RE: New York Shootings (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


DaddySatyr -> RE: New York Shootings (8/26/2012 9:32:06 AM)

I would suggest that ever since our little tiff about something I said to another poster, some time back, you've read everything I've written with a certain bent.

That's okay. I've lived with it, this long. I'll continue to live with it for a while longer




GreedyTop -> RE: New York Shootings (8/26/2012 9:36:06 AM)

perhaps. perhaps not. *shrug*

at least you aren't rule.




GreedyTop -> RE: New York Shootings (8/26/2012 9:47:00 AM)

BTW, Michael.. until you are one of the cops that WERE there, and have had to make that kind of instant decision in that kind of situation... you have no balls to stand on.




DaddySatyr -> RE: New York Shootings (8/26/2012 9:57:58 AM)

Standing on my balls would be painful.

Until you know what situations I may or may not have been in, you have no evidence to suggest whether or not I have ever had to make an instant decision and therefore whether or not my input is worth two cents or not.

Be that as it may; this is a place where we share our thoughts. Disagree with a thought but what you're doing is bringing a personal bias when reading what my thoughts were.

Keep on hating the messenger. You're doing well.



Peace and comfort,



Michael




Musicmystery -> RE: New York Shootings (8/26/2012 10:07:36 AM)

Oh, I think she can do a good job of both here.




tazzygirl -> RE: New York Shootings (8/26/2012 10:10:56 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GreedyTop

BTW, Michael.. until you are one of the cops that WERE there, and have had to make that kind of instant decision in that kind of situation... you have no balls to stand on.


I have to agree with you. Standing on that street, facing a gun held by a man who had already killed.....

Not a decision I want to make.




stormy66 -> RE: New York Shootings (8/26/2012 10:18:02 AM)

It is very easy for folks to play Monday morning quarterback -- either way. I am not from NY nor do I live there....

First, most larger LE agencies within the US have been moving away from standard "point/shoot" qualifications to "moving targets" and scenario based training, that simulates exiting cruisers, barricades, houses (domestics), etc. Away from the "70% qualification to pass/fail. Folks love to place blame if the person can shoot.

You can have expert shooters at the range, and when a situation occurs on the street, they "too" are caught up in the adrenalin/stress of the situation presented, there goes expert??? You can only create/incorporate so much stress during qualifications. Due to budgets and less and less hiring due to BUDGETS -- training is cut more and more. It is easy to say go practice yourself -- but you have to have "indoor ranges equipped with moving targets, scenario scenes, active shooter, etc" which not too many places come equipped with. You can be a perfect target shot, but when faced with a real situation and adrenalin your score goes down.... Just like a person can be the best driver in the whorl without an accident on their record or a citation but when an event occurs the lose a tad bit of their driving skills i.e black ice, a deer runs out into the road and they over-steer the vehicle; someone swerves into their lane and they hit sand. Reality is you can't plan for every situation. You train the best you can, and make the best decisions based on what is presented at that time.

In this situation the police may have been instinctive shooting vice "target shooting" -- what I mean by this is you are not utilizing your sights but are pointing at the threat and shooting from a close distance. This is taught at the ranges (now) due to the increasing number of "close" shootings that occur. During this you could jerk while firing causing the bullet to hit a "non-intended area" or you could limp-wrist with sweat and have your round go off. Police are trained more and more for instinctive shooting because there is a quicker response time of drawing the weapon, pointing and shooting at the threat (saving lives) -- vice draw weapon, raise, aim and shoot. You could be dead in those few seconds. I wasn't there so I don't know what type of firing they were doing. Were they seasoned officers or new -- what was their experience level. Were folks shuffling into them, involving themselves in the scene.

It is easier for folks to say "plan" for a safer take down area -- but if you allow him to move, which way will he move??? Will he shoot at you, shoot at someone else behind you? If he kills more folks -- is this your fault? Yup! You are going against your training.... These officers will be second guessing themselves forever.

I very much doubt that "anyone" will be "talking to them," i.e. berating their actions. They may have reacted the best they could with the knowledge that they had. If someone is pointing a gun at you and you know they have just killed someone, you are not going to stand around and play nice. You will give commands (drop your weapon) as you are taught and if they don't comply -- you shoot to stop the threat -- center mass of the target. Unfortunately, today's weapons are very powerful (based on what the perps are carrying) and have the ability to go thru objects -- whether a person/car. You can't carry less and hope to survive against today's criminals. I do not know if the police missed or the reported injuries were a result of "thru and thrus." (sp?) These officers weren't trained snipers, sitting 500 feet away with an ability to site, breath and shoot w/out distraction.

AARs are performed after each incident that occurs in a town, city, state or the nation. LE organizations are probably already taking what is "factual" based knowledge and learning what they can. This is how lesson plans are developed for range training, TacOps/SRU training and active shooter scenarios, etc..

We, the public, are so caught up with cop shows, we forget that this doesn't happen every day and you can't plan for it. You train so that training kicks in, you hope that the public is smart enough or observant enough (which too many times they are NOT) to remove themselves from the area -- instead of trying to get closer and gawk at what is going on -- we must be the first to video/twitter it to our friends.

It was a very sad event and unfortunately folks were hurt. At least only the perp was killed outside the building.

Just my personal opinion from reading all the posts.... My heart goes out to the officers and everyone involved -- from the folks in the building to the police that were forced to take a life in a "suicide by cop" which seems to occur more and more.




vincentML -> RE: New York Shootings (8/26/2012 11:16:42 AM)

quote:

I'm torn on what to think of the New York police because with the crowded sidewalks in NYC, it can't be easy. But part of me also thinks that had this situation been engaged differently, it might have ended differently.


In all fairness to the police, they were alerted by a citizen who witnessed the killing, they had no cover when he drew the gun, they had no knowledge of his intent, nor of how many rounds were in the weapon. I wonder how it could have been engaged differently.




Politesub53 -> RE: New York Shootings (8/26/2012 11:28:19 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

I also would not fault the NYPD. If someone has already killed one person and is still armed, what good would a tazor do ?  



It would disarm him, without the possibility of hitting bystanders. That was obvious but you still didnt get it.




kdsub -> RE: New York Shootings (8/26/2012 12:01:11 PM)

What a tough one… you don’t shoot and he shoots you then maybe other bystanders…I think they had little choice and thank God no innocents were killed.

I believe it was the right action considering he was taking aim on them…If he had not taken aim then a different action would have been appropriate.

As far as the officers aim it must have been pretty good because they did fell him. I remember a Texas traffic stop where two highway patrolmen and two assailants emptied their weapons at each other separated by 8 feet and no one was hit. It is one thing to hit a target on the range and another when someone is shooting at you.

Butch




BamaD -> RE: New York Shootings (8/26/2012 12:04:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

I am not knocking the NYPD here, as I realise they were in a difficult situation. I am wondering though what lessons can be learned, to avoid a repeat of nine civillians being hit by bullets, or fragments of bullets, fired by the police. It seems absurd this kind of shoot out can happen in the middle of a busy street when tazers are available.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19380492

You don't bring a tazer to a gunfight.




BamaD -> RE: New York Shootings (8/26/2012 12:07:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53


quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

I also would not fault the NYPD. If someone has already killed one person and is still armed, what good would a tazor do ?  



It would disarm him, without the possibility of hitting bystanders. That was obvious but you still didnt get it.

Some people have been known to shrug off a tazer if he is pointing a gun at you you can't take the chance that this guy is one of them.




Politesub53 -> RE: New York Shootings (8/26/2012 12:07:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

I am not knocking the NYPD here, as I realise they were in a difficult situation. I am wondering though what lessons can be learned, to avoid a repeat of nine civillians being hit by bullets, or fragments of bullets, fired by the police. It seems absurd this kind of shoot out can happen in the middle of a busy street when tazers are available.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19380492

You don't bring a tazer to a gunfight.



It helps to bring a brain to a chat forum though. [8|]

The cops have tazers and this could have made a difference to the outcome.




kdsub -> RE: New York Shootings (8/26/2012 12:10:03 PM)

quote:

I admit that hindsight is always perfect but, even as simple a thing as allowing him to walk around the corner to where his car was parked might have avoided injuries to innocent civillians


How would they know he was done killing?... That would be like letting a school killer walk into another class room full of students.

Butch




Politesub53 -> RE: New York Shootings (8/26/2012 12:10:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53


quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

I also would not fault the NYPD. If someone has already killed one person and is still armed, what good would a tazor do ?  



It would disarm him, without the possibility of hitting bystanders. That was obvious but you still didnt get it.

Some people have been known to shrug off a tazer if he is pointing a gun at you you can't take the chance that this guy is one of them.


Rare for that to happen, most people instantly collapse in a heap. You claim to have been a Sheriff or deputy or something. WTf do you think tazers were invented for......... No it would be easier to just tell you.... For the cops to avoid the use of firearms.




kdsub -> RE: New York Shootings (8/26/2012 12:14:26 PM)

quote:

The cops have tazers and this could have made a difference to the outcome


What was the distance between them... was he within the effective range of a tazer? Could he have gotten wild shots off while being shocked...too many ifs when he could have continued killing while officers tried non-lethal means to subdue him.

Now I do wonder if he knew the officers were not armed as possibly would be the case in the UK…is that true… if he would have shot them anyway?…But we will never know.

Butch




BamaD -> RE: New York Shootings (8/26/2012 12:15:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

I am not knocking the NYPD here, as I realise they were in a difficult situation. I am wondering though what lessons can be learned, to avoid a repeat of nine civillians being hit by bullets, or fragments of bullets, fired by the police. It seems absurd this kind of shoot out can happen in the middle of a busy street when tazers are available.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19380492

You don't bring a tazer to a gunfight.



It helps to bring a brain to a chat forum though. [8|]

The cops have tazers and this could have made a difference to the outcome.

Yep it would have sent him into spasims firing his weapon in ramdom directions.




Hillwilliam -> RE: New York Shootings (8/26/2012 12:17:05 PM)

They don't know he's done killing but I just think this is ironic just after one poster harped on "the only ones who should be allowed to carry are HIGHLY TRAINED police". Im sorry but these guys are 15 year vets and werent showing that they wre highly trained.

Hindsight is 20/20 but follow someone until bystanders arent at risk. You KNOW he is willing to shoot so surveilance until you can confront him without endangering citizens (yaknow those you are suppose dto protect and serve).

I keep hearing that noone should be able to carry because the police are "TRAINED PROFESSIONALS".

Im sorry but a lot of civilians would have done a better job. Im just glad none of the innocents were killed by those who were supposed to protect them.




Politesub53 -> RE: New York Shootings (8/26/2012 12:21:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

quote:

The cops have tazers and this could have made a difference to the outcome


What was the distance between them... was he within the effective range of a tazer? Could he have gotten wild shots off while being shocked...too many ifs when he could have continued killing while officers tried non-lethal means to subdue him.

Now I do wonder if he knew the officers were not armed as possibly would be the case in the UK…is that true… if he would have shot them anyway?…But we will never know.

Butch


Armed cops are common in the UK Butch, every Police Station has an armed response unit on instant call 24/7.

My point remains Tazers were invented for this very situation. If they dont work why have them at all. Seems to me they just get used on the town drunk or Occupy Wall Street type events.




BamaD -> RE: New York Shootings (8/26/2012 12:22:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

Rare for that to happen, most people instantly collapse in a heap. You claim to have been a Sheriff or deputy or something. WTf do you think tazers were invented for......... No it would be easier to just tell you.... For the cops to avoid the use of firearms.

You left off the last part of that, in non leathal situations, not for when a man is pointing a gun at you. And I made it clear that when I was with the Sheriffs office I was not a deputy, I ran, among other things the armory. We didn't was money on tazers each officer had pepper spray and baton both of which we considered to be more dependable that tazers.




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875