NY shooting, cops acquitted

[Churchill]

If you put three 9mm rounds into a person and they aren't writhing in pain and are still trying to hurt you, it's fairly obvious they are either Bruce Banner or on something. 31 rounds is excessive. This cop was shooting rounds into a subdued perp.

You've never fired a 9mm into a human being, or read about it apparently.

People live after taking 31 rds from a 9mm weapon. It's hardly something I'd want my life staked on, however it is cheap, the ammunition is cheap, and therefor training and equipment costs are low. That's a big reason the US Military and many police agencies use 9mm.

Not taking anyones side or reading the article, for what it's worth I'd very often put as many bullets and bombs into Haji as I could, just because it's fun.

[Melchiah]

I didn't say anything about killing someone with 3 9mm rounds. I said if you put three of them into a person, especially a civilian, that should get them under control. 31 rounds is not necessary, and we are not talking about "Haji" either. Even still, he had time to reload which means he had time to re-evaluate the situation. The second magazine was unnecessary.

[jmc]

I didn't say anything about killing someone with 3 9mm rounds. I said if you put three of them into a person, especially a civilian, that should get them under control. 31 rounds is not necessary, and we are not talking about "Haji" either. Even still, he had time to reload which means he had time to re-evaluate the situation. The second magazine was unnecessary.

Try 6, and it makes sense..... ive seen people shoot back after taking 3 clean hits.

But still get to the point..... 3 extra, doesnt compare to 31.

[guartz]

I think the question really is,

if it were a white man who took 50 shots from 5 cops, would the cops still be acquitted?

[fantasticdan]

I'm not trying to rationalize the cops behavior here(especially not the guy that stopped to reload than kept shooting, or that they shot at all), but it doesn't seem like most of the people replying have even read up on what they're replying to, or are just really trying to slant things. The cops weren't standing there unloading 50 bullets into one guy, they were shooting at a car.

Are there any restrictions on what a cop can do when out of uniform? It seems very likely what escalated this incident in the first place, is that the victims didn't even know they were cops, which may be why he tried to drive away. I mean some drunk guys get in an argument in a strip club, and as they try to leave some men from inside the club in plain clothes are pointing guns at them? I mean if you're showing your wallet/badge in your other hand, and trying to make it very clear you're an nypd officer that's one thing, but that didn't seem like it was the case here.

What gets me thou, is that all of these cops are basically rewarded for killing this guy with a paid 'suspension'. Your poor judgment costing people their lives shouldn't get you a paid vacation, it should get you fucking fired immediately.

[Nyima]

As I understand it the undercover cops never actually identified themselves as cops and just approached Bell with guns drawn which is obviously going to freak anyone out.

[Heian]

ITT:
BG is jurors sitting in the courtroom with all the information

Also with Churchill on this one, a 9mm is nothing more than a glorified BB gun. Small caliber rounds tend to go straight through, and in the case of the 9mm it leaves a small exit wound unlike say a .45 which upon passing will leave a large exit wound destroy a large amount of muscle around the exit as well.

My stepfather carries a Glock 9mm because it is what his department is required to use as a primary, its also the same reason he keeps a .38 stub nose revolver around his ankle because even though it is an extremely reliable as far as jamming and accuracy are concerned, it has little stopping power.

Also I love how everyone is passing judgment without hearing all of the evidence. My views on many things would be considered liberal by many, but I get the feeling that most of you have no fucking clue what goes through an officer's head in situations like that, and from hearing some of the situations that my parents have been in and what they have had to do while in duty does not lay lightly on their conscious at the end of the day.

[Melchiah]

Heian we are mostly discussing the guy who stopped to reload. That's what doesn't make any sense.

[Heian]

Heian we are mostly discussing the guy who stopped to reload. That's what doesn't make any sense.

Oh I understand but everything right now is basically "hear say" but if that is true that one officer fired 31 shots individually, then yes it most certainly should be looked into.

Most officers are taught in academy that when they draw their weapon in the circumstance that an assalint is coming at them, statistically the first 3~5 shots actually hit the ground and or miss because of being nervous, panicked, what have you. Its the same reason why deadly force is allowed at 33' or less when an assailant has a knife.

I'll also be the first to say that yes there are bad cops out there, but what I want everyone else to remember is that there are also good cops out there and not every cop who draws his weapon is some pig looking to kill someone.

[Turambar]

Now I don’t think cops should use a "Shoot to kill" attitude, it should be more "Shoot to injure, or “shoot to immobilize” they could have shot him in the legs or the arms or something.

You watch too many movies. What you're proposing simply isn't possible unless you're shooting at a paper target.

[Melena]

people need to get over this shoot to immobolize crap. if your a cop and you shoot with the intent to injure, and they do have a gun, your odds of dying have just increased. Both my father and mother have had to pull there guns in the line of duty but thankfully did not have to shoot (dumbass criminals actually listened when told to drop there weapon), but if they did have to fire, they would be shooting to kill as is instructed in the academy.

[ronin sparthos]

Now I don’t think cops should use a "Shoot to kill" attitude, it should be more "Shoot to injure, or “shoot to immobilize” they could have shot him in the legs or the arms or something.

This doesnt really work in a real-life situation where someone could easily shoot you on the way down or your bullet could miss and you'd wind up dead on the pavement instead of the perp since you were trying to be 'nice' aiming for non-vital areas. Would the perp give you the same courtesy? Nope. Life isnt a movie where every bullet completely immobilizes people or one shot to the arm will cause someone to drop a gun.

The case is really a question of the continual rise in cases where innocent people are shot by cops in NYC due to excessive force yet the policy of the police department doesnt change much. Promises are made to review procedures yet innocent people get killed in a shower of bullets. Im all for cops using firepower when its needed but when your unloading a clip and then reloading, something is wrong. The mayor says that a 3rd party will investigate the NYPDs procedure but thats just to smooth over PR until the next person dies in another police shootout really.


In defense of the cop, perhaps he got scared and instinctually fired off as many bullets as possible in fear for his life or perhaps he thought his partners gunfire was actually the gunfire from the perps. Its hard to think when your being 'shot at' and its even harder to count how many bullets you are firing off when your shooting.

[Turambar]

In defense of the cop, perhaps he got scared and instinctually fired off as many bullets as possible in fear for his life or perhaps he thought his partners gunfire was actually the gunfire from the perps. Its hard to think when your being 'shot at' and its even harder to count how many bullets you are firing off when your shooting.

Or maybe he just kept shooting until the car stopped.

[Dmitry]

Have any of you saying that 31 shots is excessive actually fired any type of handgun, or specifally the model the NYPD issues (Glock)? I think most of you don't understand how fast these guns can be unloaded, especially when you're scared because someone is trying to run you over (in this situation) or intending to harm you otherwise. Also, if they actually go to the range and practice targets or work on reloading faster, 31 isn't that excessive in a life or death situation. Granted, the cops can't know what the perp was thinking.

I don't see where the big deal is. Excessive force would be killing someone, not killing someone too much.

Yes it is, because 2-10 shots makes it look like you were shooting to neutralize the target. If the target dies then it's just a sad/negative outcome from your effort to stop him from whatever he was doing.

When you unload 31 rounds, it doesn't look like your main effort was to neutralize the target, but to shoot so many times that there is 0% chance he survives. In this instance your motive was to kill instead of put a stop to whatever the guy was attempting to do.

Did you miss the entire thread/10000000 posts about how police are trained to shoot to kill, not to neutralize?

It doesn't matter, one of his "brothers" got shot, it's a hate crime, end of story.

[Melchiah]

You don't have to count. The gun counts for you. When you deplete the magazine, the slide locks open and the gun will not recock itself unless you A) insert a full magazine and hit the slide release lever or B) just hit the slide release lever. In case B), you will have a cocked gun with no ammunition. In case A), you have to take the time to insert a fresh magazine. Time that you can use to re-evaluate the situation, unless you fail so epicly at multitasking that you have to watch yourself insert your fresh magazine and concentrate fully on this task lest you fuck it up somehow.

This coming from a person who at one point, after a lot of practice, could disassemble and reassemble an M-1 Carbine rifle in 59 seconds blindfolded(Yeah, it was stupid but my buddy and I were having a bigger-penis contest).

I propose that department marksmanship and gun handling training is substandard.

Edit: It takes about 6 seconds to empty a 17 round magazine. Quick math means about 3 rounds a second. It would take about that time to reload the weapon and re-acquire the target.

We don't know motivation, or this particular officer's level of training or his psyche evaluations. But from the evidence presented, he indicates either a desire to shoot until he runs out of rounds or substandard training/ability to maintain composure under pressure. Any one of these three things is a trait I do not want in Law Enforcement personnel.

[Nibe]

A

[Melchiah]

Somewhere above when I made that comment, I made one similar that said "barring a perp jacked up on dust or other substance".

[Turambar]

You don't have to count. The gun counts for you. When you deplete the magazine, the slide locks open and the gun will not recock itself unless you A) insert a full magazine and hit the slide release lever or B) just hit the slide release lever. In case B), you will have a cocked gun with no ammunition. In case A), you have to take the time to insert a fresh magazine. Time that you can use to re-evaluate the situation, unless you fail so epicly at multitasking that you have to watch yourself insert your fresh magazine and concentrate fully on this task lest you fuck it up somehow.

This coming from a person who at one point, after a lot of practice, could disassemble and reassemble an M-1 Carbine rifle in 59 seconds blindfolded(Yeah, it was stupid but my buddy and I were having a bigger-penis contest).

I propose that department marksmanship and gun handling training is substandard.

Edit: It takes about 6 seconds to empty a 17 round magazine. Quick math means about 3 rounds a second. It would take about that time to reload the weapon and re-acquire the target.

We don't know motivation, or this particular officer's level of training or his psyche evaluations. But from the evidence presented, he indicates either a desire to shoot until he runs out of rounds or substandard training/ability to maintain composure under pressure. Any one of these three things is a trait I do not want in Law Enforcement personnel.

And yet, in spite of not knowing motivation, level of training, or psyche evaluations, you're perfectly willing to pass judgement on him. That's what so great about this country: people who know fuck-all about things are qualified to make decisions about them.

[Beckwin]

You don't have to count. The gun counts for you. When you deplete the magazine, the slide locks open and the gun will not recock itself unless you A) insert a full magazine and hit the slide release lever or B) just hit the slide release lever. In case B), you will have a cocked gun with no ammunition. In case A), you have to take the time to insert a fresh magazine. Time that you can use to re-evaluate the situation, unless you fail so epicly at multitasking that you have to watch yourself insert your fresh magazine and concentrate fully on this task lest you fuck it up somehow.

This coming from a person who at one point, after a lot of practice, could disassemble and reassemble an M-1 Carbine rifle in 59 seconds blindfolded(Yeah, it was stupid but my buddy and I were having a bigger-penis contest).

I propose that department marksmanship and gun handling training is substandard.

Edit: It takes about 6 seconds to empty a 17 round magazine. Quick math means about 3 rounds a second. It would take about that time to reload the weapon and re-acquire the target.

We don't know motivation, or this particular officer's level of training or his psyche evaluations. But from the evidence presented, he indicates either a desire to shoot until he runs out of rounds or substandard training/ability to maintain composure under pressure. Any one of these three things is a trait I do not want in Law Enforcement personnel.

And yet, in spite of not knowing motivation, level of training, or psyche evaluations, you're perfectly willing to pass judgement on him. That's what so great about this country: people who know fuck-all about things are qualified to make decisions about them.

this shit made the news for a reason. it's not like it's the only person or only black person to get shot and killed by the police recently, but the circumstances are rather controversial and questionable. There's also the issue that the officers chose a jury-less trial; a judge alone will likely to be much more protective of cops than a jury.

[guartz]

And yet, in spite of not knowing motivation, level of training, or psyche evaluations, you're perfectly willing to pass judgement on him. That's what so great about this country: people who know fuck-all about things are qualified to make decisions about them.

people pass judgments all the time,
in fact,
getting upset about people passing judgments, is quite hypocritically, passing a judgment.