Oklahoma Police Kill 5-Year Old Boy While Shooting at Snake

[Jay Cunningham]

Oklahoma Police Kill 5-Year Old Boy While Shooting at Snake

Know your target and what's beyond your target. Don't do stupid things.

[nationwide]

I feel safer already!

[ST911]

Tragedy, for everyone.

[Buckaroo]

Prayers for the family (and the officers too).

[Striker5]

My prayers go out to the family and to the officer. I had a buddy who killed a guy in a car accident (buddy's fault) - the effects are life altering.

[Joe Mamma]

I'd like to hear the details of this shooting. I'd like to think that there's more to it than we think.

Joe Mamma

[Dport]

Everyone is fallible. That's why rule #4 always applies.

[the1911fan]

I'd like to hear the details of this shooting. I'd like to think that there's more to it than we think.

Joe Mamma

I wonder what details you suspect would make a difference? The kid was far down range and he was shot in the head right in front of his Grandpa.

What "more" to it would make it even close to reasonable. And for the officer who shot the child...his life should be altered forever.

and to the OP IMO this is way beyond doing "a stupid thing"...it's criminal

[Safetyhit]

Seems odd that the officer shot what one would assume is up into the tree, yet one shot hits near the child, then the second hits him. Really bad odds if shooting at an upward angle. As the story states, the guilty officers then walked to the scene and acted as though they did not know what happened. The grandfather says they "came out of the bushes" after the shooting, suggesting they came from close by.

How did the bullets fall so fast as to hit the child who apparently was nearby? If they shot up and then they fell, that would likely have been some distance away. If they shot that low, then surely they were negligent for not checking who what was in the bullets path first.

Of course, I am not insinuating in any way that the story is anything other than an accident, but it does seem like they almost certainly used extremely bad judgement if they shot as low as I suspect they did in what must be at least a semi-populated area.

[John_Wayne777]

I wonder what details you suspect would make a difference?

That maybe there was a compelling reason for the officer in this case to fire her sidearm at a snake, rather than what appears to be an utterly negligent use of her weapon.

From what I have read around the various boards thusfar, it seems that this was in a fairly densely populated area and that the snake wasn't presenting a real threat to any human beings.....meaning it sounds like a giant charlie foxtrot, if you know what I mean.

The expression of hope is that there is something missing from the accounts we know of thusfar that would explain her decisions.