Are BB guns deadly weapons?

[EVT1]

Considering the recent news of the child shot dead in two seconds and the man in Wal-Mart- both 'armed' with BB guns and if I remember correct dispatch was on notice that in at least the one case that the kid had a BB gun I have to ask in this case:

news.yahoo.com/cops-man-fires-bb-gun-11-old-said-155552681.html

Why was this man not charged with attempted murder?  If self-defense flies against a BB gun......

     A Pennsylvania man shot an 11-year-old boy in the chest with a BB gun on a playground because he said the boy had previously shot his own young son with the same kind of weapon, authorities said Monday.

     Albert Clark, 31, of McKeesport, approached the boy Sunday outside the former George Washington Elementary School and fired twice, police said. The boy fell to the ground, saying he couldn't breathe, and was later hospitalized in critical condition, police said

     Clark told investigators he then gave the weapon to a child who "was walking up the street," according to a criminal complaint.

     He faces charges including aggravated assault, reckless endangerment and evidence tampering and was held in the county jail on $250,000 bail pending a June 1 preliminary hearing.

What an idiot.

[Deleted]

I would classify a BB gun as "deadly-ish".

Get hit in the eye, temple or ear canal? Yup... possibly going to be dead.
Get hit in the knee, stomach, sternum, or other "non-head" area? Nope. Not even remotely likely to be "life threatening".


The preceding however assumes that when the weapon is pointed at you, that you KNOW it's a BB gun.

[EVT1]

May 25, 2015 20:46:16 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

I would classify a BB gun as "deadly-ish".

Get hit in the eye, temple or ear canal? Yup... possibly going to be dead.
Get hit in the knee, stomach, sternum, or other "non-head" area? Nope. Not even remotely going to be "life threatening".


The preceding however assumes that when the weapon is pointed at you, that you KNOW it's a BB gun.

So like a slingshot? Didn't that kill Goliath

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

May 25, 2015 20:28:38 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Considering the recent news of the child shot dead in two seconds and the man in Wal-Mart- both 'armed' with BB guns and if I remember correct dispatch was on notice that in at least the one case that the kid had a BB gun I have to ask in this case:

news.yahoo.com/cops-man-fires-bb-gun-11-old-said-155552681.html

Why was this man not charged with attempted murder?  If self-defense flies against a BB gun......

     A Pennsylvania man shot an 11-year-old boy in the chest with a BB gun on a playground because he said the boy had previously shot his own young son with the same kind of weapon, authorities said Monday.

     Albert Clark, 31, of McKeesport, approached the boy Sunday outside the former George Washington Elementary School and fired twice, police said. The boy fell to the ground, saying he couldn't breathe, and was later hospitalized in critical condition, police said

     Clark told investigators he then gave the weapon to a child who "was walking up the street," according to a criminal complaint.

     He faces charges including aggravated assault, reckless endangerment and evidence tampering and was held in the county jail on $250,000 bail pending a June 1 preliminary hearing.

What an idiot.

Bottom line: do you want a conviction? I do. And you're not going to see a conviction for attempted murder.

[EVT1]

But if the kid dies- it will be murder. Seems to me that if you intentionally shoot someone with a device that can kill.......

[Deleted]

May 27, 2015 12:29:56 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

But if the kid dies- it will be murder. Seems to me that if you intentionally shoot someone with a device that can kill.......

If I were on the jury, I wouldn't vote to convict. Intent is a very important consideration to me. Using a BB gun means there was no INTENT to kill.

[EVT1]

May 27, 2015 18:11:55 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

May 27, 2015 12:29:56 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

But if the kid dies- it will be murder. Seems to me that if you intentionally shoot someone with a device that can kill.......

If I were on the jury, I wouldn't vote to convict. Intent is a very important consideration to me. Using a BB gun means there was no INTENT to kill.

If the kid dies how far would you go- voluntary or involuntary manslaughter? Negligent homicide?

Of course the gun should matter as well- there is a lot of difference between the old Daisy spring BB gun and an air rifle.

[Deleted]

May 27, 2015 19:37:19 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

May 27, 2015 18:11:55 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

If I were on the jury, I wouldn't vote to convict. Intent is a very important consideration to me. Using a BB gun means there was no INTENT to kill.

If the kid dies how far would you go- voluntary or involuntary manslaughter? Negligent homicide?

Of course the gun should matter as well- there is a lot of difference between the old Daisy spring BB gun and an air rifle.

I could go for "negligent homicide". But would a DA offer that as a "lesser charge" when going for that "Murder 1" or "Murder 2" conviction? That's the real question...

[mroped]

Some BB guns can be lethal. They deliver the shot with a 7-800ft/second or more in the case of air guns -12-1300ft/second.
By comparison, a bow sends the arrow at 3-400ft/second ofcourse the difference being that the projectile is sharp versus rounded on the BB and the weight of the projectile.

If that kid dies, I could see the man charged with negligent homicide since you can't charge him for stupidity but the DA will most likely go for M1 or2 and fail miserably.
It seems that many DA are going for the bigger charges for no apparent reason. Do they all want to become famous or something or what is all that about?

[EVT1]

May 27, 2015 20:44:34 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

May 27, 2015 19:37:19 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

If the kid dies how far would you go- voluntary or involuntary manslaughter? Negligent homicide?

Of course the gun should matter as well- there is a lot of difference between the old Daisy spring BB gun and an air rifle.

I could go for "negligent homicide". But would a DA offer that as a "lesser charge" when going for that "Murder 1" or "Murder 2" conviction? That's the real question...

Usually a jury has the option of lesser included offenses.  When it comes to the cops in Baltimore you can be sure if there is a conviction it it will be similar- as I do not believe there was an intent to kill.  But the bill has to be paid.

[truthbound]

May 25, 2015 20:28:38 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Are BB guns deadly weapons?

If you are a Leftyloon yes.

[Deleted]

May 27, 2015 21:48:21 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

May 27, 2015 20:44:34 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

I could go for "negligent homicide". But would a DA offer that as a "lesser charge" when going for that "Murder 1" or "Murder 2" conviction? That's the real question...

Usually a jury has the option of lesser included offenses.  When it comes to the cops in Baltimore you can be sure if there is a conviction it it will be similar- as I do not believe there was an intent to kill.  But the bill has to be paid.

Note the bolded word. The DA must include it as a charge for the jury to have it as an option. They can't just pick charges on their own.

That's what I question... would a DA include it?

[EVT1]

May 28, 2015 18:23:02 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

May 27, 2015 21:48:21 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Usually a jury has the option of lesser included offenses.  When it comes to the cops in Baltimore you can be sure if there is a conviction it it will be similar- as I do not believe there was an intent to kill.  But the bill has to be paid.

Note the bolded word. The DA must include it as a charge for the jury to have it as an option. They can't just pick charges on their own.

That's what I question... would a DA include it?

The DA does not have to charge it for a judge to instruct the jury on lesser included offenses- I am sure state law varies. 

[Deleted]

May 28, 2015 20:51:24 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

May 28, 2015 18:23:02 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Note the bolded word. The DA must include it as a charge for the jury to have it as an option. They can't just pick charges on their own.

That's what I question... would a DA include it?

The DA does not have to charge it for a judge to instruct the jury on lesser included offenses- I am sure state law varies. 

Must be a state by state thing... several years ago, my brother was telling me about a trial he was a member of the jury on... and they wanted to convict on a lesser charge, but couldn't because the DA hadn't offered it as a charge, so they "Not Guilty"d the guy... because they didn't agree that any of the pressed charges applied.

[EVT1]

It is- as a general rule a judge will instruct the jury on lessers- and really the judge can do it regardless of the DA or the defense.  This is a ripe area of law- but it is more substantive. It is almost simple- a jury should be advised of these offenses because if the prosecutor cannot prove all of the elements of a high offense, but proved the elements of a lessor offense then it should matter.

Murder vs manslaughter, rape vs. sexual assault, etc. etc.

In TN the jury is going to get the option. That's the only law I can speak to. But you will find it in pattern jury instructions, judicial conferences, case law, etc.  In this state the judge makes the call.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

May 27, 2015 19:37:19 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

May 27, 2015 18:11:55 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

If I were on the jury, I wouldn't vote to convict. Intent is a very important consideration to me. Using a BB gun means there was no INTENT to kill.

If the kid dies how far would you go- voluntary or involuntary manslaughter? Negligent homicide?

Of course the gun should matter as well- there is a lot of difference between the old Daisy spring BB gun and an air rifle.

I would not go negligent homicide because of the "knew or should have known" problem.  It is not reasonable to conclude that he "knew or should have known" a BB gun could be fatal because he was doing it out of revenge for the kid shooting his own child with the same kind of gun, and it clearly didn't cause death.  So, it's not purely intent, but the question of would a reasonable person be expected to know that a BB gun is a deadly weapon? Answer: no.

This is the problem with mixing politics into the legal system.  You cannot convict someone for not having the same fringe left views as you.  Trying to do so, while ignoring what the law actually provides in these situations is how you will see an acquittal for someone that clearly needs to be convicted of aggravated assault.

[zibazinski]

I actually went and looked at some BB guns. Honestly, my only experience was watching them on the Chrstmas story show. Damn, they look real!!! My fear is kids farting around being kids and getting shot because someone thinks their gun is real. WTF is wrong with people? How many kids get to die because some manufacturer makes a toy gun look real?

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

May 30, 2015 7:30:11 GMT -5 zibazinski said:

I actually went and looked at some BB guns. Honestly, my only experience was watching them on the Chrstmas story show. Damn, they look real!!! My fear is kids farting around being kids and getting shot because someone thinks their gun is real. WTF is wrong with people? How many kids get to die because some manufacturer makes a toy gun look real?

Yeah, I'm torn about the issue. On the one hand there is the outside chance it will be mistaken for a real gun- and that generally only happens in the rare cases it does because the person / kid wielding it intends for it to be perceived as real.  On the other hand, there is the total wussification of the country where everything kids have is made of pink or orange plastic- nothing looks particularly badass, and they have to do everything they do from bike riding to water balloon fights with it with a helmet and goggles on.

[zibazinski]

I know. It's a tough call.