Authorities described the student as a juvenile male but did not provide further identification or specifics pending an investigation
Wisconsin police shot and killed a student who officials say came to a local middle school with a gun. The student never got into the school, but as a precaution the entire district was put on a lockdown late Wednesday morning.
Students have since been reunited with their parents, some of whom waited up to five hours for their children to be dropped at a bus storage center in Mount Horeb, a village about 20 miles south-west of Madison, the state capital, according to WMTV 15 news.
No other students or staff were injured in the shooting, Josh Kaul, Wisconsin’s attorney general, said during a Wednesday news conference.
This was still a school shooting. Justified or not, a child was still murdered.
You must be confused about the definition of murder.
Here’s a hint: if it’s a justified shooting, it’s not murder. Murder requires premeditation.
Murder doesn’t require premeditation. That’s a specific kind of murder.
Murder is a specific kind of homicide which is defined as the “unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.”
And that’s just the Cornell Law School page. It’s actually much more complex than what’s linked above. You’re out of your element, son.
I was more so responding in regards to the original posters comment regarding the lack of justification as distinguishing this act from murder. If the police officers were allowed to kill him under the law, it is not murder. Murder, by my sources (which show the English-language definition) as well as yours (which show the legal definition), is a legal term that applies to a subset of acts of homicide.
If the child shot or even aimed at police, the police shoot back. That’s how it works in this country.
Should be any country. Cops deserve to go home to their family too
Here is the question though. Does this rule apply to just them? Does it apply to others with respect to them?
If not, how do you deal with the police abusing the power this gives them?
If yes, how do you avoid constant bloodbaths of people shooting each other because they all had guns?
Seems like dishonest questions from you here. You responded as if I implied scenario that solves all problems ever in policing because you jumped right at it with some “well what about …” comments.
At the heart of what I am saying is cops have families and deserve safety like any other worker. I would expect anyone with a job who goes into dangerous situations are kept safe. Cops are unique in that their safety is threatened by other people. There are so many problems with police, right now this “on killing” attitude that infected police forces needs to be purged. Doesn’t negate what I said though.
You agreed and expanded, saying this is how it should work in every country and treated it as an issue of police safety, bringing up their families.
We can agree on this. Everyone worker has a right to be reasonably safe. There are definitely workers whose jobs regularly expose them to situations that can be dangerous.
I dispute the uniqueness claim. I would agree that their profession places them in situations where people may be dangerous more often than the average profession, for sure. They are not, however, unique in this. What’s unique to them is that they are issued a firearm, granted qualified immunity, treated as heroes by default, and dropped into a union often willing to sacrifice public safety as a “bargaining” tactic.
The current mentality resulting from police “warrior” training and support like you espouse is 1) Anyone and everyone could be a threat 2) An officer’s first duty is to themself and their own safety.
I think it is pretty obvious that obsessing over officer safety and exaggerating the danger they are in has led to the police violence that we see today. If an officer believes a civilian is dangerous and has a gun they follow the logic and kill them. They get pats on the back from their buddies and are defended vehemently by their supervisors and peers who often cover for any holes/inconsistencies in the story of why lethal force was necessary.
A cop doesn’t need to be an abusive, racist, hateful, violent psychopath to kill an innocent kid. They just need to be hyped up and afraid for their life. All it takes is for the kid to reach into their pocket for a cell phone.
Yet we’re discussion an instance where a kid brings a gun to school and is killed and sounds like you’re assuming the cop is automatically wrong.
Agreed on that as well. The police union is out of control. I also have issue with stories of police harassing and terrorizing anyone that comes at them and holding them accountable. Even lawyers at time sound like they are afraid to do this because the work with police often in courts and doing so would put a target on them.
I think over time the job probably affects the brain in a way most people don’t sympathize with. Its something I don’t understand. I laugh and get angry at all the same videos you all do. I go through phases where I hate cops and phases where I understand its not easy what they do. I just don’t feel like the current sentiment is accurate.
Last I understand it, there is no additional context. No shootout, nobody held at gunpoint, etc. Just “a report of an individual with a weapon” or “a report of a person with a gun”. No injuries reported other than a dead student. Other articles I’ve read never explicitly state the student had a gun. Not saying they didn’t - it’s just not clear to me.
It sounded like you are assuming the cops were automatically right and that the student was a clear and present danger. The way things are going, I wouldn’t be surprised to find out it was a minority kid with an airsoft or squirt gun.
While I admit that police work can be stressful, it’s often because they refuse to let it be otherwise. “Defund the police” was a movement to ensure police were only called when needed and that other types of emergency responders who are trained to handle domestic situations or unstable individuals… but the unions wanted the money.
Overtime isn’t exactly because they are short staffed… it’s often because it pays well. I’ve heard of officers fighting to get more overtime or being denied it as a form of punishment.
The whole system is fucked and it has gotten to the point where being a cop means you haven’t been ostracized and kicked out for trying to fix it or left in disgust. It means you are part of the problem. That’s why ACAB.