[Vision2020] Local News - Victim's father delays inquest after coroner bars his testimony

[TIM RIGSBY]

Chas:

Thanks for your perspective.  I agree with most of what you say however, 
given that the officer was notfied by dispatch that the gun was unloaded, 
knowing that the person in question was only 16, I feel as though the Boise 
Police Department could have approached the situation differently.  Before 
the officer arrived on scene, he could have loaded rubber bullets, he could 
have made sure his tazer was within reach, or he could has possibly tried 
mace.  This is indeed a unique situation where a child has been shot, 
however, I feel as though police departments all across the country need to 
address situations that involve youth much differently.  Non-lethal forms of 
submission benefit far more than killing youth who may actually learn from 
an experience such as this.

Tim

P.S. How much time do you think the average officer spends practicing his or 
her shot?  If this time is spent wisely it is possible that the officer 
could have made a clear shot into the youths leg or arm forcing him to the 
ground with pain.

Revolution is not a word but an application; it is not war but peace; it 
does not weaken, but strengthens. Revolution does not cause separation; it 
generates togetherness.
-John Africa, Strategic RevolutionC


>From: Chasuk <chasuk at gmail.com>
>To: tim.rigsby at hotmail.com
>CC: Vision2020 at moscow.com
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Local News - Victim's father delays inquest after 
>coroner bars his testimony
>Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 12:11:24 -0800
>
>On 11/16/05, The Idaho Statesman <contact at idahostatesman.com> wrote:
>
> > There really has to be a better way to subdue children and youth who are 
>acting violently than shooting them with real bullets.  As near as I can 
>tell from this shooting, the cop could have used a tazer, rubber bullets, 
>or mace instead of killing this kid.  Hopefully some good will come from 
>this inquest.
>
>I read this differently.  Officer Andrew S. Johnson arrives at the a
>scene of a disturbance in which a young man, Matthew Jones, is in
>possession of a rifle, and that rifle has a bayonet attached.  This
>young man has already struck the bayonet into the drywall ceiling of
>his father's home.  The father of the boy yells "Look out!" and the
>officer turns and fires.  My reaction would likely have been the same.
>
>The father indicates that his son got as near as 12 feet of the
>officer, and the words "Look Out!" certainly implies that the boy was
>in the act of charging the officer.  If my back was turned to a
>violent young man who was carrying a weapon -- and that young man was
>possibly as near as a few quick strides away -- I would certainly heed
>the warning of his father and take whatever action was necessary to
>prevent myself from coming to harm.  This is how I read the story.
>
>I don't know whether police officers are routinely equipped with
>tasers, rubber bullets, or mace.  If they are, then it can perhaps be
>wondered why they were not used, but in a life-threatening situation
>with no time for indecision, the instinctual response is often the
>most lethal one, and this truism applies no less to police officers
>than it does to anyone else.
>
>The question is: did the boy actually hit Johnson in the back with the
>bayonet, as he claims? Yes or no, I consider the officer's actions
>justified.
has

_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® 
Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963