The California Justice Department announced today that it has found no cause to file chargesagainst a Los Angeles police officer who, while aiming at a suspect, shot and killed a 14-year-old girl hiding in a department store fitting room. 

Fourteen-year-old Valentina Orellana Peralta was picking out a quinceanera dress with her mother just before Christmas in 2021. She was shot and killed by a bullet that ricocheted off the floor.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 145 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

So far, sentiment seems very understanding of the tough situation and a call that had unforeseen circumstances.

Except, oh wait, it’s all bullshit passive voice copaganda.

From the literal article:

Los Angeles officer Jordan Head had a 40-millimeter bean bag gun, but before he could aim it at the suspect, Jones fired his AR-15 three times.

Head “did not discharge the 40-millimeter launcher because, before he could aim, rounds were fired, and the suspect fell to the ground and was no longer an immediate threat,” according to the Justice Department analysis of the shooting.

Officer Michael Mazur, who assumed command of the scene on arrival, told Jones to “slow down” multiple times, and at some point later told Head “It’s f—– up.  We tried to slow it down.”

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 63 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    How does someone come to a point where police going around with an AR-15 is even legal, much less common?

    What kind of large field ops with trained & organised counterparty are they expecting to encounter on a daily basis outside of an active warzone? And in a store?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    All it took was two dudes in body armor robbing a bank for every cop in America to shit their pants in fear. They're so afraid of being helpless again that they went and bought fucking tanks.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    How does someone come to a point where police going around with an AR-15 is even legal, much less common?

    I've only seen this once in my life, when I was visiting Paris, and the cops were casually lounging around with rifles.

    In America, generally a cop will carry a pistol, and keep rifles or shotguns in their car (in the trunk).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Are you sure they were cops? We've had soldiers patrolling on and off since the terrorist attacks, and I don't think French cops carry anything other than handguns during their normal shift.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Oh, that's possible. I tend to instinctively assume American rules wherever I go since they're what I know, and we virtually never deploy our military domestically, so I wouldn't have thought to try to distinguish cops from the military.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I went to London which now feels like over two decades ago and was told they only have batons... Like 7 out of 10 cops had MP5s strapped casually to the side of them. Looking back I am like maybe 9/11 response? But that's still like a couple years after. I don't know, coming from the US I thought that was crazy. Some of our cops have shotguns usually, and in some towns, rifles in their car, and they are almost never used.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    Paris, like many big European cities, is a major terrorist target. It's been hit numerous times, so they're a bit on edge there. When the alert level is high, you'll see military patrols as well. Although the effectiveness of those is dubious.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 80 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] 63 points 2 years ago (4 children)
    1. Treat every gun as if is loaded

    2. Never point your gun at anything you aren’t willing to destroy

    3. Keep your finger off the trigger and out of the trigger guard until you are ready to shoot

    4. Be aware of your target and what’s beyond it

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 47 points 2 years ago (1 child)
    1. The cop was fully aware it was loaded.

    2. The cop was willing to destroy the target.

    3. The cop was ready to shoot immediately.

    4. The cop couldn't give less of a shit what's beyond their target.

    You don't know cops very well.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    You’re missing the point. Anyone who is unable to follow firearm safety should be disqualified from holding a position that will require the use of a firearm.

    Your flippant attitude doesn’t help anything. Yes, peace officers seem to have no moral code and are currently a detriment to society. However, resigning them to your point of view is somewhere between pessimistic and harmful. We must be open to changing this system for the betterment of society.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago

    My flippant attitude is based on this article.

    I don't disagree that you shouldn't have a gun if you can't follow basic safety protocols. Unfortunately, California (and the rest of America overall) does disagree. Which was my point.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    You’re missing the point. Anyone who is unable to follow firearm safety should be disqualified from holding a position that will require the use of a firearm.

    But thanks to the 2nd Amendment anyone who is unable to follow those rules can have multiple guns

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 44 points 2 years ago

    Ah yes. The classic "We investigated ourselves and found we did nothing wrong defence."

    Things like these need to be held by an independent team and no info given about those involved, e.g. the shooter was a police officer. Some people keep saying the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. The fact the shooter was an officer should have no bearing on the outcome then.

    Also, getting an independent team means new jobs for people. Get better results and be a job creator.

  • source
  • [–] 44 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Remind me again why vigilante justice is discouraged in favor of unhinged cops?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 32 points 2 years ago
    [–] 20 points 2 years ago

    How is it not negligence? If a citizen did the same thing, they would get charged with negligence.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago

    Deny justice long enough and people will get their own in the worst way possible.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago

    Step 1: Take away cops guns. No lethal weapons for cops. Not a SWAT team? No guns.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago

    The cops show up and kill more people than the suspect. How surprising.

  • source
  • [+] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] 36 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    There was an active shooter

    No, there wasn't. Dude was hitting people with a bike lock. The only way it comes out differently is if you hold the police accountable for their horrible judgement, but clearly we're not going to do that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    There were two separate 911 calls reporting an active shooter from people hiding in the store (apparently both mistook the smashing of glass as the sound of a gunshot), the officers that responded treated it as an active shooter situation because that's what they were told it was

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago

    Showing up ready for a shooter because that's what was reported is prudent. Being cautious as though a shooter may appear soon because that's what was reported is prudent. Shooting to kill someone not armed with a gun while other parties are present and while your cohort has nonlethal weapons on hand and ready to use instead isn't prudent any more

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›