Colorado boy facing felony charges in airsoft gun mishap

[QUOTE]JEFFERSON COUNTY, Colo. -- [B]A 13-year-old[/B] Jefferson County boy says [B]he knows what he did was wrong, but says it was an accident[/B] and he never intended to hurt anyone when he shot his toy airsoft gun at a friend, who was hit in the eye.

His parents say their son deserves to be punished, but believe juvenile felony assault charges go too far.

But the [B]Jefferson County District Attorney’s Office says[/B] they take many factors into account, and when they decide to file charges[B] it’s because they believe it’s in the best interest of the child.[/B]

The 13 year old, Jacob Alspaugh, tells Fox 31 News he and a friend were just messing around with a toy airsoft gun, shooting at each other and shooting at targets like cereal boxes.

When the other boy said something that made Jacob mad, he did what he calls a “quick draw,” and fired the plastic bead. To his horror, he hit his friend in the eye.

“When it happened I felt sick and I kept saying I’m so sorry, I’m so sorry,” said the teen.

[B]The other boy was treated and is fine with no permanent injuries. Police reports say his family did not want to press charges, and Jacob says he and his friend have made up. [/B]

[B]“We just talked a while about me giving him an Xbox 360 and I gave him that one night just as a ‘sorry’ present," Alspaugh said. "He forgave me. He knows I’m sorry, so we’re back to friends.”[/B]

But according to police reports, the treating doctor says the plastic bead could have caused serious bodily injury, and the Jefferson County DA’s office is charging the 13-year-old as a juvenile with felony second degree assault charges.

[B]“The judge mentioned if convicted, he has a mandatory five days in detention and he can be removed from my home for up to a year,” said Jacob's father,[/B] Craig Alspaugh.

Jefferson County DA Scott Storey says they can’t comment on any specific juvenile case, but he says they take many things into account. They look at school records, and juvenile experts evaluate the child and bring up any psychological or mental health issues. They also consider what might be going on in the home and he says they do what they believe to be in the best interest of the child.

“We really want to give them the resources to make them successful, in the future, at school, at home, with their friends and everything else,” said Storey.

[B]FOX31 News tested an identical airsoft toy gun and fired it at a piece of notebook paper. Sometimes the plastic beads went through the paper and sometimes they bounced off. [/B] Firearms expert and former [B]police officer Rich Wyatt says, “It’s a toy, it’s an airsoft gun that can be purchased in any store. You don’t have to be any age to purchase it.”[/B] Wyatt says there was a time when parents, not prosecutors handled this kind of accident.

The father says at a court hearing earlier in the week the DA’s office offered his son a plea bargain, reducing the charge to misdemeanor assault. There would be no detention time, but Jacob would go into a diversion program that would provide counseling on a variety of issues. If he stayed out of trouble, his record would be expunged, and his records would remain sealed, as are all juvenile records.

Alspaugh says they are considering the plea bargain, but he worries any kind of plea would result in Jacob being expelled from school, kicked off the football team and further stigmatize him at school.[/QUOTE]

[URL="http://www.kdvr.com/news/kdvr-jeffco-boy-facing-felony-charges-over-airsoft-gun-20110127,0,4458661.story"]link[/URL]


:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

I was shot in the eye a few years ago from about 10 feet away.
Accidents happen.


No reason the law should be involved unless there was serious damage done

Eye injury matters are not to be taken lightly.

[QUOTE=bigkingsfan]Eye injury matters are not to be taken lightly.[/QUOTE]
but if both parties agreed to settle amicably why generate a fuss, there better things to waste time on. Accident is a accident.

[QUOTE=ErhnamDjinn]but if both parties agreed to settle amicably why generate a fuss, there better things to waste time on. Accident is a accident.[/QUOTE]
seriously.

[QUOTE=kentatm][URL="http://www.kdvr.com/news/kdvr-jeffco-boy-facing-felony-charges-over-airsoft-gun-20110127,0,4458661.story"]link[/URL]


:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm[/QUOTE]

Exactly :facepalm

I'm thinking I'm about to read a horror story. The journalist who kept up with this story needs a hobby.

[QUOTE=Captain Kirk]Exactly :facepalm

I'm thinking I'm about to read a horror story. The journalist who kept up with this story needs a hobby.[/QUOTE]

:wtf: This IS a horror story.

A DA is trying to pin a felony on a 13 year old kid for accidentally shooting his friend in the face with a toy gun.

Do you not realize how serious a charge that is?

The boys have made up and are still friends. The parents of the kid that got shot don't even want charges pressed.

This is about a power mad DA that is WAY overstepping his bounds and in all likelihood needs to be removed from office b/c he clearly can't be trusted to make rational decisions.

[QUOTE=kentatm]:wtf: This IS a horror story.

A DA is trying to pin a felony on a 13 year old kid for accidentally shooting his friend in the face with a toy gun.

Do you not realize how serious a charge that is?

The boys have made up and are still friends. The parents of the kid that got shot don't even want charges pressed.

This is about a power mad DA that is WAY overstepping his bounds and in all likelihood needs to be removed from office b/c he clearly can't be trusted to make rational decisions.[/QUOTE]

Even if the other family/child don't press any charges? How is that legal?

I ****ing hate this country sometimes. At what point does a guy like this DA lose touch with reality and reason?

[QUOTE=Captain Kirk]Even if the other family/child don't press any charges? How is that legal?[/QUOTE]

A district attorney does not need the permission of a victim to press charges. This is especially true in the case of a violent crime which is what he is labeling this.

I'd take a shot in the eye for an xbox..:lol

What a joke. It's a simple accident and everything is fine between them...

hopefully he gets it dropped to at least a misdemeanor if not dropped completly, i can't even imagine haveing a felony on me at 13:no:

You highlighted much of the article, but didn't include this:

[B][I]When the other boy said something that made Jacob mad, he did what he calls a “quick draw,” and fired the plastic bead.[/I][/B]

That's when it ceases to be an accident. Kid made a horribly bad snap decision because he got momentarily pissed off. That's how people get killed, beaten, etc. Immature decision making process, not being cognizant of the potential outcome of your actions.

I'd be willing to bet that goes a long way toward explaining why the court thinks the kid needs to go through the process.

I'd also be willing to bet it doesn't end up a felony, but hopefully, the kid is deathly afraid that it will.

I think me & Kent ATm spoke about a similar issue a year or so ago... I said it then and I'll say it again...


[B][SIZE="5"]POLICE STATE[/SIZE][/B]

that's what this place is turning into

Wait so... who called the police? Why was the police involved in a simple airgun accident?

Also,

[QUOTE]They look at school records, and juvenile experts evaluate the child and bring up any psychological or mental health issues.[/QUOTE]

I wonder what his records look like. Why would the DA act irrationally without anything to back it up? What's his motive?

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]I think me & Kent ATm spoke about a similar issue a year or so ago... I said it then and I'll say it again...


[B][SIZE="5"]POLICE STATE[/SIZE][/B]

that's what this place is turning into[/QUOTE]

I hear Cairo is nice this time of year.

[QUOTE=AirTupac]What a joke. It's a simple accident and everything is fine between them...[/QUOTE]
A simple accident? He got mad and shot his friend in the face...

[QUOTE=JMT]You highlighted much of the article, but didn't include this:

[B][I]When the other boy said something that made Jacob mad, he did what he calls a

[QUOTE=shlver]A simple accident? He got mad and shot his friend in the face...[/QUOTE]

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DVfMqhOeKk[/url]

That should be the solution. :banana:

But yeah i reread and the kid should have some consequences but not a felony,

[QUOTE=JMT]I hear Cairo is nice this time of year.[/QUOTE]



maybe Americans like to see kids getting arrested over something petty like this.. I Thought this was the land of the free and home of the brave.... my mistake...

:confusedshrug:

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]maybe Americans like to see kids getting arrested over something petty like this.. I Thought this was the land of the free and home of the brave.... my mistake...

:confusedshrug:[/QUOTE]

Granted, the big picture...couple kids screwing around, airgun, bygones be bygones...looks pretty silly. That's exactly why reporters look for stories like this. They generate talk.

But the relevant fact is that the kid got mad...by his own admission...turned and shot his friend in the face.

That's a bad way to approach problem solving and anger management. The article alludes to the fact that the courts have discretion when a kids body of work (school records, etc) merit.

We don't know anything about the kid other than what's in the story. The courts do. There's no political hay to be made by bringing a good kid who got in an accident up on charges. But it wasn't an accident. He executed his 'move'...the rapid gunfiring move that he's given a name to...and pulled a trigger.

I'd much rather address this kids lousy temper and decision making now than later, when maybe there's more than an airgun involved.

Land of the free and home of the brave is a nice platitude, but it has absolutely no relevance to the situation.

[QUOTE=JMT]Granted, the big picture...couple kids screwing around, airgun, bygones be bygones...looks pretty silly. That's exactly why reporters look for stories like this. They generate talk.

But the relevant fact is that the kid got mad...by his own admission...turned and shot his friend in the face.

That's a bad way to approach problem solving and anger management. The article alludes to the fact that the courts have discretion when a kids body of work (school records, etc) merit.

We don't know anything about the kid other than what's in the story. The courts do. There's no political hay to be made by bringing a good kid who got in an accident up on charges. But it wasn't an accident. He executed his 'move'...the rapid gunfiring move that he's given a name to...and pulled a trigger.

I'd much rather address this kids lousy temper and decision making now than later, when maybe there's more than an airgun involved.

Land of the free and home of the brave is a nice platitude, but it has absolutely no relevance to the situation.[/QUOTE]

The kid said he shot at his friend. Not that he aimed at his face. He didn't intend on taking his friend's eye out. If you're gonna waste time and money prosecuting a child over a toy gun incident, you had better bring intent into the situation. You're telling me it's not ludicrous to charge a child with a felony for accidently shooting his friend in the eye with a toy gun? lol

All my friends would have felonies for the things we did to each other out of spite, jealousy, retaliation, etc......instead we don't have records and are living normal, successful lives. The things I could have been charged for when I was a kid if crackpot DA's existed where I live.:oldlol:

There has to be an end game with these sort of charges. So I ask you, what is this gonna do? Stop kids from getting angry? Stop kids from horsing around? More like kids are gonna think "Wow, that kid went to juve for shooting a toy gun?.......hey, you wanna play with fire crackers?"

But hey, all in the name of the kid's own well being, eh? I'm sure he will be thanking the system when he grows up *rolls eyes*

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]maybe Americans like to see kids getting arrested over something petty like this.. I Thought this was the land of the free and home of the brave.... my mistake...

:confusedshrug:[/QUOTE]
Petty? He shot his friend in the face in anger... Worst case scenario he could have been blinded. You wouldnt say that shooting someone in the face with a bb gun was petty if the kid was blinded.

[QUOTE=Dolphin]The kid said he shot at his friend. Not that he aimed at his face. He didn't intend on taking his friend's eye out. If you're gonna waste time and money prosecuting a child over a toy gun incident, you had better bring intent into the situation. You're telling me it's not ludicrous to charge a child with a felony for accidently shooting his friend in the eye with a toy gun? lol

All my friends would have felonies for the things we did to each other out of spite, jealousy, retaliation, etc......instead we don't have records and are living normal, successful lives. The things I could have been charged for when I was a kid if crackpot DA's existed where I live.:oldlol:[/QUOTE]

You're right. When someone ends up in court for shooting someone, we should first ask them "where on the person you shot at did you intend for the bullet to hit?" or "did you intend to kill them?".

Their answers would no doubt ease many of the problems we have with overcrowded courts and prison systems.

I don't doubt that you look back fondly at all the wacky stuff you and your friends did. Your thought process seems pretty immature.

[QUOTE=JMT]Granted, the big picture...couple kids screwing around, airgun, bygones be bygones...looks pretty silly. That's exactly why reporters look for stories like this. They generate talk.

But the relevant fact is that the kid got mad...by his own admission...turned and shot his friend in the face.

That's a bad way to approach problem solving and anger management. The article alludes to the fact that the courts have discretion when a kids body of work (school records, etc) merit.

We don't know anything about the kid other than what's in the story. The courts do. There's no political hay to be made by bringing a good kid who got in an accident up on charges. But it wasn't an accident. He executed his 'move'...the rapid gunfiring move that he's given a name to...and pulled a trigger.

I'd much rather address this kids lousy temper and decision making now than later, when maybe there's more than an airgun involved.

Land of the free and home of the brave is a nice platitude, but it has absolutely no relevance to the situation.[/QUOTE]


I understand the concerns...... I think you can address the kid's concerns without unnecessarily introducing him to the criminal justice system at a young age over something like that. that can be handled without police lawyers and judges...

kids grew up for years and had bb guns and all types of sh*t and we never needed the cops to handle this stuff before...

I think we have a hyper punitive society... People are getting carried away with wanting everyone punished for every little thing that happens..

Point being.... the police and the criminal justice system isnt needed to mediate this dispute

[QUOTE=JMT]You're right. When someone ends up in court for shooting someone, we should first ask them "where on the person you shot at did you intend for the bullet to hit?" or "did you intend to kill them?".

Their answers would no doubt ease many of the problems we have with overcrowded courts and prison systems.

I don't doubt that you look back fondly at all the wacky stuff you and your friends did. Your thought process seems pretty immature.[/QUOTE]

The bullet. Is that what you call the projectiles shot out of a toy gun? lol

Kill. Ya, that word should be brought up here when we're talking about a toy gun.

Apparently you and the DA have a hard time with context. Context means everything when charging a boy with a felony for shooting a toy gun.

What about my thought process was immature? That I'm glad the silly things I did as a kid didn't pointlessly send my to juve? Ya, real immature of me to be thankful for that. Way to go on the logic part here. You should be proud of yourself.

[QUOTE=shlver]Petty? He shot his friend in the face in anger... Worst case scenario he could have been blinded. You wouldnt say that shooting someone in the face with a bb gun was petty if the kid was blinded.[/QUOTE]


no I wouldnt call it petty had someone been blinded... but being as though no one was blinded? this is a great opportunity for his parents to pull the kid aside and get after him about his behavior and the fact that someone could have been blinded or seriously hurt.. he is still a minor and this isnt an instance where he needs to go in front of a judge

I just dont see where the cops come in

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]no I wouldnt call it petty had someone been blinded... but being as though no one was blinded? this is a great opportunity for his parents to pull the kid aside and get after him about his behavior and the fact that someone could have been blinded or seriously hurt.. he is still a minor and this isnt an instance where he needs to go in front of a judge

I just dont see where the cops come in[/QUOTE]

But the cops have to come man. Nothing more worthwhile than wasting our money and this kid's time than to put him in juve for NOT blinding his buddy who is still friends with him because everyone BUT the DA realizes it's a non issue. lol

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]I understand the concerns...... I think you can address the kid's concerns without unnecessarily introducing him to the criminal justice system at a young age over something like that. that can be handled without police lawyers and judges...

kids grew up for years and had bb guns and all types of sh*t and we never needed the cops to handle this stuff before...

I think we have a hyper punitive society... People are getting carried away with wanting everyone punished for every little thing that happens..

Point being.... the police and the criminal justice system isnt needed to mediate this dispute[/QUOTE]

On the other hand, we all know or knew kids that have all the earmarks of dangers to society. Too quick to anger, act without thinking, see violent acting out as an answer, etc.

The article talks about how the courts review the kids school behavior, family situation, psychological profile and other factors before deciding whether to press charges. I'm sure this isn't the only instance of a kid shooting another kid with an airsoft gun, but I haven't heard of any of them resulting in charges. It doesn't appear the local DA is recklessly targeting juveniles.

So why this kid? Total random coincidence, or are there behavioral issues that the reporter doesn't go into? It's not even a dispute...the other family didn't press charges...so how do the police and DA come to be in volved?

There's much more to this story that's not in the article. My guess is that's why the authorities got involved, not to unreasonably persecute a good kid.

[QUOTE=Dolphin]The bullet. Is that what you call the projectiles shot out of a toy gun? lol

Kill. Ya, that word should be brought up here when we're talking about a toy gun.

Apparently you and the DA have a hard time with context. Context means everything when charging a boy with a felony for shooting a toy gun.

What about my thought process was immature? That I'm glad the silly things I did as a kid didn't pointlessly send my to juve? Ya, real immature of me to be thankful for that. Way to go on the logic part here. You should be proud of yourself.[/QUOTE]

OK, let's make it 'projectile' and 'harm'.

And it's not shooting a toy gun that's the problem. It's shooting a toy gun at someone in anger. There's your context.

The immature thought process takes a situation and reduces it to the ridiculous (ie kid...toy gun...can't be bad...me and my friends did that...uhhuh uhhuh). The mature thought process takes into account the action, what precipitated the action, and the potential results of the action.

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]no I wouldnt call it petty had someone been blinded... but being as though no one was blinded? this is a great opportunity for his parents to pull the kid aside and get after him about his behavior and the fact that someone could have been blinded or seriously hurt.. he is still a minor and this isnt an instance where he needs to go in front of a judge

I just dont see where the cops come in[/QUOTE]
Where the cops come in? A crime was committed in anger.

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]
I just dont see where the cops come in[/QUOTE]

Doctor/hospital called the law, as he's required to do.

[QUOTE=shlver]Where the cops come in? A crime was committed in anger.[/QUOTE]

a crime :facepalm

yo... you are seriously trying to equate this to real crime? :oldlol:


I guess its already too late if you truly believe kids should be arrested for this kind of stuff...

[QUOTE=JMT]OK, let's make it 'projectile' and 'harm'.

And it's not shooting a toy gun that's the problem. It's shooting a toy gun at someone in anger. There's your context.

The immature thought process takes a situation and reduces it to the ridiculous (ie kid...toy gun...can't be bad...me and my friends did that...uhhuh uhhuh). The mature thought process takes into account the action, what precipitated the action, and the potential results of the action.[/QUOTE]

Potential results of the action? We know what the results are. Nothing happened and the kids are still friends because nothing happned. Thank you, come again.

I never said a kid with a toy gun can't be bad because of the things I did as a kid. lol I said knowing full well that a kid doesn't need to go to juve to get over this incident (because I know many a kid who did these types of things and didn't need to go to juve), I think this DA is a crackhead.

According to you, anger + split second mistake that resulted in no harm = felony charge for a minor. The fact that you used the word bullet before, I think you have this idea that the kid stole a gun from his dad's desser, aimed at his friend's head and pulled the trigger. lol

The only footing you have in the argument is if this kid had a prior record. We can't prove he didn't, but you can't prove he did. So what are you arguing here? And ya, kids without prior records do get ****ed over by the law. It happens all the time, dummy.:roll:

Sounds like a setup for an eventual lawsuit against the toy company.

[QUOTE=Dolphin]Potential results of the action? We know what the results are. Nothing happened and the kids are still friends because nothing happned. Thank you, come again.

I never said a kid with a toy gun can't be bad because of the things I did as a kid. lol I said knowing full well that a kid doesn't need to go to juve to get over this incident (because I know many a kid who did these types of things and didn't need to go to juve), I think this DA is a crackhead.

According to you, anger + split second mistake that resulted in no harm = felony charge for a minor. The fact that you used the word bullet before, I think you have this idea that the kid stole a gun from his dad's desser, aimed at his friend's head and pulled the trigger. lol

The only footing you have in the argument is if this kid had a prior record. We can't prove he didn't, but you can't prove he did. So what are you arguing here? And ya, kids without prior records do get ****ed over by the law. It happens all the time, dummy.:roll:[/QUOTE]
Anger+split second mistakes also equal murders. Better to nip it in the bud and give harsh consequences.

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]a crime :facepalm

yo... you are seriously trying to equate this to real crime? :oldlol:


I guess its already too late if you truly believe kids should be arrested for this kind of stuff...[/QUOTE]
Shooting someone with a BB gun is a crime.

[QUOTE=shlver]Anger+split second mistakes also equal murders. Better to nip it in the bud and give harsh consequences.[/QUOTE]

Again, context. What part of shooting a toy gun that wasn't even aimed at his friend's eye = murder or the potential for this kid to commit a murder in the future? lol

Society has become such a failure in many ways.:facepalm

btw, my mother in higschool was shot in the leg with a bb gun by a dude in his apartment while running track. He was arrested, and rightfully so because there was a clear intent to harm someone. Context.

[QUOTE=Dolphin]Again, context. What part of shooting a toy gun that wasn't even aimed at his friend's eye = murder or the potential for this kid to commit a murder in the future? lol

Society has become such a failure.:facepalm[/QUOTE]
Are you dumb? If not, why are you dumbing down the argument? I never said that shooting a bb gun equals the potential of murder in the future. I said the anger and the split second decision equals murder. It is fully at the discretion of the DA to prosecute an actual crime that caused bodily injury. Doesn't matter if they're friends, if it was an accident, if it was settled by an xbox. It is not ludicrous as you guys make it sound. I see it more of as a preventive measure. I know a lecture from my parents wouldn't stop me from doing something wrong.