• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

No indictment in police shooting death of Ohio man carrying air rifle

im sure walmart will get sued we always get sued. In a normal walmart store the gun is in the box unsecured and easy to open. That walmarts policy is to have it spider wrapped for anti-theft purposes. So while it might have contributed to the tragedy, it would not be so uncommon to see an air gun outside its box.

"Might have contributed"? I'd bet if the gun was in a wrapped box he would not have been walking around with it. Walmart might change policy and say 'no air gun boxes on the sales floor' if employees cannot follow policy.
 
Why dont you tell me why I subconsciously got into my field, you seem to know for everyone else.

Im sure whatever you do for a living, you do it for the worst reasons. :roll:


You're wasting your anger and unhappy on me, it has no effect. ;)
 
Reading more on this, apparently he was on the phone, however, I could not see that in the video. So, could the officers as they showed up? Did they know that he was on the phone?

This is a tragedy, but the cops couldn't know what was going on, nor did the caller. I have no idea what the caller saw, but what he told the dispatcher was what the police knew, and that was that there was a guy who appeared to be threatening people in Walmart with a gun. They are not going to know what type of gun immediately. They must assume the armed person is a threat until they have information that says that he isn't. Maybe the caller should be investigated but I bet that the caller was just scared and thought he saw stuff that he didn't see. We can't know. Unless it comes out the caller knew the guy or was purposely lying to the 911 operator about what went on, then we can't prove that he didn't believe he saw what he claimed to see at that time.
 
"Might have contributed"? I'd bet if the gun was in a wrapped box he would not have been walking around with it. Walmart might change policy and say 'no air gun boxes on the sales floor' if employees cannot follow policy.

Are you really trying to argue that not following an anti-theft policy is a safety hazard?
 
Are you really trying to argue that not following an anti-theft policy is a safety hazard?

I'm arguing that Walmart not following its own policy contributed to the tragedy.
 
I'm arguing that Walmart not following its own policy contributed to the tragedy.

But the policy in question is an anti-theft policy and has nothing to do with preventing tragedies
 
But the policy in question is an anti-theft policy and has nothing to do with preventing tragedies

Why is it more difficult to steal a wrapped box as opposed to an unwrapped? Presumably, the idea is to prevent the gun from being removed from the box. That seems like a safety idea as well; after all, who would advocate air guns being open access in Walmart. It would just be a matter of time until some kid does something stupid. I don't have access to Walmart's policy statement regarding air guns, so I guess we'll wait for the case.
 
Why is it more difficult to steal a wrapped box as opposed to an unwrapped? Presumably, the idea is to prevent the gun from being removed from the box. That seems like a safety idea as well; after all, who would advocate air guns being open access in Walmart. It would just be a matter of time until some kid does something stupid. I don't have access to Walmart's policy statement regarding air guns, so I guess we'll wait for the case.

The policy is purely for anti-theft purposes, there are plenty of walmarts that dont secure their airguns at all. We only used to secure our air guns over $50 until we moved to a 24 hour super center.
 
The policy is purely for anti-theft purposes, there are plenty of walmarts that dont secure their airguns at all. We only used to secure our air guns over $50 until we moved to a 24 hour super center.

There's a difference between not securing them and leaving them outside a box. I'd argue that the box itself is a safety measure and wrapping is additional attempt to prevent a gun from being removed from a box. I'd scour Walmart's policy statements for any evidence of motive regarding air gun security.

Do you believe the young man would have been walking about with the gun if it had been in a box (let alone wrapped)?
 
I found more video footage showing what happens before. He's pretty much just walking around the store without anyone caring that he is carrying the air rifle:

 
I found more video footage showing what happens before. He's pretty much just walking around the store without anyone caring that he is carrying the air rifle:



Your video clip speeds through the footage (a disservice for context) in the unedited video, you can see around 1:20 or so (on your link) where the woman watches this guy, and leaves. Also, you can see him holding the weapon upright, but the pistol grip.

So no, he was not just "walking around" and I'd expect a cop to respond. I also dont think the cop is wrong for assuming that pellet gun was a rifle.
 
I found more video footage showing what happens before. He's pretty much just walking around the store without anyone caring that he is carrying the air rifle:



I'm wondering why a youtube video is clearer than the video presented in the OP.

In anycase in this video it is easier to see that it looks like the guy swung the rifle somewhat up after the cops said something to him and it also looks like he was bending his knees. Possibly to shoot it, possibly to put it down. Its hard to tell. I personally think that we may have known for sure had the 911 caller not lied. Which he did do. For that reason the police officers were edgy as all get out....which is understandable. That 911 caller lying is what lead to the death of this kid imo.
 
You have to be 18 to buy one by law in most places and by walmart policy just like a gun, and the ones that are sold at walmart have enough power to kill.

Heres a story about a death by a .177 pellet gun

South Auckland air rifle victim named | NZNews | 3 News

One freak accident does not mean that air rifles are as lethal as real rifles. That's all there is to it. They are powered by air, either by pumping, by spring piston, or c02. THey do not cause an explosion the way a powder burner does. You're just wrong about this. Air rifles cannot be technically compared to regular rifles, nor are they as lethal.
 
Bah I pasted the wrong link. I wanted to add the whole video, from the time he walks in to the time he gets shot. I couldn't find it when I made this topic.

Here's the video:

[video]http://www.whio.com/videos/news/surveillance-video-john-crawford-iii-at-walmart/vCtDmK/[/video]
 
I'm wondering why a youtube video is clearer than the video presented in the OP.

In anycase in this video it is easier to see that it looks like the guy swung the rifle somewhat up after the cops said something to him and it also looks like he was bending his knees. Possibly to shoot it, possibly to put it down. Its hard to tell. I personally think that we may have known for sure had the 911 caller not lied. Which he did do. For that reason the police officers were edgy as all get out....which is understandable. That 911 caller lying is what lead to the death of this kid imo.

Possibly to shoot an air rifle? Seriously?
 
Bull. I saw the mother glance over at the guy, say something to the kids, and they left into the garden section, eventhough it looked like they were going to be getting fish. Then she starts looking for someone, probably an employee and it appears like she is gesturing for someone to make a phone call. She walks immediately the other way when she steps back inside, away from the guy with the gun. She obviously felt somewhat threatened by him. Now, I didn't see him point the gun at anyone, however, that doesn't mean the guy talking didn't believe he did. Afterall, we have no idea what angle the guy talking is seeing this from. The guy with the gun was moving the gun around much of the time, swinging it up and down at least.

Yes, indeed, most mothers who supposedly feel threatened, with two small children in tow, will reenter a store where a lunatic is supposedly threatening people with a rifle. And you call bull? That's hilarious.
 
An air gun shoots a metal pellet up to 6 times faster than an electric airsoft gun, they dont have orange tips because they are just as dangerous as real guns and should be treated the same

I get an air gun is dangerous, but let's not get carried away Crovax. There's a reason why our soldier aren't running around carrying air guns...
 
I get an air gun is dangerous, but let's not get carried away Crovax. There's a reason why our soldier aren't running around carrying air guns...

There is also a reason are soldiers arent using .22 guns either, does that mean we should call those toys also?
 
Possibly to shoot an air rifle? Seriously?

I'm going to be blunt here. People are stupid. I have no problems seeing someone attempting to shoot people/cops with even the weakest air gun out there that couldn't hurt a fly much less hurt anyone. And air guns can be deadly. The Crosman MK-711 (which this guy apparently had) is considered as a small game hunting air rifle. It will shoot pellets at 800FPS which is roughly about 3/4 of the speed of a standard .22 bullet. That's still enough to kill someone. Many people don't realize just how deadly an air rifle can be. Back when I was a kid I had a BB pump air gun that would fire a BB at the same fps as a .22 bullet.

Besides all that, the cops had no idea whether it was an air gun when they first arrived or not. An air rifle can look the same as any other real rifle. And if someone lifts it in what could be perceived as a threatening manner then they are going to shoot. And I can't blame them for doing so.
 
There is also a reason are soldiers arent using .22 guns either, does that mean we should call those toys also?

There's some people who go hunting with a .22 gun, now I could be wrong here, but I don't recall people "hunting with air guns". I know of kids shooting bb guns at squirrels though...

Do you have some balistics that can demonstrate that an air gun is just as strong as even a .22 gun, I'd be very interesting in seeing that.

However if the next poster is to be believed, than it seems you are wrong again.

I'm going to be blunt here. People are stupid. I have no problems seeing someone attempting to shoot people/cops with even the weakest air gun out there that couldn't hurt a fly much less hurt anyone. And air guns can be deadly. The Crosman MK-711 (which this guy apparently had) is considered as a small game hunting air rifle. It will shoot pellets at 800FPS which is roughly about 3/4 of the speed of a standard .22 bullet. That's still enough to kill someone. Many people don't realize just how deadly an air rifle can be. Back when I was a kid I had a BB pump air gun that would fire a BB at the same fps as a .22 bullet.

Besides all that, the cops had no idea whether it was an air gun when they first arrived or not. An air rifle can look the same as any other real rifle. And if someone lifts it in what could be perceived as a threatening manner then they are going to shoot. And I can't blame them for doing so.
 
There's some people who go hunting with a .22 gun, now I could be wrong here, but I don't recall people "hunting with air guns". I know of kids shooting bb guns at squirrels though...

Do you have some balistics that can demonstrate that an air gun is just as strong as even a .22 gun, I'd be very interesting in seeing that.

However if the next poster is to be believed, than it seems you are wrong again.

you just claimed an air gun wasnt used for hunting and then used a post claiming it was used for hunting to back up a different argument. I never said an air gun was ballisticly as strong as a .22 only that they both can kill and should be treated as such by police.
 
There's some people who go hunting with a .22 gun, now I could be wrong here, but I don't recall people "hunting with air guns". I know of kids shooting bb guns at squirrels though...

Do you have some balistics that can demonstrate that an air gun is just as strong as even a .22 gun, I'd be very interesting in seeing that.

However if the next poster is to be believed, than it seems you are wrong again.

There is actually quite the market for air guns....

.22 Cal Air Rifles
Benjamin Trail NP XL 1500
Walmart Crosman MK-177 that the guy in the OP had

And I could provide many many links of other airguns used as hunting guns.

As for the ballistics the Benjamin link there shows a gun that has a pellet traveling at 1500 fps. Here is a link to a simple page that shows some .22 bullet speeds. Link

.22 rimfire cartridge 1200–1500 fps
.22 centerfire cartridge 2400–3000 fps
.22 Swift 4000 fps
.38 Special 600 fps
.221 Fireball 2650 fps

That Benjamin link would easily fit within the catagory for the .22 Rimfire cartridge...and the one that the guy in walmart had would easily fit with in the .38 special catagory.
 
I'm going to be blunt here. People are stupid. I have no problems seeing someone attempting to shoot people/cops with even the weakest air gun out there that couldn't hurt a fly much less hurt anyone. And air guns can be deadly. The Crosman MK-711 (which this guy apparently had) is considered as a small game hunting air rifle. It will shoot pellets at 800FPS which is roughly about 3/4 of the speed of a standard .22 bullet. That's still enough to kill someone. Many people don't realize just how deadly an air rifle can be. Back when I was a kid I had a BB pump air gun that would fire a BB at the same fps as a .22 bullet.

Besides all that, the cops had no idea whether it was an air gun when they first arrived or not. An air rifle can look the same as any other real rifle. And if someone lifts it in what could be perceived as a threatening manner then they are going to shoot. And I can't blame them for doing so.

I've got zero experience in the world of guns but you raise an issue here that doesn't make sense to me. I don't understand why people who are adamantly in favour of individual gun ownership and very limited or no restrictions on such individual rights aren't really ticked off and strenuously advocating for far clearer appearance differentiation between "toys" and "weapons".

On numerous occasions, I've heard of people being shot by police because they had a "toy" gun and police believed it was a real weapon and had no way of knowing otherwise. I've also seen it said that toys are supposed to have some orange markings on the barrel that identifies it as a toy, but why are we allowing toy makers to produce and sell toys that have all the appearance of real weapons? Why isn't the entire toy orange? A kid wouldn't care as long as it wasn't pink like a girl's gun.

And why have pellet guns or air guns or whatever the case was here, on display in stores for customers to pick up and carry around, potentially removed from packages, and mistaken for something more dangerous even though from the sounds of it pellet and air guns can be very dangerous themselves?

Perhaps this is just coming from someone with no gun history, but seems to me gun advocates and those who want to protect their gun ownership and possession rights would be damn mad that these kinds of incidents are putting serious, responsible gun owners/advocates in a bad light and just inflaming those who want to take those rights away. Why isn't the NRA lobbying to make toy guns far more distinguishable and why don't they advocate that all weapons that can do serious damage to humans be sold in a controlled store environment?
 
I've got zero experience in the world of guns but you raise an issue here that doesn't make sense to me. I don't understand why people who are adamantly in favour of individual gun ownership and very limited or no restrictions on such individual rights aren't really ticked off and strenuously advocating for far clearer appearance differentiation between "toys" and "weapons".

On numerous occasions, I've heard of people being shot by police because they had a "toy" gun and police believed it was a real weapon and had no way of knowing otherwise. I've also seen it said that toys are supposed to have some orange markings on the barrel that identifies it as a toy, but why are we allowing toy makers to produce and sell toys that have all the appearance of real weapons? Why isn't the entire toy orange? A kid wouldn't care as long as it wasn't pink like a girl's gun.

And why have pellet guns or air guns or whatever the case was here, on display in stores for customers to pick up and carry around, potentially removed from packages, and mistaken for something more dangerous even though from the sounds of it pellet and air guns can be very dangerous themselves?

Perhaps this is just coming from someone with no gun history, but seems to me gun advocates and those who want to protect their gun ownership and possession rights would be damn mad that these kinds of incidents are putting serious, responsible gun owners/advocates in a bad light and just inflaming those who want to take those rights away. Why isn't the NRA lobbying to make toy guns far more distinguishable and why don't the advocate that all weapons that can do serious damage to humans be sold in a controlled store environment?

There are already laws that require manufacturers to make, at the very least, the tip of a toy gun bright orange so there is no need to call for such a law. It already exists. :shrug: And it exists due to those instances that you talk about...kids being shot by police for having a toy gun that looked real. This however will not stop a kid from painting the gun to look real or removing that tip. That kind of thing just simply is not able to be stopped.

As for air guns...they're simply not considered dangerous enough to require such restrictions. Look at this thread for that example. Lots of people consider them a "toy". Indeed, I don't even think that there are any laws forbidden felons from owning an airgun. Think maybe i'll check into that to find out for sure. I as a felon might just get one for home defense since i'm not allowed any other type of gun for home defense.....or maybe a paintball gun....without protective gear those things HURT and would make such a person easily marked and found by police....hmm.....
 
Back
Top Bottom