Police Open Fire Because They Mistook a Cell Phone for a Gun

Advocates of gun control want to grant a monopoly on gun ownership to the state. If they managed to get their way people like this would be the only individuals who could either own guns or determine who can own guns:

Las Vegas police responded to a call of a suicidal man who pulled out a cell phone and pointed it at them, perhaps to record them, prompting an officer to shoot at him.

The officer missed but the man fell to the ground anyway where police arrested him.

“The individual reached into his pocket, he pulled out a dark object, pointed it at the sergeant in a manner like he would be firing a pistol,” explained Deputy Chief Al Salinas of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department in the above video.

Thank Odin that police officers are notoriously bad shots. Unfortunately they’re also very bad at determining whether or not an object in somebody’s hand is a weapon or not. Personally, I’ve never mistook a cell phone for a firearm before and when somebody pulls out a cell phone and points it at me my first assumption is that they’re recording me.

We all know how this case will turn out, the officers who opened fire will be given a paid vacation until this fiasco blows over. After the media is done covering the incident the officers will be cleared of any wrongdoing and will return to the streets where they can open fire on another unarmed person. Meanwhile the person who was shot at will likely be charged:

The man, who has not been identified, will most likely be charged with assault with a deadly weapon as well as battery with a deadly weapon because prior to the shooting, he had been throwing landscaping rocks at the officers, according to Salinas.

Welcome to America.

3 thoughts on “Police Open Fire Because They Mistook a Cell Phone for a Gun”

  1. Police should be held to a higher standard than ordinary people, but I think you are asking for too much. I’ve never had to identify the difference between a weapon and a cellphone fast enough to avoid getting shot, while someone who knows I’m armed is throwing rocks at me. If that’s the standard, then George Zimmerman is automatically guilty.

    1. In general I look at it this way: if a person without a badge and state costume were to perform the same act would they be found guilty or innocent?

      I tend to believe that a person lacking a badge and costume would be found guilty of murder if they shot somebody who had drawn a cell phone. In the case of George Zimmerman the primary criteria is whether or not Zimmerman or Martin initiated force. Since the police were responding to a call regarding a suicidal man such criteria may not be applicable.

  2. A normal person has the option of leaving if someone is acting violently irrational. A policeman doesn’t have that option–that’s the main reason I’ll give the police more latitude here–but I’d give the same latitude to non-police unable to leave.

    I’d love to get to the point where cases like this were the primary abuse of police power we had to deal with, just like I’d like to get to where we are seriously considering privately owned operational tanks.

Comments are closed.