Yet ANOTHER Shooting

hedonist

JonnyPistachio wrote:

hedonist wrote:

I can't watch the video from work so it may make my point moot, but I have to wonder...had the police not acted as they had, they'd still be criticized, no? Sort of a damned if you do, damned if you don't type of thing.

yeah, i can agree with that...I just cant get out of my head, police are to "protect and serve"...I think in this instance, they were protecting themselves more than the innocents who were caught in the crossfire. I dont think they should be fired, but I think some additional training or better procedures need to be looked into. Judging from the video, the man didnt appear to be a threat to the people around him anymore...maybe the police couldve followed him until he was in a less crowded area. They are REALLY lucky no innocents were killed.

OK...I'm gonna have to watch this later on, then. I'd been thinking, "were they supposed to just follow this guy around and chance it that he wouldn't shoot others until they could get to him?" But yeah, I'm definitely missing something here that I'm hoping the video will fill in.

PJ_Soul

peacefrompaul wrote:

PJ_Soul wrote:

hedonist wrote:

I can't watch the video from work so it may make my point moot, but I have to wonder...had the police not acted as they had, they'd still be criticized, no? Sort of a damned if you do, damned if you don't type of thing.

If they hadn't acted as they did, they wouldn't have shot 9 innocent bystanders, would have pursued the guy on foot, and caught him without hurting anyone. The alternative to shooting towards people walking by was not to just stand there and do nothing. Or how about actually aiming at the man with the gun and firing once instead of a bunch of them firing wildly in his approximate direction? One of the cops was really close to the suspect; the dude was pretty much standing there at police gunpoint. The cops acted rashly and irresponsibly.

Good old NYPD.

I support police forces generally. I don't want to criticize the entire police force or anything. The officers in the particular incident acted foolishly and dangerously and I think demonstrated that they aren't fit for street duty. The does not, however, reflect on all NYPD cops IMHO... That being said, I think that a LOT of police forces (the Vancouver PD and RCMP especially!) that need EXTREME retooling, and WAY more oversite and internal investigation should be conducted by independent bodies. I'll be very interested to see how this incident is finally investigated and dealt with.

mikepegg44

PJ_Soul wrote:

JonnyPistachio wrote:

hedonist wrote:

I can't watch the video from work so it may make my point moot, but I have to wonder...had the police not acted as they had, they'd still be criticized, no? Sort of a damned if you do, damned if you don't type of thing.

yeah, i can agree with that...I just cant get out of my head, police are to "protect and serve"...I think in this instance, they were protecting themselves more than the innocents who were caught in the crossfire. I dont think they should be fired, but I think some additional training or better procedures need to be looked into. Judging from the video, the man didnt appear to be a threat to the people around him anymore...maybe the police couldve followed him until he was in a less crowded area. They are REALLY lucky no innocents were killed.

Yeah, the man wasn't a threat to the bystanders as far as I could tell either. The police were, as it turns out.

that seems like a pretty bold conclusion without being there. there are way too many what ifs for me to jump to that conclusion. All they know is that a guy in a gray suit shot someone to death and that he was still armed and dangerous. This requires split second decision making and unfortunately some people got hurt. There is just no way of knowing if they were needlessly hurt or if he was on his way to kill someone else...who knows...They don't know he had a specific target, they don't know if he isn't planning on killing more people.

If he wasn't a threat he wouldn't have pulled the trigger to begin with, nor pulled it out when confronted...there is no way of knowing what he is or isn't going to do at that moment...that is the problem. I don't know what possessed the police officers to open up like they did, they must have felt he was a threat. If they had let him fire once more and someone ended up dead...what then?


The police didn't cause this, they were put into an impossible situation and did the best they could. But if someone raises a gun to you and you think it is you or them, would you pull the trigger or simply ask him to stop shooting until innocent people are out of the way? I am sure the injured will be compensated.

I don't find myself defending police officers much, but in this case I don't know what other decision they could have made...I really don't know

ComeToTX

First day of school and we already have a shooting in MD.

PJ_Soul

mikepegg44 wrote:

PJ_Soul wrote:

JonnyPistachio wrote:

yeah, i can agree with that...I just cant get out of my head, police are to "protect and serve"...I think in this instance, they were protecting themselves more than the innocents who were caught in the crossfire. I dont think they should be fired, but I think some additional training or better procedures need to be looked into. Judging from the video, the man didnt appear to be a threat to the people around him anymore...maybe the police couldve followed him until he was in a less crowded area. They are REALLY lucky no innocents were killed.

Yeah, the man wasn't a threat to the bystanders as far as I could tell either. The police were, as it turns out.

that seems like a pretty bold conclusion without being there. there are way too many what ifs for me to jump to that conclusion. All they know is that a guy in a gray suit shot someone to death and that he was still armed and dangerous. This requires split second decision making and unfortunately some people got hurt. There is just no way of knowing if they were needlessly hurt or if he was on his way to kill someone else...who knows...They don't know he had a specific target, they don't know if he isn't planning on killing more people.

If he wasn't a threat he wouldn't have pulled the trigger to begin with, nor pulled it out when confronted...there is no way of knowing what he is or isn't going to do at that moment...that is the problem. I don't know what possessed the police officers to open up like they did, they must have felt he was a threat. If they had let him fire once more and someone ended up dead...what then?


The police didn't cause this, they were put into an impossible situation and did the best they could. But if someone raises a gun to you and you think it is you or them, would you pull the trigger or simply ask him to stop shooting until innocent people are out of the way? I am sure the injured will be compensated.

I don't find myself defending police officers much, but in this case I don't know what other decision they could have made...I really don't know

Well, fair enough, I can't say for sure; I'm only going on what it looks like to me. But the man wasn't pointing the gun towards anyone ... it looked like he was simply panicking and trying to figure out what to, causing him to just jitter on the spot.

In any case, I don't defend police officers when they shouldn't be defended, and I never criticize them as a knee jerk reaction - I'm not "anti-cop" by any means. But I don't think there is any question whatsoever that shooting towards a bunch of innocent people is absolutely not acceptable under any circumstances, really, and certainly not in this circumstance. I don't think they did the best they could at all, and it wasn't an impossible situation at all. It was one man with a gun. It's not like cops haven't dealt with that situation before, and not like they aren't trained to deal with that situation in various ways, and I can guarantee you that shooting in the direction of innocent bystanders isn't a part of the training. They either should have pursued on foot, and/or AIMED at the guy and shot only him. Instead, they clearly panicked themselves and shot wildly enough to hurt 9 other people. If they had done the best they could with the situation, no one but the suspect would have been shot. NINE PEOPLE were hurt, all by the cops. I don't really think that is defensible. If we were talking about civilians I would agree with you. But we're not.

Jason P

I watched the video and the closest cop was at least fifteen feet away before the suspect first turned around and was ten feet away when the suspect pulled his weapon out and pointed at the officers (at which point they retreated for obvious reasons). So tackling him wasn't an option.

The suspect was armed and moving erratically towards the officers. The use of deadly force was well within their rights.

And if the officers were a threat to the crowd, how the heck couldn't the armed suspect who just gunned somebody down in the last minute not be a threat to the crowd?

It's just too bad they were not better shots.

PJ_Soul

Jason P wrote:

I watched the video and the closest cop was at least fifteen feet away before the suspect first turned around and was ten feet away when the suspect pulled his weapon out and pointed at the officers (at which point they retreated for obvious reasons). So tackling him wasn't an option.

The suspect was armed and moving erratically towards the officers. The use of deadly force was well within their rights.

And if the officers were a threat to the crowd, how the heck couldn't the armed suspect who just gunned somebody down in the last minute not be a threat to the crowd?

It's just too bad they were not better shots.

Better shots?? They're probably fine shots. They just weren't thinking enough or acting responsibly enough to aim properly. That's the problem. I don't know about the rest of you, but I expect the police to be thoughtful and under control when they're firing weapons in crowded areas no matter what the circumstances are. Of course I think the use of deadly force was warranted. That's not my criticism. The haphazard way they used that deadly force is what bothers me. I really don't think there is any good excuse for cops having injured 9 innocent bystanders because there is one man with a gun to deal with. I'm a bit surprised that people are defending it, frankly.
The suspect wasn't pointing his weapon at anyone or behaving like he was even considering shooting bystanders... that is obviously just an opinion of mine from what the video looks like, that's all. Either way, 9 innocents injured from police gun fire?? No excuses IMHO.

Jason P

PJ_Soul wrote:

Jason P wrote:

I watched the video and the closest cop was at least fifteen feet away before the suspect first turned around and was ten feet away when the suspect pulled his weapon out and pointed at the officers (at which point they retreated for obvious reasons). So tackling him wasn't an option.

The suspect was armed and moving erratically towards the officers. The use of deadly force was well within their rights.

And if the officers were a threat to the crowd, how the heck couldn't the armed suspect who just gunned somebody down in the last minute not be a threat to the crowd?

It's just too bad they were not better shots.

Better shots?? They're probably fine shots. They just weren't thinking enough or acting responsibly enough to aim properly. That's the problem. I don't know about the rest of you, but I expect the police to be thoughtful and under control when they're firing weapons in crowded areas no matter what the circumstances are. Of course I think the use of deadly force was warranted. That's not my criticism. The haphazard way they used that deadly force is what bothers me. I really don't think there is any good excuse for cops having injured 9 innocent bystanders because there is one man with a gun to deal with. I'm a bit surprised that people are defending it, frankly.
The suspect wasn't pointing his weapon at anyone or behaving like he was even considering shooting bystanders... that is obviously just an opinion of mine from what the video looks like, that's all. Either way, 9 innocents injured from police gun fire?? No excuses IMHO.

He was pointing his weapon towards the cops, which in turn is going to have an affect on their aim. If someone is pointing their gun away from you, it allows for you to steady your aim and take proficient shots. If someone is moving unpredictably towards you while pointing a gun at you, and you are trying to take cover it affects your aim.

I don't think there is anything in police training that instructs you to let an armed suspect point a weapon at you at point blank range and do nothing. I'm pretty sure you are instructed to shoot to kill. They had seconds to react.

PJ_Soul

Jason P wrote:

PJ_Soul wrote:

Jason P wrote:

I watched the video and the closest cop was at least fifteen feet away before the suspect first turned around and was ten feet away when the suspect pulled his weapon out and pointed at the officers (at which point they retreated for obvious reasons). So tackling him wasn't an option.

The suspect was armed and moving erratically towards the officers. The use of deadly force was well within their rights.

And if the officers were a threat to the crowd, how the heck couldn't the armed suspect who just gunned somebody down in the last minute not be a threat to the crowd?

It's just too bad they were not better shots.

Better shots?? They're probably fine shots. They just weren't thinking enough or acting responsibly enough to aim properly. That's the problem. I don't know about the rest of you, but I expect the police to be thoughtful and under control when they're firing weapons in crowded areas no matter what the circumstances are. Of course I think the use of deadly force was warranted. That's not my criticism. The haphazard way they used that deadly force is what bothers me. I really don't think there is any good excuse for cops having injured 9 innocent bystanders because there is one man with a gun to deal with. I'm a bit surprised that people are defending it, frankly.
The suspect wasn't pointing his weapon at anyone or behaving like he was even considering shooting bystanders... that is obviously just an opinion of mine from what the video looks like, that's all. Either way, 9 innocents injured from police gun fire?? No excuses IMHO.

He was pointing his weapon towards the cops, which in turn is going to have an affect on their aim. If someone is pointing their gun away from you, it allows for you to steady your aim and take proficient shots. If someone is moving unpredictably towards you while pointing a gun at you, and you are trying to take cover it affects your aim.

I don't think there is anything in police training that instructs you to let an armed suspect point a weapon at you at point blank range and do nothing. I'm pretty sure you are instructed to shoot to kill. They had seconds to react.

I'm pretty sure that they are trained to do ANYTHING they can to avoid harming and possibly killing innocent people, including risking their own safety.
Anyway, differences of opinion here, obviously - that's fine... But I am curious to see how this is dealt with. My eyebrow will go up pretty high if it's not an independent body investigating it.

pandora

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/ ... 4X20120827

hollow point bullets ricocheted the cops didn't shoot the bystanders per say...

walk a mile in a cops shoes ...
they are big to fill

PJ_Soul

pandora wrote:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/27/us-usa-shooting-empirestate-police-idUSBRE87Q04X20120827

hollow point bullets ricocheted the cops didn't shoot the bystanders per say...

walk a mile in a cops shoes ...
they are big to fill

Again, I don't underestimate the role of the police. I'm not anti-cop by any means. I just call it like I see it, and to me, that 9 people got injured in this police shooting incident is impossible to justify. Cops should NEVER be letting bullets fly like that around large numbers of innocent people unless the suspect is firing a weapon all over the place at that time. It had been some time since the suspect had fired his weapon and he wasn't aiming it at anyone or making any overt gestures suggesting he was going to. Yes things happen fast... Cops should not be shooting in the direction of bystanders. They train not to.

This ricochet thing or shrapnel excuse doesn't really fly with me... so they were shooting towards people and some of the bullets hit the planter instead of the dude standing beside the planter ... makes no difference to me as far as irresponsible actions go. But anyway... whatever. It happened. Shitty. I'm not frothing at the mouth over it. It's just a fucked up story.

RW81233

ComeToTX wrote:

First day of school and we already have a shooting in MD.

Shit was like 15 minutes from my house...kid walked in with a shotgun and shot a bully from the early reports. WtF is going on?

Cosmo

RW81233 wrote:

WtF is going on?

...
Q: What's Going On?
A: Just another day in The Land of the Free.
...
Seriously, if we are not going to sit down, cut down the fanatic hysteria, quit repeating bumper sticker slogans as debate points and actually talk to each other and try to come to a workable solution... then, none of us should be surprized that this kind of stuff happens.

ComeToTX

Cosmo wrote:

RW81233 wrote:

WtF is going on?

...
Q: What's Going On?
A: Just another day in The Land of the Free.
...
Seriously, if we are not going to sit down, cut down the fanatic hysteria, quit repeating bumper sticker slogans as debate points and actually talk to each other and try to come to a workable solution... then, none of us should be surprized that this kind of stuff happens.

The saddest/scariest part is that I'm not surprised anymore.

RW81233

ComeToTX wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

RW81233 wrote:

WtF is going on?

...
Q: What's Going On?
A: Just another day in The Land of the Free.
...
Seriously, if we are not going to sit down, cut down the fanatic hysteria, quit repeating bumper sticker slogans as debate points and actually talk to each other and try to come to a workable solution... then, none of us should be surprized that this kind of stuff happens.

The saddest/scariest part is that I'm not surprised anymore.

yeah that stopped at Virginia Tech for me

hedonist

And...some dipshit with a rifle on a balcony in Hollywood today.

Gotta say it feels just wrong to be thankful that I'm still taken aback and saddened by shit like this.

pandora

Last Friday at school a young man attempted suicide here locally,
he passed this weekend ...
when are we going to address mental health issues and get people what they need to live happy
productive lives?

http://www.examiner.com/article/boy-16- ... igh-school

Jason P

Cosmo wrote:

Seriously, if we are not going to sit down, cut down the fanatic hysteria, quit repeating bumper sticker slogans as debate points and actually talk to each other and try to come to a workable solution... then, none of us should be surprized that this kind of stuff happens.

We need to start addressing human psychology. We are bombarded with Click-it or Ticket PSA's even though 99% of cars have a goddamn ding that goes off if you get more then 15 feet out of your driveway without your seat belt on and your dashboard lights up like a Xmas tree. (they've spent hundreds of millions of dollars promoting this by now, right?)

Why no PSA's on warning signs of mental sickness? Or avenues for help?

Some parents want to avoid warning signs and do it subconsciously. But maybe if they see a PSA where they find out that letting little Timmy set frogs on fire isn't just boys being boys and may possibly be connected a deep rooted problem. Maybe their eyes will be opened and they can seek and find help. Or maybe they can detect warning signs of suicidal tendencies (All I wanted was a Pepsi, just one Pepsi!).

Just a thought.

JonnyPistachio

ComeToTX wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

RW81233 wrote:

WtF is going on?

...
Q: What's Going On?
A: Just another day in The Land of the Free.
...
Seriously, if we are not going to sit down, cut down the fanatic hysteria, quit repeating bumper sticker slogans as debate points and actually talk to each other and try to come to a workable solution... then, none of us should be surprized that this kind of stuff happens.

The saddest/scariest part is that I'm not surprised anymore.

Me too, and that adds to this -- The second saddest/scariest part is that there have been so many shootings lately, that people who normally might not have guns are go out and buying guns because there are so many shootings lately. We're just perpetuating it.

hedonist

Jason P wrote:

Some parents want to avoid warning signs and do it subconsciously. But maybe if they see a PSA where they find out that letting little Timmy set frogs on fire isn't just boys being boys and may possibly be connected a deep rooted problem. Maybe their eyes will be opened and they can seek and find help. Or maybe they can detect warning signs of suicidal tendencies (All I wanted was a Pepsi, just one Pepsi!).

Just a thought.

Not just a thought, but a good thought. I agree.