Another reason to stay away from NYC
CBS News reports that some New York Police Department officers shot more innocent bystanders near the Port Authority yesterday while trying to subdue a man who was acting erratically;
Police said officers saw a man on foot weaving erratically through traffic and sometimes blocking vehicles. After approaching him, police said, the man reached into his pocket as if grabbing a weapon, and two officers fired a total of three shots. They missed him but struck a 54-year-old woman in the right knee and a grazed a 35-year-old woman in the buttocks, police said.
The women were taken to hospitals, where they both were listed in stable condition, according to police. Neither had injuries considered life threatening, police said.
The man was taken into custody after a police sergeant subdued him with a Taser. No weapons were found on him.
Lucky for the crowd that he didn’t have a gun. A year ago, NYPD officers shot nine innocent passer-byes while subduing a gunman outside the Empire State Building. In yesterday’s incident, the guy the cops were shooting at was not struck by bullets, so Mayor Bloomberg is right, they need more gun control in NYC, that can be cured by more range time for NYPD.
Category: Crime
Nope. Since these clowns can’t safely use guns, disarm them and let them enforce the law how the brits do it. Then we’ll see how tough these cops are.
Fire those cops and sue Bloomberg right into the ground.
As the firearms instructor I took a class with recently stated, roughly 70% of all shots fired by police in shootings miss their intended target.
That said, they may have been a little quick to shoot on that one too.. but I am not going to second guess them too much. I wasn’t there.
@1, not all British Cops are unarmed. Many of them in fact are armed.
Didn’t really need another reason to not visit NYC, but additional reasons are at least affirmation of the correctness of the original decision.
In the interest of full disclosure, I have indeed been there. No reason to go back. Sad. There are lots and lots of fine New Yorkers.
You might want to stay avoid Charlotte, NC too:
Unarmed man, possibly looking for help after wreck, shot by police
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57602996/unarmed-man-possibly-looking-for-help-after-wreck-shot-by-police/
The officer involved has been charged with voluntary manslaughter.
OK. First let me say, most of you know me as a level headed, calm and generally very sensitive and caring type of guy.
Having said that, the title of this article is COMPLETE BULLSHIT.
Let me explain.
Yes, bystanders being shot is absolutely irresponsible and unacceptable.
However, there are several bigger reasons to stay away from NYC. For example, the smell of subway platforms on a hot and humid summer day. I would gladly offer to be shot in the knee in order to ensure that the subway system always smelled like fresh cut roses or scoans just removed from the oven.
Or the millions of democrat, non-taxpaying, benefit leaching, non-english speaking or simple math computing, unemployed zombie victims who roam the city streets and government customer service offices. Again, I would happily with a surprising level of enthusiasim volunteer to be shot in this ass if the result would rid the city of the aforementioned.
So, in review there are many more apparent examples and good reasons to stay away from NYC.
One is more likely to smell urine soaked subway platforms and witness a real life walk of the living dead than to be shot by a not so proficient police officer.
So if you are contemplating a trip to NYC, please do. Our great country got its start here. It moves fast all day and night. Has the best attractions and some of the saddest. It is very Vet friendly. And we do love the tourist!
Oh … Can someone send me a list a fine restaurants in West Virginia (that require at least a tee shirt and flip flops) as I may be visiting before I die.
@3 Sounds about right. When I was on the job we only had to qualify twice a year, the qualification course was 50 rounds.
Truth be told I’ve had far better firearms training as a civilian than I ever had on the job.
Well, I’ll be happy to second guess them. In a shoot/don’t shoot situation something in addition to preservation is at play. That, in part, is the difference between thugs and police when the shooting begins. At least, it used to be.
So, those who protect and serve can’t hit what they’re aiming at? Last time I checked, police had to qualify at least once a year, what is the excuse these jokers are giving.
But, hey. At least the Union will keep them from being fired for gross incompetence. They’ll probably find some way to actually blame the two women for being in the line of fire in the first place.
How much weapons training do the police in NYC get? It almost seems that these incidents are a regular occurrence.
rb325th (@3), Mustang2LT (@1),
Only about 5% of the UK police are armed and authorized to carry/use firearms.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19641398
To support the Master Chief’s view of NYC, I would like to point out that without New York City, there would be no place for refugee Paki cab drivers to find work. All the refugee cab driver jobs in Chicago are taken up by an influx of illegal Chicanos and a few Bears/Bulls/White Sox sout’ sider fans.
@ 11 … Big chuckle!
BTW. I alway this after these incidents:
Hold fire – it is better to be a good witness than bad shot!
Gotta love those 12 lb trigger pull Glocks they NYPD uses. Yes, 12 lb trigger pull.
I’ve already been to NYC several times and don’t really want to visit again. I find it dirty and expensive. I would like to see the 9/11 Memorial, Ellis Island and the Statue of Liberty though.
Sounds like cops are a bigger threat than bad guys. The bad guys don’t usually risk shooting people in broad daylight on a crowded street.
#6 MCPO NYC USN (Ret.); OK, stay out of West Virginia, too. Feel better?
Several reasons why you are more likely to be shot by The Only Ones (i.e., cops) rather than a civilian CCW holder.
Cops are trained to empty their magazines until the threat is ended. Civilian CCW holders tend to use the Mozambique drill.
Most cops don’t spend a lot of time at the range: once a year to qualify. The civilian CCW holder will be at the range weekly or monthly.
Think of a two-by-two matrix. On one axis is Authority (low and high), on the other is Personal Accountability (also low and high). The Only Ones operate in the high authority, low accountability box. The civilian CCW holder in the low authority, high accountability box. Who do you think will be more careful before putting his booger hook on the bang switch?
@ Jonn … Pithy … I like it! And for record … I visit often. The secret undisclosed locations on ocassion.
@3 rb325th:
“As the firearms instructor I took a class with recently stated, roughly 70% of all shots fired by police in shootings miss their intended target.”
The figure often bandied about — a 20-25% hit percentage for state and local LE — is accurate, but problematic since it lumps all shootings together (i.e., those involving: daylight and diminished lighting; stationary and moving targets; armed and unarmed suspects; isolated and public areas; single and multiple officers; static and dynamic environments (e.g., stand-offs vs. car chases); beat cops and SWAT; and so forth).
The good-ish news is that LEOs, at least at the better departments, have an okay hit rate of 60-70% in daylight. The bad news is that (a) hit rates drop quickly as lighting diminishes, (b) most shootings (including most shooting of unarmed persons) occur under diminished lighting [yes, yes, we all know that’s also when crime likes to happen], and (c) most standard training occurs in well-lit, distraction-free environments.
(Fun Fact: A couple of studies have observed increases not only in the biomarkers of stress, but also corresponding unsafe weapons practices during training scenarios involving unfamiliar/dark environments (viz. touching the trigger makes people feel better when they’re scared)).
@1M ustang2LT, 10 ByrdMan:
Yep, AFO’s make up about 5% (although I believe the SAS can assist on UK soil). What’s remarkable is that about three-quarters of UK police are, to varying degrees, opposed to increasing that number and/or being themselves required to carry, the primary objections being that it would degrade police and community morale, and also decrease officer safety.
The morale argument is intesting. But, even if the effect on *officer* safety holds true, nowhere — not Detroit, New Orleans, Moscow, nor anywhere else — have I felt such real concern that I could be murderously attacked for the slightest perceived offense as I did in places like Manchester and Edinburgh. Even the South Africans (!) I met were disturbed by the number of potentially violent people milling about.
Remember, I was a police range master for about 30 years (and still help)…I’d estimate about 25% of the cops I’ve seen suck and shooting. I don’t know if they just never learned the right way, or just didn’t give a shit and didn’t listen. There were a few I had turn in their duty guns until they could qualify.
And once again we see that the NYPD really are the world’s top experts on the fine art of shooting innocent bystanders. It’s funny, from the age of 8, I was always taught that when you pulls trigger, that round you fire is going to hit something, and probably kill what it hits, and that as the shooter YOU are responsible for WHATEVER gets hit. But then again I grew up in a very pro-gun family in a very pro-gun area of the country (in Southern California, believe it or not).
This begs the question: if NYC is one of those wonderfully safe Gun-Free zones, why do the cops need to carry them? Especially in light of the fact that the NYPD seem to pose the greatest threat of randomly shooting innocent people on the street.
What’s worse than being held hostage by a criminal in NYC?
Being rescued by the NYPD.
So they shot at an unarmed man, and hit two unarmed bystanders? Sorry, but the “I-thought-he-had-a-gun” excuse doesn’t wash with me, ever. Then to just plain out miss?