2010, 07:26 PM: Message edited by: Dan Carey ]
Posted by Brad Norman (Member # 234) on April 13, 2010, 08:32 PM:
With the proviso that I have not read this entire thread, I've often wondered every time I read or hear a story about a stand off, why don't the people who are holding the person at bay just leave? How did they hear about the person anyway? Especially when the person is in his own home or in the woods. It seems to me that once left alone the person eventually falls asleep or comes to his senses. It always turns out bad when law enforcement hunkers down behind their squad cars with weapons drawn.
As TA says, "For what it's worth."
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 13, 2010, 10:53 PM:
Because, Brad. Police have that extra gene. They must do something about the problem, even if it's wrong. The statement has been make several times, in this thread, that they gave the kid every chance, so when you are out of options, you shoot him. They can't leave. He broke into a cabin. He needs to surender, or be carried out.
I'm still of the opinion that they didn't need to kill the kid. If he was deranged, they must have been able to observe it. If they knew it, why was that F&G officer standing out in the open, when there is a whacko kid with a gun on the roof?
Of course, there is this shoot to kill policy, you know? You can't shoot him in the leg so that he falls off the roof and breaks his neck. Better to just shoot him in the head.
Good hunting. LB
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 14, 2010, 02:57 AM:
Leonard is correct in that police officers are not trained to shoot to "disable." When an LEO must use deadly force (firearm), he or she is countering deadly force or threat of same (firearm in this case).
Brad, we have the benefit of hindsight here. The officers on the scene were forced to make decisions in real time. I am not saying the incident was handled properly or improperly not having been there myself and having the benefit of the whole story.
I mentioned earlier, the problem with just leaving the kid is we don't know what action he would take upon our departure. What if he decided to wander into a residential neighborhood in his deranged state and start shooting at innocents? Then of course the officers would be found at fault for not taking enough action.
[ April 14, 2010, 03:17 AM: Message edited by: 4949shooter ]
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 14, 2010, 03:08 AM:
Dan in response to the video you posted, I have a new computer and do not have the sound workin yet. However some research shows the conduct of the officers is being dealt with accordingly:
(CNN) -- A Prince George's County, Maryland, police officer has been suspended, and prosecutors are investigating an incident -- caught on video -- in which officers wielding nightsticks beat a University of Maryland student, officials said Tuesday.
Authorities also are looking into documents filed by police in the case that appear to contradict the video, Prince George's County police Lt. Andy Ellis said.
The video was shot March 3 after the Maryland men's basketball team defeated Duke. In the video, students can be seen celebrating the win as officers in riot gear and on horseback are nearby. Some students are holding up their cellphones, taking pictures or video of the officers and the celebration.
The video shows a student identified as John "Jack" McKenna skipping down the street and approaching two officers on horseback. After a brief exchange, two officers on foot slam McKenna against a wall and he falls to the ground. A third officer joins the first two, and the three strike McKenna with nightsticks while he is on the ground as other students scatter.
McKenna had a cut on his head that required eight staples to close, said Sharon Weidenfeld, a private investigator working for McKenna's attorney, Chris Griffiths. In addition, he had a concussion, a badly swollen arm and bruises elsewhere on his body. Griffiths' office referred questions to Weidenfeld on Tuesday.
Another man identified as Benjamin Donat was also beaten, although that incident was not shown on the video, Weidenfeld said. On Donat's body, the imprint of the officers' nightsticks could be seen, she said. He also suffered a head injury that caused him some memory loss for a few days, although he will be all right, Weidenfeld said. "He really had his bell rung," she said.
Weidenfeld discovered the video and would say only that it was shot by another University of Maryland student.
Authorities arrested Donat and McKenna on suspicion of assaulting an officer and disorderly conduct. Documents filed by police allege that the two were causing a disturbance and that they struck mounted officers and their horses, causing minor injuries, when authorities intervened.
"Arrested 1 and Arrested 2 were both kicked by the horses and sustained minor injuries," the charging documents said.
The video does not show McKenna striking the mounted officer or horse, and the horses were not nearby while the beating was taking place. The documents tell a "totally fabricated story," Weidenfeld said Tuesday.
Prosecutors dropped charges against Donat on Friday and McKenna on Monday, she said. Griffiths is representing both youths, and a lawsuit is planned against the officers, Weidenfeld said.
"I was very disappointed to see the conduct of my officers on the tape," Prince George's County Police Chief Roberto Hylton said at an afternoon news conference. "I'm very disappointed in what I saw."
He emphasized that he wanted to make sure that the officers, once identified, get a "fair and impartial investigation." Although he came down on the officers seen on the tape, he also said the students' celebration involved setting fires, rocking buses and throwing things at officers.
"There is a two-party fault here: the students, but also you can see I am very disappointed by the actions of my officers," he said.
The department's internal affairs unit is investigating the incident, and will assist Prince George's County prosecutors in their probe, Ellis said.
"The charging documents certainly do not appear to be supported by the video," Ellis said. But he said, "I'm sure it's a stretch to say it's a cover-up," saying it's likely the officer who wrote the documents had a "miscommunication" with officers involved in the incident, who provided information.
Read the charging documents from CNN affiliate WJLA-TV (PDF)
The department's internal affairs unit is investigating and will assist Prince George's County prosecutors in their probe, he said.
Ellis said he did not know whether the officer suspended wrote the charging documents. Because the officers on the video were in full riot gear, they could not be readily identified, but authorities are looking into who was on duty that night and where officers were at the time to determine who was involved.
"We didn't know about this videotape until it came out yesterday morning," he said. "We had no idea. It's kind of caught us by surprise. As evidence comes out, or we learn more information, we'll suspend officers as they become identified."
He added, "Not only is the conduct of the officers on tape excessive -- and clearly it's excessive -- there are other issues here we need to work through to make sure we're more organized" in such situations.
The officers on horseback were from the Maryland-National Capital Park Police. Department spokesman Lt. Stanley Johnson said the mounted officers were there for crowd control purposes. While "there were a lot of activities" going on that night, he said, no department horses or officers were injured and there were no reports of people being kicked by horses.
In a statement Monday, McKenna's family told CNN affiliate WJLA-TV in Washington that "some of these characters ought to go to jail. ... Some ought to merely be booted off the force, and the remainder should be properly trained to discover that force is not always necessary, and brutality is always wrong."
The U.S. Justice Department is aware of the video and is "looking into it," Weidenfeld said Tuesday.
She said she is surprised officers would take such action knowing that so many people were filming the celebration.
Prince George's County police arrested 28 people after the basketball game, WJLA reported. Of those, 23 were students.
The police department emerged from federal oversight about 14 months ago, according to the station. The Justice Department had monitored it after complaints about officers using unnecessary force.
Posted by Cdog911 (Member # 7) on April 14, 2010, 04:57 AM:
"the problem with just leaving the kid is we don't know what action he would take upon our departure."
And my reply/ suggestion earlier was not that the officers vacate the scene. Rather, I suggested that they stand down, give the kid a little breathing room and diffuse an otherwise over the top situation. Instead, you have a bunch of guys who got bored and felt the "do something, even if it's wrong" mentality.
There's a difference between abandoning one's post, and taking a defensive tactical position to let the situation calm down and, hopefully, resolve itslef peacefully.If the boy were to try and leave, you take him down once he's off the roof. Hell, there were five grown men there that couldn't out think this minor?
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 14, 2010, 11:22 AM:
Cdog I was referring to what others on this thread suggested, which was to leave altogether. Just packing up and leaving is not a viable option.
I happen to agree with your suggestion, and had I been in command at that scene that is most likely the course of action I would have taken, absent other factors that we may not be privy to. Establishing a perimeter in this case makes a lot of sense. There was no one else in the area at the time that we know of, and he was a danger only to himself and the officers on scene. I would have called in a trained negotiator however.
Posted by TundraWookie (Member # 1044) on April 14, 2010, 11:55 AM:
How does a negotiator deal with somebody shooting at them? The kid took a shot at his own mother, I'd wager a negotiator would've been in his shooting path too. Just curious.
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 14, 2010, 12:03 PM:
Tundra, you are still laboring under the assumption that everything in that report was graven in stone. I think facts and perceptions will change because it, (the story) sorta stinks. Ya know?
Good hunting. LB
Posted by TundraWookie (Member # 1044) on April 14, 2010, 12:41 PM:
True, most news has a spin on it and truth doesn't always seem to matter to some journalists. Either way, I am curious how police would get a negotiator to function in such a situation. Maybe a loud speaker behind bullet-proof shields?
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 14, 2010, 01:20 PM:
I was thinking a loudspeaker from behind cover. This would all depend on the scene, and if the layout permitted such an attempt. Again, without the benefit of being in there in person, it is difficult to say for sure.
A few years ago we had a guy in a truck holding a gun to his own head. The negotiator attempted to talk the guy out from the patrol car PA system while our SWAT team waited behind the truck ready to go. It didn't work however, and the guy ended up offing himself.
This was a different situation but the potential for the guy to fire on us was there. But you may be right Tundra, depending on the boy's angle of fire it could have made negotiation too difficult. The article does say the boy fired on his mother.
Agsin, it's difficult to say not being there. This is why I don't like to MMQB.
[ April 14, 2010, 01:24 PM: Message edited by: 4949shooter ]
Posted by TundraWookie (Member # 1044) on April 14, 2010, 01:43 PM:
Thanks 4949, I was just curious if there was a SOP for such instances.
Posted by Cdog911 (Member # 7) on April 14, 2010, 03:10 PM:
TW, There usually is, and "shoot the bastard so we don't miss lunch" ain't it.
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 14, 2010, 04:18 PM:
Okay, give 49er a break, once in a while. He might be normal, you know? With feelings.
BTW. Donuts, Lance. It's coffee and donuts break.
Good hunting. LB
Posted by Az-Hunter (Member # 17) on April 14, 2010, 04:58 PM:
Lance summed it up pretty well in his assesment that "Hell, there were five grown men there, that couldn't out think this minor?"
I ain't buyin' any of this shit they did what they had to, christ all mighty, he was a 14 year old kid and they were miles from anywhere on an old ranch property.
They could have done a lot of things in that situation, but killin' that kid wasn't one of them.
[ April 14, 2010, 05:03 PM: Message edited by: Az-Hunter ]
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 14, 2010, 07:13 PM:
Well maybe I will respond to Cdog and AZ-Hunter tomorrow, after I have had a chance to cool off a bit.
Have a good night gentlemen.
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 14, 2010, 07:28 PM:
Okay, just don't forget, you started it, so these guys assume that you are man enough to listen to opposing points of view. Right?
Good hunting. LB
Posted by TOM64 (Member # 561) on April 14, 2010, 07:54 PM:
Elbee, me and Andy had nothing to do with it, this time.
Thing to remember is cops is human and they give cops guns and authority, it's bound to get abused.
Hint to 49; talk cop on cop forums and coyote on coyote forums. Unless you just like to fight, then by all means, enjoy.
Posted by Cdog911 (Member # 7) on April 14, 2010, 08:01 PM:
My point wasn't direceted at 4949. I believe that he and I are mostly on the same sheet of music. My remark was more at the LEO's involved in the incident. Again, I wasn't there and cannot address the particulars that occurred in that incident. Then again, whether FD or EMS, or the relatively short time I was with the SO, there was NO way to prepare for each and every incident you could and would face on the job. But, you operated within SOP's and standing orders that approximated the most diverse array of potential situations as you could so that, when face to face with something, you had options with which you were comfortable.
Years in the FD taught me that SO, PD and EMS pretty much prioritized things the same way - conservation of life, then property. That, and "you perform under stress only as well as you practice".
As has been said, this young man was pretty much isolated in a relatively remote area. They brought his mom in and he took a shot at her. I think I would have looked at the situation and wondered why the boy ran off to begin with. Might it have been something to do with mom? Sure, bring mom in and get familiarized with the local expert on this boy - his mom. Sounds to me like she tried to tell them important information that was dismissed by the guys on-scene. It would have been wiser for them to bring in a trained negotiator who could have tried to establish a rapport with the young man and attempted, in time, to earn his trust and talk him out of there with no one getting hurt. Instead, there seems to have been a bunch of well-intending LEO's who fell into group think and lost sight of the desired outcome - no loss of life. They failed. And again, I think a civil court will ultimately have a very significant say as to just how well this incident was managed. IMO, any time you end up with a dead body, it wasn't handled very well.
Again, I take this personally as my son has some very similar problems. And, as was the case here, arrogant and uninformed self-designated experts in positions of making decisions chose to dismiss his problems as being fictitious or irrelevant. Same thing has happened to my son and, as of today, those that chose wrong will come to very much regret their short-sightedness. Can't say what's going on, but I will say it involves lawyers and federal agencies that give the thumbs up or down to whether our local school receive literally millions of dollars in federal funds to cover their operation. I'll lock the damned school house doors to ensure that the people that have caused my son grief are held accountable.
Posted by Andy L (Member # 642) on April 14, 2010, 09:53 PM:
Ive pretty much stayed out of this fray on purpose, at least more than I normally do. LOL
Maybe they could have done something different? Who knows? Im sure we dont have the whole story. The fact that he shot at his mom still holds a lot of water with me. That shit aint right and makes me think there was less chance for another outcome that what we are seeing?
Its pretty easy to Monday morning quarterback. These situations are a lot like that deal with the helicopter smokin those ragheads. Those guys in the copter didnt have the luxary of hindsight. Maybe these cops did and maybe they didnt. Like I said, to me at least, when the fired at his mother, that should tell you something.
I dont, however, understand why the possum cop was getting out in the open? And why that would trigger the shot. The shot may have had to come anyway, but what was up with him giving him a clear shot? See, there is just too much that dont make sense and we dont know. Walking away and letting the boy stumble in when he came to his senses as someone suggested, I dont see that as an option. He already showed that he was capable of killing. What if he didnt stumble home? He may have went on a rampage somewhere else. Who knows? If I were the cop there, Im not saying I would have killed him or not. But I dont think I would have just said, hell boys, leave him be. He will be alright and come in at supper. That makes no sense.
See 49, Im not a LEO hater. I call it like I see it. Sometimes folks like it and sometimes they dont.
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 14, 2010, 10:33 PM:
It's a siege, Andy. We aren't talking about going home or getting some donuts. Just camp out and wait him out....kinda like they did at Waco. Oh wait, that one sorta went to hell too, didn't it? I think the justification was the poor kids were being mistreated so Reno HAD to do something; like burn the friggin' fort down to the ground,killing every last one of 'em. Sometimes, ya gotta do what ya gotta do. BARF!
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 15, 2010, 05:11 AM:
quote:
Okay, just don't forget, you started it, so these guys assume that you are man enough to listen to opposing points of view. Right?
Yes Sir absolutely. This is why I wanted to cool off a bit prior to responding.
Quote from the first article I posted:
quote:
"They told him (the boy) they were looking for him," West said. "He said 'That's me.' They said, 'Your parents are concerned about you. You need to come with us.' The boy then drew a weapon."
The boy had a rifle and a handgun and refused to go. The teen then allegedly fired shots as the officers retreated.
The LEO's could have shot him right there. They chose not to and gave him some space.
Another quote from the same article:
quote:
Officers followed him to the second camp, urging him to put down the weapons but the boy continued firing.
The officers could have shot him a second time. Hmm....there seems to be a pattern developing here.
Another quote from the same article:
quote:
He ran to a third spot, where he climbed to the top of a barn and shot at officers.
AGAIN, the officers would have been legally justified in firing on the kid in their own defense.
Another quote:
quote:
Dozens of shots were fired in an area spanning a mile and a half, West said. At one point, deputies brought the boy's mother to the scene to try to get her son to surrender, but the teen took a shot at her, West said
All these shots fired (dozens), and deputies still aren't trying to kill the kid. Sounds like they used restraint to me. Oh, they even brought the boy's mother in to try and talk him out of this rampage. As Cdog pointed out, this may not have been the best thing to do, but shows the officers were TRYING to resolve this peacefully.
Final quote:
quote:
"He had a clear shot at a game warden," West said. Fearing for the game warden's life, law enforcement officers fired and shot the boy, who died at the scene.
This is an unfortunate and tragic ending. I don't know how the boy had gotten a bead on the game warden because I wasn't there. But to my way of thinking, the officers tried to use a great amount of restraint here. I am not saying they handled it perfectly, but having been involved in a few incidents myself I know that they never do run perfect.
I have a 14 year old boy myself, who is a pretty damn good shot. I love him dearly. But if God forbid he ever shoots at police officers, I couldn't blame them for returning fire. Especially after they were to give him all the chances they gave the boy in question here.
If you guys think I only stand up for fellow LEO's, I will put up a couple links from GT where I condemned the actions of other police officers who were in the wrong. These include the shooting on the Tilman Bridge in New Orleans during Katrina as well as the incident Dan Carey provided a link to in Maryland.
I call 'em like I see 'em.
[ April 15, 2010, 05:35 AM: Message edited by: 4949shooter ]
Posted by TOM64 (Member # 561) on April 15, 2010, 05:59 AM:
I'm not gonna change my mind just because Hootie and Vic think differently no more than I would if 49 disagreed with me.
He quit being a "14 YO kid" when he picked up the guns and fired at anyone. Whether he had a bad homelife, his GF found new love, he had a brain tumor or his dog was giving the orders, he had to be contained and with the evidence given, that meant killing him, as sad as it is.
Lance I remember a bit about your ordeal, would you have let your son shoot at someone, given his condition, or would you have stopped him given the chance?
I mean no disrespect just trying to follow your thinking.
Posted by Rich (Member # 112) on April 15, 2010, 07:16 AM:
I didn't get an electric train for Christmas when I was a kid, and boy does that ever piss me off. Probably cause my ADHD, but nobody knew about that disorder back then. I had a rifle and shotgun when I was ten years old, but never thought about shooting anybody with em.
Posted by TundraWookie (Member # 1044) on April 15, 2010, 07:25 AM:
With the assumption based on the article that the kid wasn't on his meds and his hearing might have been impared, the whole negotiation thing might have been pointless anyways (it was for his mom).
It seems to me that all they had to do was wait until the kid was out of ammo. At the rate he was firing, it couldn't have lasted that much longer.
This is an interesting discussion and without any of us being there, it's tough to make a call.
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 15, 2010, 08:15 AM:
Yeah, Tundra. Aaron told me he tried calling you about twenty times to set up a hunt. Don't you get your messages at work, or were you blowing the kid off?
I'm just glad this kid, (in TX) wasn't black or the shooters would definitely be in trouble!
Good hunting. LB
Posted by TundraWookie (Member # 1044) on April 15, 2010, 08:36 AM:
Leonard,
That's lousy, I moved to a new building and have a new number. I thought I gave him my cell number as well. When does he leave for Germany? If he's into fishing, I'll have an open seat for some Salmon when the rivers thaw and the fish are running. Bummer, I feel bad about not getting in touch with him. I'll give him a call and touch bases with him about setting something up.
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 15, 2010, 08:41 AM:
Total, committed fisherman , and no, you didn't give him a cell phone number. He leaves sometime in September, I think?
Good hunting. LB
Posted by TundraWookie (Member # 1044) on April 15, 2010, 08:56 AM:
I just spoke with him, he's definitely into doing some fishing. Come end of June/July I told him I'd take him and his wife/daughter out to get some Kings on rod & reel. He has my cell number now, so we're all set for contact information. Thanks for letting me know he was trying to call.
[ April 15, 2010, 08:57 AM: Message edited by: TundraWookie ]
Posted by Nikonut (Member # 188) on April 15, 2010, 12:11 PM:
quote:
This is an interesting discussion and without any of us being there, it's tough to make a call.
I'd say that comment pretty much sums this whole thread up fairly well...
It really is a shame that the kid was having a hard time and that his actions forced a situation that he didn't survive. I don't think anyone would have wished for the outcome but it happened and it's too late to change now.
I also know that most everyone here could have put a shot on the target to take the kid out without killing him. Once the call to terminate is made it's all over! That's just the way it is...
Nikonut
Posted by Cdog911 (Member # 7) on April 15, 2010, 05:05 PM:
Tom, No disrepect taken. Yours is a valid position that I can't say I disagree with. And yes, it appears that the cops gave him as much room on the run as they could, and then some. It's too bad to good men are foced to make on-the-fly decisions such as these to pick up real world messes when the inevitable shit happens. If life only happened in 30-minute periods with the conflicts all resolved before they roll the final credits. I wouldn't expect anyone to risk their life for my son, but I'd hope they werern't in a hurry to take it either.
You never know how you'll respond to something like this - when another human being unleashes violence upon you.
When my son was first in the deepest and darkest part of the changes that occurred after his head injury, he attacked me one night. We had an argument over the phone and he flat out told me to call the cops because "I'm coming home to kick your ass." I hung up, knew that he was at least six miles away and called 911 to tell them to have an officer or two enroute and why. Four minutes later, I walked out onto my front stoop and he came to a screeching halt in front of the house, jumped out of his car and came toward me with his right fist reared back.
Freeze.
What do you do? I outweigh him by roughly a hundred pounds, and my reach is about six inches longer than his.
A lot of thoughts go through your head about then and a lot of thoughts went through my mind in the 2-3 seconds it took him to cross that front lawn: If I do what I feel like doing, I'll hurt him or worse. If I hit him first, I go to jail, too, regardless of his intent. If I go to jail for felony domestic battery, my gun rights are on the chopping block, as is my job.
He landed one good punch and shattered the cartilage in my left ear. At that point, I went to trying to contain him, picked him up in a bear hug and carried him off the front steps to the front lawn where neither of us would be hurt, but not until after he had tried to push me through the glass storm door and over the wrought iron porch railing. He pounded me on the back and against the back of the head, but when he wriggled out of my grasp and realized that none of that had so much as phased me one bit, he got real smart and chose to disengage. He ran four miles to a friend's house where I found him and called the Sheriff's Department who arrested him. I knew he was at a friend's house becasue I went that way and saw him climb into a car a half-mile in front of me. The guy I was with yelled, "Get 'em!" and I rolled to a stop, knowing that chasing them would only make them run. I knew where he was heading and, despite what we'd been through that evening, I knew that once he got there he would calm down and not resist. I could have succumbed to my testosterone from square one and none of it would have ended up the same. Probably would have ended up far, far worse. It's a gamble you make at the time and yes, everything is in slow motion as you consider your options, consider their various outcomes and pick (hope for)the one that looks best.
BTW, that first night I told about, the cops took 43 minutes to get there, and we only have 7k people in a town that's roughly 2 square miles.
Sometimes, life sucks.
Posted by TOM64 (Member # 561) on April 15, 2010, 06:39 PM:
Lance, thanks for not taking offense, I knew from what you told us about it, it might get personal and that you didn't, speaks highly of you in my book.
Violence sucks but it's all it knows and all it respects.
Posted by Nikonut (Member # 188) on April 15, 2010, 10:31 PM:
That's difficult stuff Lance, you just have to keep showing him love.
I do understand how that must make you feel. I was hit in the head working at the railroad. My ex used that in court against me during our divorce, saying I was more irritable.
Hell, I was just in a really bad mood most of the time dealing with not being able to work. I've been around people that could not control their emotions at all after an accident. The human condition is delicate and once the balance is broken it's hard to keep life on level.
Nikonut
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 16, 2010, 11:25 AM:
Thoughts and prayers sent Lance.
Posted by Brad Norman (Member # 234) on April 16, 2010, 05:12 PM:
We had a stand off less than a mile from my house last night. Woman broke into her ex's house and stole a pistol. They finally found her sitting on the train tracks. Yes, I live near the tracks. Anyway, the cops shut down all the surrounding roads and Union Pacific. After 9 hours It ended after they bought her a Sonic cheeseburger. Just saying...
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 16, 2010, 05:56 PM:
I've had Sonic cheesburgers. Compared to an InNOut DoubleDouble, they ain't much. And, I live not much more than a mile from an Amtrack line. Is that something to be ashamed of? I don't know? Let me know.
Good hunting. LB
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 16, 2010, 06:42 PM:
It sounds like a different type of situation Brad.
I am glad it was resolved peacefully though.
Posted by Brad Norman (Member # 234) on April 16, 2010, 08:33 PM:
An InNOut Double Double can't touch a Sonic burger. All InNOut does is give me the shits. It's not bad to live by the tracks as long as you're on the right side. An Amtrak line doesn't count LB.
It was a different situation. I just found the timing interesting.
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 16, 2010, 08:43 PM:
Yawn; what does an Okie know? DoubleDouble's rule!
Posted by Az-Hunter (Member # 17) on April 16, 2010, 09:22 PM:
I must be a dinosaur; Ive never sank a tooth in one of the much adored In and Out burgers? Drove by with my daughter in Tucson, and to me, it looks like a glorified Micky Ds? Same color scheme, adn the burger looks to be about the same quality, although my daughter and son in law say they are good?
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 17, 2010, 03:06 AM:
The best burgers I have ever had were at a place called "Stoolies" in Gainesville, Texas.
They were unbelievable, and my buddy and I kept on going back there during our stay.
I would swear that the Texans must keep the best beef for themselves.
Posted by Andy L (Member # 642) on April 17, 2010, 05:17 AM:
I think I had an In and Out burger in Phoenix? I know Higgins and Fred took me somewhere after pickin me up at the airport and the comment was made that this was the famous burger joint LB talks about. They make homemade french fries where you can watch while in the drive through, is that the place?
To me, the burger was good. Not extra special, but good. Fries were good. Sonic burgers are the same, ok, but not great. Culvers has the best fast food burgers, IMHO. And I get to sample burgers often with two yungins at home. LOL
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 17, 2010, 06:46 AM:
InNOut for those of us raised here in SoCal, the origin of much pop culture in the 50s and 60s, is a symbol that has not changed since we drove our mom's car for the first time, that's where everything happened, a seen and be seen place, and they INVENTED the California style of burger that the whole country is serving, today. Sort of a much copied, never duplicated, situation. George Lucas' semi documentary, American Graffiti although set in central California, was based on 1950's southern California teen culture, of which InNOut Burger played a large part. If you don't appreciate a DoubleDouble, youmust be some kind of hick from back east?
Andy, I know there is one in Scottsdale, which is in the opposite direction from Sky Harbor, if you are going to Tucson? Maybe they have others, they are expanding all over I think there are a half a dozen in Las Vegas? AZ is always slow on following trends, but they have a few. I took my Army buddy from Omaha to an InNOut and although polite, I don't think he really "got it"? Go ahead, be a po dunk. Don't matter to me. People don't realize that they follow California trends, but they do. They say, (and it is true) that the latest SoCal culture is eleven hours away from Tokyo. About ten years, for the midwest and MacNeal.
Good hunting. LB
[ April 17, 2010, 06:47 AM: Message edited by: Leonard ]
Posted by Az-Hunter (Member # 17) on April 17, 2010, 06:56 AM:
Leonard my friend; I'd be perfectly happy to have every cultural phenomenon that ever gets a start in California, just plain pass around me and my little world in MacNeal,
Here in the true west, we as a whole, don't really take to fry top burgers, we perfer grilled beef. One fry top burger is about like any other fry top burger to me, other than the condiments one can place on top?
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 17, 2010, 07:03 AM:
To the guys from back east a "double double" means a double egg sandwich from Harry's in Ridgefied, NJ.
This is the same place where the mafioso serial hit man the "Iceman" said in his HBO interview he dumped a body outside in the parking lot in a steel drum.
Posted by TOM64 (Member # 561) on April 17, 2010, 07:13 AM:
In and out? Double Double? Never heard of em.
A&W was the first drive in around 1920 it opened in Sacramento.
The first Sonic drive in opened in 1953, here in okieland and their burgers still suck, that is if they get your order right and bring you a burger...
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 17, 2010, 07:32 AM:
Yeah, I agree on the Sonic. I had never had one, my first was in MacNeal with Vic and Tim, but I did notice there is one east of me somewhere? Not popular, and not very many in California.
Look, you guys. I understand and appreciate all the CA bashing shit. I'm on your side, but it didn't used to be that way. All you people have assimulated the CA culture via Hollywood and TV, whether you know it or not. Other than backwaters like Minneesota, that is. Maybe MacNeal, too?
Good hunting. LB
Posted by Dave Allen (Member # 3102) on April 17, 2010, 08:25 AM:
Never heard of In and Out either ?
However Sonics started popping up all over the place about 4-5 yrs ago, I'm not impressed at all.
Truthfully I hardly ever eat out anymore, when I do its at a local mom n' pop burger or pizza joint.I admit that I'm lucky for the last 4 1/2 yrs I work only three miles from home, so I go home for lunch and cook or have leftovers.
Its weird now that I'm in my 40's I cant hardly stomach fast food anymore ? tears me up.
[ April 17, 2010, 08:27 AM: Message edited by: Dave Allen ]
Posted by Kokopelli (Member # 633) on April 17, 2010, 08:26 AM:
For a REAL burger............TOMMY'S Chili Cheese Burger!!!!!
We used to call them the 'Edible Enema'.
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 17, 2010, 08:33 AM:
Yeah, those are good. Good and sloppy. Don't wear good clothes. The one on Rampart is where you could see Dodgers after the game, standing in line like everybody else. How retro, a cooler with bottles of pop, help yourself. And, eat standing up, at a shelf. But, an experience, after a Dodger game not to be missed.
Good hunting. LB
Posted by CrossJ (Member # 884) on April 17, 2010, 08:56 AM:
Hell, everyone here in OK lives near the tracks. We are really blessed here with two railways intersecting in our town.
As far as the sonic burger, I would have held out for an Oreo or Butterfinger blast, at least thats what its gonna take to get me down off my water tower. Of course, some cheese covered tatertots might get my attention also!
Maintain
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 17, 2010, 10:19 AM:
Okay, free DoubleDoubles, this week end! Just stop by the house and we go, I pay. For registered Humtmasters members, in good standing. I'm sure everybody exc4pt Okies will appreciate a superior burger. This is the one thing that everybody moving from CA hunger for, just ask them.
Good hunting. LB
edit: offer not good for the asshole that keeps signing me up for trips to Orlando!
[ April 17, 2010, 10:20 AM: Message edited by: Leonard ]
Posted by Nikonut (Member # 188) on April 17, 2010, 10:59 AM:
Nothing quite like going for a "Whitecastle Slider" after a Cardinal's game. They sure could make you hurry back home!
A&W and "Dog & Suds" for me! That's been so long ago... Still hit "Steak and Shake" for a plate of "Chilli Mac".
I'm an Okie but I have to agree that Sonic sucks!!!!! ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
WOW! This post really got side tracked. Probably a good thing...
Nikonut
[ April 17, 2010, 11:02 AM: Message edited by: Nikonut ]
Posted by TOM64 (Member # 561) on April 17, 2010, 11:55 AM:
Not sidetracked at all, someone mentioned waiting the kid out till he got hungry and viola, a double double.
Makes perfect sense here at HM and we love Elbee for it.
Posted by Andy L (Member # 642) on April 17, 2010, 12:17 PM:
Nikonut, I agree.
Its a 2 1/2 hr drive to see a Cardinal game for us. After a good 7:05 game and a belly full of beer, a box full of Whitecastle belly bombers work really well for the ride home!!
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 17, 2010, 12:30 PM:
quote:
WOW! This post really got side tracked. Probably a good thing...
No problem here.
Enjoy...
Posted by Dave Allen (Member # 3102) on April 17, 2010, 12:31 PM:
Hey guys, whats the deal with Whitecastle, is that some kinda hamburger chain ?
Posted by 4949shooter (Member # 3530) on April 17, 2010, 02:02 PM:
Yes. They sell small, square hamburgers. If you eat there make sure you have a bathroom close by.
[ April 17, 2010, 02:03 PM: Message edited by: 4949shooter ]
Posted by Dave Allen (Member # 3102) on April 17, 2010, 02:50 PM:
Thanks, I assumed they might be some kinda chain, anyway I spotted some in the frozen section while grocery shopping and thought I'd try 'em as a snack. Wow ! what a gut bomb
It doesnt sound like the restaurant variety is any better !
[ April 17, 2010, 02:51 PM: Message edited by: Dave Allen ]
Posted by DAA (Member # 11) on April 17, 2010, 03:26 PM:
My favorite burger dump in Okie land is Ron's. No trip to OKC is complete without a Ron's sausage chili burger and fried okra.
That's some goooooooood shit!
- DAA
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 17, 2010, 04:16 PM:
FRIED OKRA? Gooey green slimy snot! Dave, I'm finally shaking my head wit you! I'd sooner eat liver & onions or fried oysters, and I won't (and shushi) eat any of that shit. And, that's what it is.
Good hunting. LB
Posted by Kokopelli (Member # 633) on April 17, 2010, 04:51 PM:
Leonard;
You're making me hungry!!!
(You probably don't want to know that I have bobcat in the crock pot right now)
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 17, 2010, 05:12 PM:
No objections on bobcat. It's pretty good, actually.
Good hunting. LB
Posted by Nikonut (Member # 188) on April 17, 2010, 05:16 PM:
Not liking fried okra is sacrilege!!!!!
Oh man, my Gramma used to send us boys out to cut(you don't pick okra)a bunch of okra for the frying pan! Not a fan of it boiled like some of these Northern folk like to do! That does make it slimmy.
Edit: I've tried eating lots of critters over the years but never a bobcat... I eat at a oriental place every now and then that might be about the same!!!! ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Nikonut ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
[ April 17, 2010, 05:20 PM: Message edited by: Nikonut ]
Posted by Kelly Jackson (Member # 977) on April 17, 2010, 09:21 PM:
Fried Okra is food for the gods LB.
Boiled its some nasty shit.
You still got that coon in the backyard??
Posted by Leonard (Member # 2) on April 17, 2010, 09:32 PM:
Yeah, Rocky eats everything from left over burrito½ to chicken bones. When it was raining last week, he was under my BBQ cover. I know because he kinda rearranged stuff, pushed it out of his way to get comfy. He's healthy, judging by the size of the evidence he leaves behind.
Good hunting. LB
UBB.classicTM
6.3.0