Conclusion to old thread

[jiggahertz]

I wonder how many people got hit in the nuts with those?

 

[MercenaryForHire]

What the hell happened to good old fashioned tear gas and fire hoses?

- M4H

 

[crystal]

Of course it was an accident. Otherwise those cops would be on trail for murder. But that doesn't mean the dept don't have to paid/settle to the nose for wrongful death.

 

[crystal]

Originally posted by: SonnyDaze

Originally posted by: RelaxTheMind
The guy who lived in my house previously. His brother was going down road with a girl on his motorcycle. Cop pulls him over and shoots him point blank in the head then drives off. Turns out he just rode a similar bike of a guy that his wife cheated on him with.

To this day he hates cops with a passion.

May have seen on tv.

Nice little story there.

Back on topic......if this story is 2 years old, why was it brought up again?

"Conclusion to old thread" maybe that is the reason?

 

[Bootprint]

Originally posted by: FallenHero

Originally posted by: jpeyton
It's not some 'freak accident'. The weapon was created to be fired randomly into crowds to disperse them.

A random crowd is just that. You don't have people lining up uniformly, all at the same height, all facing the same direction, all motionless.

If the weapon is deadly hitting any area of the body, it's potentially lethal.

Calm down there killer. The death itself WAS an accident. Any amount of force, including punches and pepper spray can be lethal if used in sufficient quantities or where an "ideal" circumstance exists. I am not trying to say that it wasn't a tragic death, but to say it "wasnt just a freak accident" would be a gross exaggeration of the situation.

More like neglect, at least one of them must've watched A Chirstmas Story.

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: skyking

Originally posted by: Chaotic42

Originally posted by: FallenHero
It was actually pure accident, assuming I have my incidents correct. She was shot at point blank range when she tripped and fell toward police as the officer was aiming well below eye level to hit the crowd in the chest/legs. It was by sheer chance that she was hit in the eye and died from it.

So, and I'm not saying this to be smartass, how exactly is this the Boston PD's fault? It was an accident.

the pellet opened a three-quarter-inch hole in the bone behind the eye, broke into nine pieces, and damaged the right side of her brain.

The assesment that this was a less-lethal or nonlethal crowd control tool was fundamentally flawed. The officers were given a tool that they thought they could use without lethal results, and that thing could easily kill by damaging a femoral artery, for example. It was a negligent act for the manufacturer to taut is as non-lethal and the department to put it in service without testing.

Exactly. I don't see charging Boston's taxpayers as any sort of justice. Fire the guy who implemented without testing and sue the company who marketed it as non-lethal.

That said, any weapon that can inflict enough pain to be useful in crowd control will likely kill when received point-blank in the eye. That means they're imperfect, but sometimes crowds need to be controlled and these guns are preferrable to .45s and billy clubs, don't you think?

 

[Savij]

I was there, I don't exactly when she was hit, but the cops were definitely shooting at people in the rafters (above above most of the crowd). I don't know if it was an accident or bad training or what, but she wasn't the only one there with a bloody face/head after they started shooting the pellets.

My personal opinion is that this wasn't a good place/time to use the "guns" since the crowd was not violent. Most of the people were just standing/dancing/cheering in the streets. There were maybe 5 or 10 people trying to climb the rafters at fenway, but most of the crowd wasn't really doing anything dangerours or destructive. In addition, I don't think that anyone really heard any calls to disperse from the police. The first that my friends and I realized the police didn't want people there is when we realized that they were shooting at us.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: rivan
That said, any weapon that can inflict enough pain to be useful in crowd control will likely kill when received point-blank in the eye. That means they're imperfect, but sometimes crowds need to be controlled and these guns are preferrable to .45s and billy clubs, don't you think?

Like I said above - break out the tear gas and fire hoses.

- M4H

 

[SonnyDaze]

Originally posted by: crystal

Originally posted by: SonnyDaze

Originally posted by: RelaxTheMind
The guy who lived in my house previously. His brother was going down road with a girl on his motorcycle. Cop pulls him over and shoots him point blank in the head then drives off. Turns out he just rode a similar bike of a guy that his wife cheated on him with.

To this day he hates cops with a passion.

May have seen on tv.

Nice little story there.

Back on topic......if this story is 2 years old, why was it brought up again?

"Conclusion to old thread" maybe that is the reason?

You're pretty good at reading topic titles.....:roll:

Boston police to stop using pellet guns

I guess that's the conclusion.....besides the arguing about who is/was right or wrong in this case.

 

[crystal]

Originally posted by: SonnyDaze

Originally posted by: crystal

Originally posted by: SonnyDaze

Originally posted by: RelaxTheMind
The guy who lived in my house previously. His brother was going down road with a girl on his motorcycle. Cop pulls him over and shoots him point blank in the head then drives off. Turns out he just rode a similar bike of a guy that his wife cheated on him with.

To this day he hates cops with a passion.

May have seen on tv.

Nice little story there.

Back on topic......if this story is 2 years old, why was it brought up again?

"Conclusion to old thread" maybe that is the reason?

You're pretty good at reading topic titles.....:roll:

Boston police to stop using pellet guns

I guess that's the conclusion.....besides the arguing about who is/was right or wrong in this case.

Because your question is pretty stupid to begin with. Some people are interested in the events that caused much debates here at ATOT and would like to know the outcome. BTW, you forgot about paid a $5.1 million settlement. Pretty much tell you who are in the wrong in this case.

 

[Passions]

Dirty pig cops. I have never met in my life a decent and quality police officer.

The article says that "Two other revelers were struck in the head and survived. "

Why do you aim for the head??? It shows that Boston PD wasn't aiming for the body but directly for the HEAD.

The Pig who shot her should be tried for murder.

 

[dethman]

Originally posted by: Flatscan

Originally posted by: jagec
If the gun can break bones, what's it going to do to soft tissue?

How thick is the bone behind the eye?

it's very thin, and actually breaks pretty easily.

 

[FoBoT]

http://www.victoriasnelgrove.org/

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Originally posted by: crystal
Of course it was an accident. Otherwise those cops would be on trail for murder. But that doesn't mean the dept don't have to paid/settle to the nose for wrongful death.

When it is intentional cops do go to jail for murder. When it is negligent homicide and it is a copy that did it, nothing happens. There is a double standard.

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: Passions
Dirty pig cops. I have never met in my life a decent and quality police officer.

The article says that "Two other revelers were struck in the head and survived. "

Why do you aim for the head??? It shows that Boston PD wasn't aiming for the body but directly for the HEAD.

The Pig who shot her should be tried for murder.

Has someone walked into your house and shot you? If not, thank the police.

 

[AndrewR]

Boston should replace them with those new microwave weapons that the Marines and Army are fielding. Bring some hot dogs and popcorn to the riot!

 

[IEC]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire
What the hell happened to good old fashioned tear gas and fire hoses?

- M4H

The zombies stole them.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: Chaotic42
So you mean you're glad that the tax payers of Boston paid for it?

a big payout would certainly persuade a government department to change it's policy. if they were not forced to pay out 5 million dollars, would they still be using these deadly pellet guns?

Probably not, since they're intended for non-lethal purposes (crowd control) and the first time they used them someone died.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: FallenHero

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: FallenHero

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: FallenHero
Calm down there killer. The death itself WAS an accident. Any amount of force, including punches and pepper spray can be lethal if used in sufficient quantities or where an "ideal" circumstance exists. I am not trying to say that it wasn't a tragic death, but to say it "wasnt just a freak accident" would be a gross exaggeration of the situation.

So what other circumstances were present beyond the pellet hitting the eye socket?

Perhaps the training to NOT aim for the head (basic to all less lethal projectiles) and that fact that the girl (again assuming I have the incident correct) tripped forward into the path of the oncoming projectile. You aim for center mass or a bit lower in the case of a crowd.

I get it; so you tell the person you're aiming for to stand still so the projectile will hit them in the correct body part? I'm sure that kind of communication is crystal clear and 100% effective in a riot/crowd control situation.

Regardless, lack of training is the city's fault, so they should pay up.

How is it not an accident when that occurs, thats my point.

Why even bother responding to him after he referred to cops as pigs? He's obviously anti-police, and you're not going to change that. You're just wasting your time.

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: Savij
I was there, I don't exactly when she was hit, but the cops were definitely shooting at people in the rafters (above above most of the crowd). I don't know if it was an accident or bad training or what, but she wasn't the only one there with a bloody face/head after they started shooting the pellets.

My personal opinion is that this wasn't a good place/time to use the "guns" since the crowd was not violent. Most of the people were just standing/dancing/cheering in the streets. There were maybe 5 or 10 people trying to climb the rafters at fenway, but most of the crowd wasn't really doing anything dangerours or destructive. In addition, I don't think that anyone really heard any calls to disperse from the police. The first that my friends and I realized the police didn't want people there is when we realized that they were shooting at us.

I was in the area too. The problem with crowds, however, is that it doesn't take much for a peaceable 'friendly' crowd to become hostile and aggressive. Large groups of people are dangerous for the police, which is why they try and disperse them.

I also agree that the cops didn't make it clear they wanted people out. We only really found out when they used a motorcade to split the crowd in half (using the bridge over the mass pike) and then hit us with tear gas.

 

[Passions]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42

Originally posted by: Passions
Dirty pig cops. I have never met in my life a decent and quality police officer.

The article says that "Two other revelers were struck in the head and survived. "

Why do you aim for the head??? It shows that Boston PD wasn't aiming for the body but directly for the HEAD.

The Pig who shot her should be tried for murder.

Has someone walked into your house and shot you? If not, thank the police.

Thank the police for what? Eating donuts at the local Dunkin Donuts??? No cop has ever protected me or my house. :roll: