Tuesday, September 4, 2012

Another Toy Gun Shooting by the Police

SF Gate reports

I'm sorry, but I can believe that a small time drug dealer carries an air-soft gun to make it look like he's armed to his customers, but I can't believe that he drew the toy gun on the police.

To me this sounds like another case of the cops being trigger-happy and then trying to cover it up.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.


  1. At least in Texas, you will get shot. Here also if you use a toy gun to rob a place, its armed robbery. It would be no different than it would be if you use a real gun. If you just infer that you are armed and never display anything, but you announce that you are then you are considered and treated as armed and dangerous.

    If it looks real and you treat it as if it were real, your gonna die!

  2. Yet another example of why realistic-looking pellet/BB guns should be banned. I've seen case after case where they've been used to intimidate, threaten, rob, and, yes, even seriously harm or kill someone. I defy someone to give me a GOOD REASON why such a gun needs to be made realistic-looking.

    Here are examples that involved children: http://kidshootings.blogspot.com/search/label/Pellet%20and%20BB%20Guns

    1. A good reason? Cheap training for using the real thing. That's what the buyer wants. Making it look like the real thing is a statement about how it should be treated. There's three good reasons. To me, if it looks like a gun, I'm treating it like a gun. But as always, for you, if one person does something stupid, we all must be controlled. I'll keep my freedom, thanks.

    2. Greg, I've heard this excuse before. If you are using an AirSoft gun for live-fire training, it isn't realistic enough to be an adequate training mechanism. If it isn't a live-fire training, then a wooden or rubber gun is sufficient (like what I've used for martial arts disarmament training), and it doesn't actually need to look real for that.

      And I take issue with your supposition that most buyers want AirSoft guns for training purposes. From what I've experienced, most buyers want them for entertainment purposes (wherein it doesn't need to look real).

    3. And in a free country, the buyer wanting it that way is good enough.

      I have an Airsoft version of a 1911. It has the same shape and same controls as the real thing. It lets me practice quick aiming and a good trigger squeeze without having to wave the live gun around--that's a safety measure.

  3. Sounds to me like Mr Independent Pharmacist, should have done two things.....

    Not dealt drugs.....

    Put the gun down when he was told....

    Too bad for him.....

    1. Don't you love the genius protestor who said that the cops should have shot this thug in the arm or the leg? Of course, any time I see a "No Justice, No Peace" sign, I suspect the holder of idiocy.

      It's not hard to avoid running afoul of our drug laws--don't deal, don't possess. Don't spend time with those who do.

    2. You guys love to mock civilians who say shoot to would, but in fact we have seen cases in which the cops have done just that.

      It's not the idiotic suggestion you say, especially since many of these shootings are unnecessary anyway.

    3. Shooting to wound is difficult, even under the best circumstances. And what such thinking fails to recognize is that there are important blood vessels in the arms and the legs. Shooting to wound is Hollywood ballistics, not real life. Shooting should only happen when a person has a reasonable belief that the target poses a danger to life. Shooting in that case must be to put an end to the danger.

      This incident happened in the wee hours of the morning. The cops saw someone with what looked like a firearm and a person acting armed. We've seen you argue before that effectively, cops and private citizens have to wait for a bullet to pass through their bodies before they're justified in shooting, but that's nuts.