Shoot to Kill: Cop allegedly shoots three-year-old

R13...

R13...

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2008
Messages
54,505
Reaction score
30,314
Location
the One State...
They are shooting alright, trouble is they not looking what they shooting at,
A single gunshot through the window of a parked car, and a three-year-old boy was dead. The shooter: a police constable.
Click to expand...

"They arrived at the address and found a car outside the house. It is alleged one member saw a pipe which looked like a firearm, and he then fired in the direction of the pipe," Dlamini said.

"A three-year-old boy was shot in the chest and died instantly. No pipe or firearm was recovered from the car."
Click to expand...

Sauce
 
apparently the cop saw a gun (pipe which looked like one) and shot at it, but hey most people wanted the shoot2kill. once again this clearly shows that the cops are in seriously need of proper training as i have said from the very beginning. there is no good in using a weapon without learning when and how to use it properly first.
 
Very sad :(

Unfortuantely in the harder stance the police are taking towards crime, I suspect this won't be the only incedent like this.
 
Necuno said:
once again this clearly shows that the cops are in seriously need of proper training as i have said from the very beginning.
Click to expand...

Its not training but intelligence/common sense that is lacking. As for this whole shoot to kill thing; the law is already perfectly clear as to when you may shoot, it just that most don't understand this. There is no need to change any law as the current ones are perfctly adequate.

Very sad story though for all involved.
 
Viva. Sounds like the constable was on tik. Roar up to a car, in an unmarked car, plainclothes and sommer open fire without identifying himself or even trying to assess the situation...

Reap what you sow dudes... Vote anc, get anc.
 
KhoisanX said:
Its not training but intelligence/common sense that is lacking. As for this whole shoot to kill thing; the law is already perfectly clear as to when you may shoot, it just that most don't understand this. There is no need to change any law as the current ones are perfctly adequate.

Very sad story though for all involved.
Click to expand...

why i specifically said in my post

Necuno said:
there is no good in using a weapon without learning when and how to use it properly first.
Click to expand...
 
Stupid cops need to be weeded out of the police force.

I still support the shoot to kill policy, but it can only be implemented with the proper training and preparation. Unfortunately 90% of our police force is in no fit state to handle such a policy.

Having said that... if a cop points a firearm at me... the first thing I am going to do is raise my hands and show him that I am no threat. I would like to know how the occupants of the car behaved immediately prior to the shooting.
 
Garyvdh said:
Stupid cops need to be weeded out of the police force.

I still support the shoot to kill policy, but it can only be implemented with the proper training and preparation. Unfortunately 90% of our police force is in no fit state to handle such a policy.

Having said that... if a cop points a firearm at me... the first thing I am going to do is raise my hands and show him that I am no threat. I would like to know how the occupants of the car behaved immediately prior to the shooting.
Click to expand...

I don't think any of the countries who have top notch police have a shoot to kill policy, its just stupid and leads to events like this all the time. Also, lets be honest. It's all great and good supporting such a crazy policy on a whim but what would you honestly do if that had been your 3yo child?

It sounds like the police constable shot without even taking a proper look. I mean how can you not differentiate between a 3 yo child(with a pipe...which was never found) and an armed gunman... I doubt holding your hands up is gonna save anyone if the cops are feeling jittery. If you remember the other recent incident of a girl being shot in a car mistaken for a suspects car then you can clearly see a pattern. Police are firing upon vehicles which they suspect have criminals, without even confirming it. How are any of us safe from that?

Even worse is the fact that according to the article, the police arrived in a private, unmarked car and were not wearing uniform. The also, shot before getting out the car, issuing a verbal warning or indicating in any way they had arrived and were police. So, if a random stranger pulls up in a car and fire a gun at me, in the off chance that I'm still alive I must put up my hands because I know it is a policeman and not a psychopathic murderer?
 
Last edited:
KhoisanX said:
Its not training but intelligence/common sense that is lacking. As for this whole shoot to kill thing; the law is already perfectly clear as to when you may shoot, it just that most don't understand this. There is no need to change any law as the current ones are perfectly adequate.

Very sad story though for all involved.
Click to expand...

100% true, the law states you may shoot to kill when your life is in danger. The last few incidents of this nature has proven that the cops are merely shooting on hunches. These policemen should be jailed as criminals committing first degree murder IMO.

Cops have somehow lost their cool and are shooting at random now.

I still don't understand why this "Shoot to kill" thing has been implemented, instead of bringing back Capital punishment. At least when you are trialled the law will "in most cases" prevail. You will always get innocent deaths and it's horrible, but that way there are procedures in place to lessen the collateral damage, this way it's a free for all.

But this just seems ridiculous
 
Last edited:
shoot to kill ........ I like that...

bring all psycho-killers to SAPS ....... we will have excellent police services.

(you run away from me? :fire: )
(you ask me to pay you? :fire: )
(a little boy? :fire: )

happy-trigger man :D = psycho-killer

only idiots cannot see the problem of "shoot to kill".
 
KhoisanX said:
Its not training but intelligence/common sense that is lacking. As for this whole shoot to kill thing; the law is already perfectly clear as to when you may shoot, it just that most don't understand this. There is no need to change any law as the current ones are perfctly adequate.

Very sad story though for all involved.
Click to expand...

I agree.
 
Blue said:
I don't think any of the countries who have top notch police have a shoot to kill policy, its just stupid and leads to events like this all the time.
Click to expand...

The US has such a policy. Notice how the cops do routine traffic stops, hand near the gun, clear instructions given to the driver etc.
 
DreamKing said:
shoot to kill ........ I like that...

bring all psycho-killers to SAPS ....... we will have excellent police services.

(you run away from me? :fire: )
(you ask me to pay you? :fire: )
(a little boy? :fire: )

happy-trigger man :D = psycho-killer

only idiots cannot see the problem of "shoot to kill".
Click to expand...

Actually, the shoot to kill policy has always been on the books in the Criminal Procedure Act in the form of the use of "reasonable force".

It allows an officer to use reasonable force to defend himself or the public if someone puts their lives in danger. That includes killing the suspect if people's lives are in imminent danger.

But what happened recently was that police personnel were coming under legal threat when they used this reasonable force.

The government has simply stepped in and stated what the law always said, that you can use reasonable force to defend yourself.

It is reasonable to assume that this "reasonable force" would include killing heavily armed suspects who do not hesitate to kills cops or civilians.

What needs to happen now is training to teach the cops to use this force.

The cops are not psycho-killers. They are there to enforce the law and to protect you and I. The first duty of the state is the protection of its citizens.

To label them all psycho-killers shows that you are not worthy of being defended and are part of the problem instead of the solution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X