A BB Gun and a Minor Facial Injury

Funky_Bold_Ribena

peachyprice wrote: »

Can you not see the irony of this comment? You really have made yourself look rather stupid as well as ignorant.

You cant see any of my irony, so what does that make you?

Richard53

For what it's worth, Keystone, I think you have approached the whole matter in a reasonable and balanced way, and demonstrated compassion for all of the children involved (for that is what they are). You don't want to go down the police route unless absolutely necessary for fear of what it will do to the boy himself, which is commendable of you. Mediation, if it is possible, is always a better way to resolve things than going down the judicial route.

Your daughter might be a nasty little racist, who has been instrumental in tormenting a poor mixed-race lad to the point of snapping. Equally, she might be a sweet kid who got involved in a bit of horseplay that got out of hand, and almost got herself blinded by a junior gangster. Point is, you don't know which it is, yet, so how anyone else can pontificate on it is beyond me. If it turns out that your daughter is not quite the innocent she claims to be, I think you have made it clear that you will deal with that in a robust way, and so you should.

What I can't forget in all of this is that a 13-year-old boy took an illegal weapon out with him (perhaps even took it to school), and thought it was OK to pull it out and shoot towards someone. Despite any amount of provocation, that is wrong. If he's carrying a BB gun at 13, what will he be carrying when he is 17, or 24, or 30?

I hope the mediation with the other parents is successful, the boy will learn his lesson, and everyone concerned can move on. But if it isn't, you should turn it over to the police and then step back. Which you have said you will do.

If the boy had been of Middle-Eastern extraction, I can see how the 'terrorist' jibe could be considered racist. But Afro-Carribean people are no more associated with terrorism than Australians. Now you have explained the situation further, I can't see a racist angle in this at all.

Good luck with the meeting.

muckybutt

kaya wrote: »

I have several guns and do a lot of shooting , I would say call the police , next time he pulls a gun of any kind In public he risks the chance of being shot and killed by armed police because they won't wait to get close enough to see if its real or not and quite rightly so , besides which idiots like that give other sensible shooters who operate within the law a bad reputation , you would actually be doing him and his family if the police went round and explained this to him before he gets himself shot with a real gun

Quite right kaya, only the other weekend I had to call our local armed response out for a fire arms incident, a chap whom neither I or our neighbours know invited himself into our neighbours back garden to go a shoot rabbits from behind their hedge ! without their permission, gawd know what he thought he was doing trespassing, as a shooter myself I am fully aware of the laws and armed trespass is a bloody serious offence.

Lucky for this chap he !!!!!!ed off before the arv got here and unfortunately I didn't see the car he left in, folks like that really p me off, total disregard and disrespect for anyone and their property.

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

aliasojo wrote: »

I think you're overthinking too much and basing too much on your assumptions.

He's a young teenager. The age where testosterone is more of a guiding factor than common sense.

And you're assuming its my opinion, rather than thoughts of an alternative perspective.

I've been shot at with an air rifle. Those things can kill when a metal pellet is used. They kill and maim cats, birds and other animals all the time. I reported it to the police and the culprit had to pay me compensation. Difference is, it was an adult who thought it was fun to pretend to be a sniper. Not somebody I knew and had been teasing/joking/irritating/communicating with immediately prior to the event.

aliasojo

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

And you're assuming its my opinion, rather than thoughts of an alternative perspective.

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

................. because he's obviously looking for extreme ways of dealing with those he perceives as hunting in packs.

Sorry Jo but that sounds like your opinion to me.

LannieDuck

keystone wrote: »

Oh no not too late at all. Thank you for the input. Yes I am appalled by his stupidity but is it stupidity born of ignorance and playfulness or is it stupidity borne of wilfull intention to harm. Its a question of degree. Will it be a life lesson for him - I hope so. Is there any merit in dragging the boy through the courts when no harm was actually done. If actual harm had been caused then there would have been no choice but to involve the police instantly. At the moment we have a choice and that involves finding out why it happened. Despit a great deal of speculation and rumour mongering and making him the victim on this thread we don't know. What would be the point in risking turning him into a totally out of control teenage tearaway by exposing him to Feltham Young Offenders institution if it can be dealt with sensibly, responsibly and caringly. Please note that I still have not ruled out taking it to the Police. I decided to allow the opportunity for his parents to have some input first and left it to the school to facilitate that. Thus far that hasn't happened and I'm starting to find that a tad irritating. I'm of the view that I can't leave it muchbeyond tomorrow tbh and (for the benefit of certain others) if that means my daughter is also in deep dwang so be it.

Cheers

I'm not sure I would necessarily want the boy sent off to a young offender's institution either, but I don't think that would happen even with the police involved. The most likely chain of events would be that you reported it to the police, they went to have a word with him and his parents to find out what had happened... and probably not much more.

But it would (I hope) emphasise to him how serious his actions were and make him think twice about doing it again... and perhaps his parents will pay more attention to where he takes the BB gun in future.

KxMx

I can't believe people are vilifying the OP's daughter and ignoring the fact that a 13 year old took a gun out of home and into the public!

Alpha58

alleycat` wrote: »

A Plastic BB shot at 20 feet could easily have been aimed quite "off" to scare someone and then hit them.
They are quite readily wind affected.

Oh dear. BB guns are not controllable. "Aimed off"? What happens in the movies is not real life. You don't "aim for his leg" as there is relatively little chance of hitting the target, you aim for the centre body mass...anyway, the fact that it was out and being fired at all is a grave cause for concern.

alleycat` wrote: »

A sensible police officer to put the "frightners" on also wouldn't go amiss.

No, no, no. The Plod aren't allowed to "put the frighteners on" - once the complaint is made it is recorded as a crime and has to be investigated. The street bobby (not that there is such a thing any more) does not have the discretion to make that decision.

IMHO the "race card" is a red herring. Two wrongs don't make a right and whereas it is completely unacceptable to make comments, pinch scooters etc, I don't personally see it as in the same league as firing a BB gun in a public place and at someone'e face. Or even in the same general direction at a person.

Apart from anything else, using such a thing could easily lead to a concerned member of the public dialling 999 and, before you know it, you have a tactical firearms unit on scene - and trust me, they will aim for the centre mass, not "aim off."

A long winded way of saying report it to the Police but be aware that there is always the possibility of a counter-allegation of a racial hate crime being made.

Whichever way you go - best of luck!

VitaK

Are we seriously seeing a school investigate a firearm incident. This is a serious incident that should be handled by a professional organization that have the necessary knowledge, expertise and tools.

People have been shot dead by BB guns. Please don't settle without involving the police.

alleycat`

Alpha58 wrote: »

Oh dear. BB guns are not controllable. "Aimed off"? What happens in the movies is not real life. You don't "aim for his leg" as there is relatively little chance of hitting the target, you aim for the centre body mass...anyway, the fact that it was out and being fired at all is a grave cause for concern.

I meant that at 20 feet he could have aimed 4 foot to her left and the wind has blown it into her face.

The pellets are light, it has been rather windy recently you might have noticed.

I'm well aware of what you'd aim for if your intent was to hit someone.
Blowing someones knee off with laser guided sniper precision is, as you say, 99.9% of the time movie horlicks.

What i was trying to point out was that it is very possible he didn't aim at her at all.

Does that excuse what he did, not at all.
Should any fire arm, of any caliber, be fired in any way to scare anyone, no of course not.

Should he even have had access to the weapon, no of course not.

Do i think keystone has tried to deal with it in the most proportionate way based on when he became involved then yes i think he has.

The parts about involving an Armed Response Unit as others have alluded to is relevant to the boys "education" which is where i was coming from with regards to police "frightners".

That's my opinion on what we've been told by one party of an incident he didn't see.