"Our bad, he was armed though." This isn't a direct quote from the Brownsville Police Department, but it's pretty much their stance on the shooting at Cummings Middle School.
The eighth grade boy killed by Brownsville, Texas police yesterday morning was armed, alright-with a pellet gun. Police said the weapon resembled the real deal (which it does) after they fired multiple shots at 15-year-old Jaime Gonzalez (last photo), one of which struck him it the head.
Of course the Brownsville PD is defending their actions, saying that they repeatedly told Gonzalez to drop the gun, but did they really need to put one in the head of a minor? Couldn't they have just fired shots to take him down, as his father suggested?
Imagine having to explain fatally shooting a kid, then imagine having to explain fatally shooting a kid who wasn't armed with a real weapon. Should he have had the gun? Of course not, but regardless of how you explain it, this situation looks terrible.
As an officer of the law, how do you deal with knowing you killed a kid who wasn't even really armed?
[via Gawker and the AP]