Idaho police officers opened fire from behind a chain-link fence just seconds after exiting their patrol cars and critically wounded a teenage boy — described by his family as nonverbal, autistic and intellectually disabled — as he stepped toward them with a knife, video from a witness shows.
Seventeen-year-old Victor Perez, who also has cerebral palsy, remained hospitalized in critical condition Tuesday after having nine bullets removed from his body and having his leg amputated, Ana Vazquez, his aunt, told The Associated Press. Doctors were planning tests on his brain activity.
The shooting Saturday in Pocatello outraged the boy’s family and neighbors as well as viewers online who questioned why the officers opened fire within about 12 seconds of exiting their patrol cars while making no apparent effort to de-escalate the situation or use less lethal weapons. Dozens of protesters gathered outside the police department Sunday, eastidahonews.com reported.
When thinking of calling the police on someone, you have to first ask yourself, "is this a situation where the significant chance of death to the person versus the amount of danger they pose to others is really a risk worth taking? Because there are definitely cases where the answer is clearly Yes. We don’t want to let a victim get killed or raped or beaten by ignoring a threat, but we also don’t want to get someone killed when what they’re doing requires restraint, but not the death penalty.
But oftentimes the best course isn’t clear. In a healthy society, we could call properly trained authorities worthy of being trusted to handle those situations, who would be trained on things like how to de-escalate, how to use only the amount of force actually necessary while ensuring people’s safety, and who have been psychologically evaluated to weed out those with personality traits that would make them unsuitable for such a role.
But our police forces are not that–they are basically the exact opposite of that.