11-Year-Old Arrested For Using Rubber Band Gun

[blindndead]

OCOEE, Fla. -- An 11-year-old Ocoee boy was arrested for playing with a toy gun. Police said the arrest was necessary, because it was a safety issue.

The boy was using a rubber band gun and his father said the kid did nothing wrong, but police said they take it as a serious threat and the 11-year-old is facing felony charges.

The crime isn't very common, but Ocoee police said it is serious. It centers on an 11-year0old boy and his toy short-barreled shotgun.
click for full story.
http://www.wftv.com/irresistible/13448349/detail.html

 

[Ripach]

The incident started Sunday afternoon, when the 11-year-old was riding in his dad's pickup near Clarke Road and White Road in Ocoee. Someone driving nearby called police after they said the boy pointed what looked like a real gun out the window. The victim told police she was afraid for her life.

This is the kind of thing that officers should have used common sense in dealing with. Sorry the moonbat got scared but come on.

In other the news, the Massachusetts State house in a knee jerk reaction to this Florida incident is calling for tougher regulations regarding the concealed carry and possession of rubber bands. The gov. would like to see a one band per month policy for civilians and an outright ban on large capacity rubber band feeding devices.

 

[drgrant]

Whatever happened to a stiff talking to (to the parent/kid) by the
responding officer? More often than not that would have gotten the
point across without having to resort to dropping a full blown f-bomb on
someone.

-Mike

 

[TomH]

I used to have piles of rubber band guns... I don't recall every getting arrested for using them! Quite ridiculous.

 

[Arioch]

I used to have piles of rubber band guns... I don't recall every getting arrested for using them! Quite ridiculous.

You've given yourself away! The minions of the law will be visiting you in the dark of night to confiscate your evil posesions, and give you a stern talking to. (Unless they're having coffee)

 

[matt1956]

this is pretty effing pathetic. $50.00 says the "victim" is an a**h*** snowbird from MA.

my son rarely leaves the house without some sort of toy gun. Now.. I don't allow him to carry them into stores and such, but when in the car... I allow him to, well... BE A KID!

 

[Chris]

Ah yes, the old "Scare the Liberal" felony.

 

[RKG]

While I suspect there is more to this story than has been reported, based only on what has been reported, you cannot evaluate the situation without breaking it down into its constituents:

1. Is possession of a "rubber band gun" an offense in and of itself? Not in Massachusetts and I strongly doubt in any other state.

2. Is shooting a rubber band at someone and hitting him potentially the crime of battery? Could well be, though an 11-year-old child is unlikely to have formed the requisite criminal intent. And there is nothing in the story that says or implies that any person was hit with rubber band.

3. Is brandishing the rubber band gun (or any other object) at someone with the specific intent of causing that person to fear potentially the crime of assault or assault by means? Presuming the fear would be objectively reasonable (and subjectively factual), it might well be, but again I doubt that a child of that age could form the requisite criminal intent.

 

[matt1956]

Ok... Im gonna say again, EFFING PATHETIC!

1. Even if you paint this black.... it still looks like a toy!

my son has many toy guns/ cap guns that look a lot more real then this. ITS A TOY! Even the father said it is black but looks like a stick.

2. no where does it say that he shot it... simply pointed it. I can say that my kids, hell even I did when I was little, would pretend to be ridding in a army truck and shooting bad guys.

This woman would have been in fear if the kid pointed a magic marker at her from the sounds of it... it is f***ing pathetic.

AT MOST, the pd could have given the kid a "stern talking too" to make the woman happy. He didnt do a f***ing thing wrong. Yes i know that some of us would say that toy or no toy that he was not practicing gun safety. News falsh, not everyone teaches their kids that especially if they themselves do not own guns.

I see nothing, nothing at all that this kid did wrong.

The PD needs a ass kicking and the old woman should drop dead.

 

[Ripach]

+1 Well said Matt!

 

[Weerd Beard]

+1 Well said Matt!

+2. There was NO crime committed. A similar idea would be the old lady calling the cops on some kids eating pixie stix claiming they were selling Coccain.

 

[JonJ]

A crime was committed. The question is, was it properly handled? It certainly could have been handled without charging the cherub.

 

[KMaurer]

A crime was committed. The question is, was it properly handled? It certainly could have been handled without charging the cherub.

OK, I give up. What exactly was the crime that was committed? It certainly wasn't possession without an FID. Since there's no statement that the kid shot the gun or that anyone was hit, it wasn't battery. Unless one actually believes that the kid intended to frighten some one with the toy and that someone actually was frightened and that their fear was reasonable, then it wasn't assault. So what was the crime?

As to whether or not it was handled properly, I suspect that we're pretty much in agreement there.

Ken

 

[JonJ]

In the article it doesn't say just what the FL officers charged him with but in MA it would be Assault by Means of a Dangerous Weapon. The mere pointing of what was considered a "weapon" at a person and placing that person in fear does it.
MGL Chp265S15B

(b) Whoever, by means of a dangerous weapon, commits an assault upon another shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than five years or by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or imprisonment in jail for not more than two and one-half years.

 

[Ripach]

Considering a rubber band launching stick a "Dangerous Weapon" is a stretch in my book. I hope the parents of this child sue for malicious prosecution and for damages due the mental anguish the poor kid has had to endure. This is obviously a case of an antigun agenda being pushed too far.

 

[KMaurer]

In the article it doesn't say just what the FL officers charged him with but in MA it would be Assault by Means of a Dangerous Weapon. The mere pointing of what was considered a "weapon" at a person and placing that person in fear does it.
MGL Chp265S15B

Possibly (though intent is still required) since a "weapon", by definition is capable of inflicting serious harm, thus making any fear reasonable. Given that the rubber band gun in question is neither defined as a weapon by statute nor capable of inflicting serious harm from the distance involved, how would any fear on the part of the complainant (i.e., the neurotic hoplophobe) be reasonable?

Ken

 

[JonJ]

Possibly (though intent is still required) since a "weapon", by definition is capable of inflicting serious harm, thus making any fear reasonable. Given that the rubber band gun in question is neither defined as a weapon by statute nor capable of inflicting serious harm from the distance involved, how would any fear on the part of the complainant (i.e., the neurotic hoplophobe) be reasonable?

Ken

Just telling you like it is. The "victim" thought it real. I don't know why, I never saw it.
The same result could be had with a BB gun, Air Soft, rubber knife, pipe ("Oh I thought it was a shotgun!"). People have been convicted of Assault by Means even when the alleged "weapon" was never found.
As for intent, the article says that he pointed it out the window. It doesn't say that he pointed it at the person. If he indeed pointed it at the person and that person thought it was real, that's it. The "victim" doesn't know that it's not real.

 

[C-pher]

As much as I hate it, I agree with Jon. If we want to hold criminals to this if they use a toy to rob a store, or a finger in their pocket. IT's got to be held across the board.

My only question is what RKG said. Does and 11 year old understand the concept of intent? Or is it just poor thought of playing that he doesn't get yet??

 

[KMaurer]

As much as I hate it, I agree with Jon. If we want to hold criminals to this if they use a toy to rob a store, or a finger in their pocket. IT's got to be held across the board.

I don't dispute at all that people get convicted of assault under a lot of highly questionable circumstances. I've just got a real problem with treating kids playing with toy guns that don't look the least bit realistic the same as we treat career thugs using real guns.

I've also got a problem with treating those thugs who use toy guns the same as those who use real guns. Those laws distinguishing between robbery and armed robbery or assault and assault with a dangerous weapon were written for a reason. People who use real weapons in the commission of a crime are much more likely to end up doing serious harm to some citizen than those who use toys or other props. The harsher penalties were intended to deter the use of dangerous weapons, thus protecting citizens. When criminals start to face the same penalties for using a toy gun or poking their finger against the inside of their pocket to mimic a gun as they would, then they're going start using real guns more often, and a lot more citizens are going to end up dead or seriously injured.

People who oppose the death penalty frequently argue that the high rates of murder back when the death penalty was used on a very regular basis prove that it doesn't deter violent crime. What they're missing is that the death penalty was used so frequently for what we'd consider minor offenses, that there was in reality no penalty for killing every potential witness, since stealing that loaf of bread from the baker's store (i.e., shoplifting) already carried the death penalty. It's the same here. When robbery with a toy gun or pointed finger carries the same penalty as robbery with a loaded 12 gauge shotgun, then in reality there's no penalty whatsoever for carrying the 12 gauge.

Like everyone else, I frequently voice my momentary preference that some particularly annoying criminal be hanged, drawn and quartered (or preferable burned at the stake). Once I've got that out of my system, I acknowledge that I'd prefer laws be a bit more rationally designed to achieve their real purpose, even though the occasional public evisceration of a politician or child molester would provide a huge amount of emotional satisfaction.

Ken