Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 11:18:46 -0400, George >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >Presumably they fired their guns before. You don't need to put 10 rounds
> >into someone at 8 feet to stop them. You do need to consider you are on
> >a crowded city street and know that each additional round you fire
> >increases the probability that someones husband, wife or child may not
> >come home that day.
>
> You are correct, of course, but that is so easy to say sitting at home
> in front of your computer. I wonder just how you'd react in real
> life. Remember, if he shoots first, or even second or third, it is
> YOU that won't be going home.

Remember that police are typically required to wear body armor (IIIA
typically), so the threat of them not going home is not as large as you
apparently believe.

Jim Elbrecht wrote:
>
> On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 11:02:17 -0500, "Pete C." >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"l, not -l" wrote:
> >>
> >> On 25-Aug-2012, George > wrote:
> >>
> >> > If I was in that scenario I would not have emptied a clip into someone
> >> > if I was on a crowded city street. You are supposed to know what is in
> >> > the line of fire and what damage you can cause.
> >>
> >> Have you ever been in a firefight? Ever been in the line of fire? Until
> >> you have, you have no idea what you would do.
> >
> >Says someone with likely zero firearms experience or training.
>
> OK-- *I'll* ask, then. Have you (or George) ever been face to face
> with a loaded gun and had to use deadly force?

Fortunately not, though it came close once. Those making the claims that
a civilian couldn't shoot better than a cop however have mostly not even
ever fired a gun at a range. There are a number of studies that
consistently show that civilians have better hit ratios than police.
People want to think that police are highly trained marksmen, but that
is simply not the reality unless the particular cop is on a SWAT team.
That indeed is why SWAT teams exist, to provide a backup force with a
higher level of training.

>
> Jim
> [and yes-- *I* have-- thankfully not on a busy city street. Mine
> were in free fire zones so we didn't have to worry about collateral
> damage---- but I can definitely vouch for the difference between
> imagination and reality]

Military experience is really quite a different thing from city streets
with civilian populations. Not that it isn't valid combat experience,
but it is different enough to not be transferable in a meaningful way.

"l, not -l" wrote:
>
> On 25-Aug-2012, "Pete C." > wrote:
>
> > "l, not -l" wrote:
> > >
> > > On 25-Aug-2012, George > wrote:
> > >
> > > > If I was in that scenario I would not have emptied a clip into someone
> > > > if I was on a crowded city street. You are supposed to know what is in
> > > > the line of fire and what damage you can cause.
> > >
> > > Have you ever been in a firefight? Ever been in the line of fire?
> > > Until
> > > you have, you have no idea what you would do.
> >
> > Says someone with likely zero firearms experience or training.
>
> I received my first weapon, Remington rifle, at age 10, and used my father's
> 45 in target practice at age 12. At age 20 I entered the US Army and was
> trained on the M14 and m16. Serving in a recon unit of the First Cavalry
> Division in the Republic of Vietnam 1968-1969 I carried and used M16s, 9mm
> and 45s. I have been in numerous firefights . I have seen more people die
> from gunfire than I care to think about and more than most folks who are not
> combat veterans .

Military combat and city streets with civilians are significantly
different and cannot be compared in a meaningful way.

>
> Given your response to my questions, I can only conclude that you have only
> come face-to-face with practice targets. I assure you, they do not have the
> impact of looking into the face of another person who is intent on killing
> you. Little paper targets with a few holes in them are unlikely to have the
> impact on you that looking into the eyes of a human being as life
> disappears.

The suspect was walking away with no weapon visible. The police failed
right off the bat by initiating an armed confrontation when no
justification existed at that point. They were not responding to an
active shooter as some suggest, they were responding to a suspect
leaving the area.

I'm afraid you have no idea of the impact shooting a human would have on
me. I am not emotional and I am not religious, any human that I have
determined is a sufficient threat to justify my use of deadly force has
already been categorized the same as the animals I may hunt.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 11:21:09 -0400, George >
> wrote:
>
> >And one really reasonable course of action would be to simply follow him
> >where he may have ran into an alley or a location with a better backstop
> >than people on the street.
>
> Sure, you tell me that with a gun pointing at you.

That was not the situation, no weapon was visible until after the police
confronted the suspect. Until they initiated the confrontation it was
simply a suspect leaving the area.

> A loaded gun that
> just killed another person. Maybe you can buy him a coffee and
> persuade him to put the gun away and turn himself in. My choice is
> shoot the SOB before he shoots me.

Your choice is apparently to not look at the reported facts of the
situation and to rather fabricate a situation that would provide
justification for opening fire on a crowded street.

>
> According to the accounts that I read, once he spotted the police, he
> pulled a gun. Again, neither of us was thee so we can make up all
> sorts of fantasy solutions. Point a gun at me though, I'm shooting.

According to the reports, the suspect did not present a weapon until the
police were something around 10' from him.

Pete C. wrote:
>
> The suspect was walking away with no weapon visible. The police failed
> right off the bat by initiating an armed confrontation when no
> justification existed at that point. They were not responding to an
> active shooter as some suggest, they were responding to a suspect
> leaving the area.
>

SOP for the NYPD: Create a dangerous situation, Shoot your way out of
it, Bask in your "qualified immunity" from any legal repercussions.

_There was no need to confront the guy at all_ Follow from a far
distance until you get a safe opportunity to grab him, and if that never
happens or he slips away *that is OK too*, they knew who he was and
could pick him up later.

The ridiculous 12# triggers they put on NYPD guns probably has as much
to do with their poor hit ratio as anything. But what the heck; they
are not responsible for each and every bullet they fire like you or I
would be.

Bob

On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 12:22:49 -0500, "Pete C." >
wrote:



>
>> A loaded gun that
>> just killed another person. Maybe you can buy him a coffee and
>> persuade him to put the gun away and turn himself in. My choice is
>> shoot the SOB before he shoots me.
>
>Your choice is apparently to not look at the reported facts of the
>situation and to rather fabricate a situation that would provide
>justification for opening fire on a crowded street.


Point a gun at me and I'm shooting. That is the only fact I need.

>
>>
>> According to the accounts that I read, once he spotted the police, he
>> pulled a gun. Again, neither of us was thee so we can make up all
>> sorts of fantasy solutions. Point a gun at me though, I'm shooting.
>
>According to the reports, the suspect did not present a weapon until the
>police were something around 10' from him.

Again, we don't know the full story, just some reports. He pointed a
gun, they fired. Maybe they were following, maybe not. To assume he
is going to a lesser populated place is pure speculation. He could
have taken a hostage, he could have started randomly shooting. Many
possibilities.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 12:22:49 -0500, "Pete C." >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >> A loaded gun that
> >> just killed another person. Maybe you can buy him a coffee and
> >> persuade him to put the gun away and turn himself in. My choice is
> >> shoot the SOB before he shoots me.
> >
> >Your choice is apparently to not look at the reported facts of the
> >situation and to rather fabricate a situation that would provide
> >justification for opening fire on a crowded street.
>
> Point a gun at me and I'm shooting. That is the only fact I need.

Indeed, even when it has no applicability to the event being discussed.

>
> >
> >>
> >> According to the accounts that I read, once he spotted the police, he
> >> pulled a gun. Again, neither of us was thee so we can make up all
> >> sorts of fantasy solutions. Point a gun at me though, I'm shooting.
> >
> >According to the reports, the suspect did not present a weapon until the
> >police were something around 10' from him.
>
> Again, we don't know the full story, just some reports. He pointed a
> gun, they fired. Maybe they were following, maybe not. To assume he
> is going to a lesser populated place is pure speculation. He could
> have taken a hostage, he could have started randomly shooting. Many
> possibilities.

He had no weapon displayed, after being pointed out by bystanders he was
still nothing more than a suspect walking away from the area.

On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 12:09:20 -0500, "Pete C." >
wrote:

>
>Remember that police are typically required to wear body armor (IIIA
>typically), so the threat of them not going home is not as large as you
>apparently believe.

How many is not large?
http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/

"Gary" > wrote in message ...
>
> If you think policemen are bullies and arrogant, wait until you need to
> call
> one to help you and see how happy you are when they show up quickly.
>
> Gary
>
> PS - in my city, the police get pretty damn good pay and benefits. Once
> you
> consider the dangerous job they take on each shift though, I think they
> are
> probably underpaid.

Interesting program on the radio this morning.
Apparently, in states that have introduced "3 strikes" laws, the murder rate
of police officers has doubled.
Unintended consequences of "common sense" but ultimately stupid laws.

On 8/25/2012 2:42 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 12:22:49 -0500, "Pete C." >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>> A loaded gun that
>>> just killed another person. Maybe you can buy him a coffee and
>>> persuade him to put the gun away and turn himself in. My choice is
>>> shoot the SOB before he shoots me.
>>
>> Your choice is apparently to not look at the reported facts of the
>> situation and to rather fabricate a situation that would provide
>> justification for opening fire on a crowded street.
>
>
> Point a gun at me and I'm shooting. That is the only fact I need.

How many times when on a crowded street?


>
>>
>>>
>>> According to the accounts that I read, once he spotted the police, he
>>> pulled a gun. Again, neither of us was thee so we can make up all
>>> sorts of fantasy solutions. Point a gun at me though, I'm shooting.
>>
>> According to the reports, the suspect did not present a weapon until the
>> police were something around 10' from him.
>
> Again, we don't know the full story, just some reports. He pointed a
> gun, they fired. Maybe they were following, maybe not. To assume he
> is going to a lesser populated place is pure speculation. He could
> have taken a hostage, he could have started randomly shooting. Many
> possibilities.
>
Look at the video link I posted. Some stores CCTV caught the whole
thing. It showed him hustling along on the cub side of the sidewalk.

On 8/25/2012 5:00 PM, l, not -l wrote:
> On 25-Aug-2012, George > wrote:
>
>> On 8/25/2012 11:21 AM, Gary wrote:
>>> George wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 8/25/2012 10:22 AM, Gary wrote:
>>>>> The cops don't go to an office and safely work on a computer, drink
>>>>> coffee,
>>>>> and have a great day. They are sent out to deal with the scum that are
>>>>> everywhere. If I was a cop and a bad guy pointed a gun in my face, I'd
>>>>> empty
>>>>> my clip into him...one less worthless piece of crap. Better him than
>>>>> me.
>>>>
>>>> Without concern for the safety of others even if you were on a crowded
>>>> city street?
>>>
>>> Come on, George. Of course the cops have concern for that. That's why
>>> they
>>> often refrain from shooting someone. Keep in mind too....what if they
>>> don't
>>> shoot the bad guy and he starts shooting the innocent people.
>>
>> They were right behind him. Lets say they didn't confront him and he
>> drew his gun they could have shot him and maybe not so many times
>> considering they were on a crowded street. A few bullets at 10 feet have
>> substantial effect.
>
> According to today's NYTimes, he did draw his gun on the cops and there is
> security video that documents it.
>

I posted the link for the video here. It showed him scooting along on
the curb side of the sidewalk and he pulled the gun after they
confronted him.

zxcvbob wrote:
>
> Point of order: *It was the cops who shot the passers-by*
>
> It started out as a routine homicide inside the ESB; one shooter and
> one targeted victim he had a grudge against. When the shooter was
> getting away cops outside the building opened fire into the crowd,
> killing the bad guy and injuring a bunch of bystanders.

My friend was a NYC cop for 20 years, and he took target practice seriously.
The other guys couldn't shoot straight.

When a situation demanded that he shoot and kill, he did. Other cops fired
shots that went into the walls, fortunately.


--

Reply in group, but if emailing add one more
zero, and remove the last word.

"Pete C." > wrote in message
.com...
>
> "Christopher M." wrote:
>>
>> "Pete C." > wrote in message
>> .com...
>> >
>> > graham wrote:
>> >>
>> >> "Andy" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> > OT: Craziness in NYC!!!
>> >> >
>> >> > Noon TV news reported earlier this morning, a crazed gunman at the
>> >> > Empire
>> >> > State building in midtown Manhattan at 34th Street and Fifth Avenue
>> >> > shot
>> >> > randomly at passers by. Two dead, nine injured.
>> >> >
>> >> > The mayor reported some injured were, in the confusion, were shot by
>> >> > police.
>> >> >
>> >> > Crazy nuts to my left <---> crazy nuts to my right!!!
>> >> >
>> >> > Crazy!
>> >> >
>> >> > Andy
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Guns don't kill people!
>> >>
>> >> But people with guns sure as hell do!
>> >
>> > Police with guns sure do. As a non-criminal civilian your odds are much
>> > higher for being shot by careless police than by a civilian.
>>
>> You could make the same argument with car chases. But if no one enforces
>> the
>> law there's chaos. The thin blue line must be preserved.
>
> Have you noted that nearly everywhere the police now have rules
> prohibiting nearly all car chases? Nearly every car chase scenario ends
> worse than simply letting the suspect get away and finding them later in
> a safer environment. In this NYC case the police did not have an active
> shooter to respond to until they initiated the confrontation, prior to
> that they had a suspect leaving the area, nothing more.

How do you know the suspect wasn't planning to shoot more people? Could you
read his mind?


W. Pooh (AKA Winnie P.)

On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 17:12:52 -0400, George >
wrote:



>>
>>
>> Point a gun at me and I'm shooting. That is the only fact I need.
>
>How many times when on a crowded street?
>

I don't know. None of us know. We can sit at a computer and calmly
say what "should" take place, but unless you are in that situation,
you don't know what you really will do.

George wrote:
>
> I posted the link for the video here. It showed him scooting along on
> the curb side of the sidewalk and he pulled the gun after they
> confronted him.

Any sane person would know that if you pull a gun on a cop, you will get
shot even before you get to aim. And like me, I would keep shooting his evil
ass until I was convinced he was done and couldn't sit back up and shoot
me. One shot can knock a person down but that doesn't mean that it's over.

G.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 17:12:52 -0400, George >
> wrote:
>
> >>
> >>
> >> Point a gun at me and I'm shooting. That is the only fact I need.
> >
> >How many times when on a crowded street?
> >
>
> I don't know. None of us know. We can sit at a computer and calmly
> say what "should" take place, but unless you are in that situation,
> you don't know what you really will do.

I said that already and agree. I've been in several situations (not violent)
where I thought I knew how I would react but once it happens you can be
surprised how you react and how you feel. You just never really know until
something actually happens.


G.

On 8/26/2012 5:15 AM, Gary wrote:
> George wrote:
>>
>> I posted the link for the video here. It showed him scooting along on
>> the curb side of the sidewalk and he pulled the gun after they
>> confronted him.
>
> Any sane person would know that if you pull a gun on a cop, you will get
> shot even before you get to aim. And like me, I would keep shooting his evil
> ass until I was convinced he was done and couldn't sit back up and shoot
> me. One shot can knock a person down but that doesn't mean that it's over.
>
> G.
>

No one is disputing being shot if you pull a gun. What is under
discussion is two cops side by side and 8 feet away from the person they
were shooting firing so many shots on a crowded street.

George wrote:
>
> On 8/26/2012 5:15 AM, Gary wrote:
> > George wrote:
> >>
> >> I posted the link for the video here. It showed him scooting along on
> >> the curb side of the sidewalk and he pulled the gun after they
> >> confronted him.
> >
> > Any sane person would know that if you pull a gun on a cop, you will get
> > shot even before you get to aim. And like me, I would keep shooting his evil
> > ass until I was convinced he was done and couldn't sit back up and shoot
> > me. One shot can knock a person down but that doesn't mean that it's over.
> >
> > G.
> >
>
> No one is disputing being shot if you pull a gun. What is under
> discussion is two cops side by side and 8 feet away from the person they
> were shooting firing so many shots on a crowded street.

You're nitpicking here, George. If cops fire on a crowded street, even the
first shot might hit someone else. According to your thinking, they
shouldn't have fired even the first shot. My thinking is....once you start
shooting, make sure he won't get back up.

G.

On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 07:59:22 -0400, Gary > wrote:

>George wrote:
>>
>> On 8/26/2012 5:15 AM, Gary wrote:
>> > George wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I posted the link for the video here. It showed him scooting along on
>> >> the curb side of the sidewalk and he pulled the gun after they
>> >> confronted him.
>> >
>> > Any sane person would know that if you pull a gun on a cop, you will get
>> > shot even before you get to aim. And like me, I would keep shooting his evil
>> > ass until I was convinced he was done and couldn't sit back up and shoot
>> > me. One shot can knock a person down but that doesn't mean that it's over.
>> >
>> > G.
>> >
>>
>> No one is disputing being shot if you pull a gun. What is under
>> discussion is two cops side by side and 8 feet away from the person they
>> were shooting firing so many shots on a crowded street.
>
>You're nitpicking here, George. If cops fire on a crowded street, even the
>first shot might hit someone else. According to your thinking, they
>shouldn't have fired even the first shot. My thinking is....once you start
>shooting, make sure he won't get back up.
>
>G.

While at least one poster thinks they should have followed him to a
better location, he turned and drew his gun. Only one possible and
sensible response to that. Shoot. Shoot first if you can.

Gary wrote:

> > > Don't say "perp", it makes you look stupid. HTH :-)

> > BTW, cops use that term all the time. What are you saying about them,
> > exactly?
>
> That just made me wonder. Cops do use that term all the time on the cop
> shows but I wonder if real cops use it?

Hollywood writers consult with real cops, you know. That tells me some
cops have used the term, although maybe it's not prevalent.

You're the one who loves gun nuts, though. You should know about this
stuff. Here's a poser: Suppose somebody shot up a *** Pride parade. Is
he a "perp" or a Righteous Smiter Of Sinners?

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 07:59:22 -0400, Gary > wrote:
> >You're nitpicking here, George. If cops fire on a crowded street, even the
> >first shot might hit someone else. According to your thinking, they
> >shouldn't have fired even the first shot. My thinking is....once you start
> >shooting, make sure he won't get back up.
> >
> >G.
>
> While at least one poster thinks they should have followed him to a
> better location, he turned and drew his gun. Only one possible and
> sensible response to that. Shoot. Shoot first if you can.

And live.

"George M. Middius" wrote:
>
> Gary wrote:
>
> > > > Don't say "perp", it makes you look stupid. HTH :-)
>
> > > BTW, cops use that term all the time. What are you saying about them,
> > > exactly?
> >
> > That just made me wonder. Cops do use that term all the time on the cop
> > shows but I wonder if real cops use it?
>
> Hollywood writers consult with real cops, you know. That tells me some
> cops have used the term, although maybe it's not prevalent.
>
> You're the one who loves gun nuts, though. You should know about this
> stuff. Here's a poser: Suppose somebody shot up a *** Pride parade. Is
> he a "perp" or a Righteous Smiter Of Sinners?

He's a criminal "bad guy," George. >:-o Gays are not sinners, imo.

G.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 12:09:20 -0500, "Pete C." >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >Remember that police are typically required to wear body armor (IIIA
> >typically), so the threat of them not going home is not as large as you
> >apparently believe.
>
> How many is not large?
> http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/

In a country with a population of something like 330,000,000 75, or 119
is about as "not large" as you can get.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 07:59:22 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>
> >George wrote:
> >>
> >> On 8/26/2012 5:15 AM, Gary wrote:
> >> > George wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> I posted the link for the video here. It showed him scooting along on
> >> >> the curb side of the sidewalk and he pulled the gun after they
> >> >> confronted him.
> >> >
> >> > Any sane person would know that if you pull a gun on a cop, you will get
> >> > shot even before you get to aim. And like me, I would keep shooting his evil
> >> > ass until I was convinced he was done and couldn't sit back up and shoot
> >> > me. One shot can knock a person down but that doesn't mean that it's over.
> >> >
> >> > G.
> >> >
> >>
> >> No one is disputing being shot if you pull a gun. What is under
> >> discussion is two cops side by side and 8 feet away from the person they
> >> were shooting firing so many shots on a crowded street.
> >
> >You're nitpicking here, George. If cops fire on a crowded street, even the
> >first shot might hit someone else. According to your thinking, they
> >shouldn't have fired even the first shot. My thinking is....once you start
> >shooting, make sure he won't get back up.
> >
> >G.
>
> While at least one poster thinks they should have followed him to a
> better location, he turned and drew his gun. Only one possible and
> sensible response to that. Shoot. Shoot first if you can.

Yes, he turned and drew (but didn't fire) *after* they confronted him.
Until that time he was nothing more than a suspect leaving the area. The
police didn't even witness him doing anything, they only were told by a
bystander.

Tom Del Rosso wrote:
>
> zxcvbob wrote:
> >
> > Point of order: *It was the cops who shot the passers-by*
> >
> > It started out as a routine homicide inside the ESB; one shooter and
> > one targeted victim he had a grudge against. When the shooter was
> > getting away cops outside the building opened fire into the crowd,
> > killing the bad guy and injuring a bunch of bystanders.
>
> My friend was a NYC cop for 20 years, and he took target practice seriously.
> The other guys couldn't shoot straight.
>
> When a situation demanded that he shoot and kill, he did. Other cops fired
> shots that went into the walls, fortunately.

Exactly. The public, particularly the anti-gun types want to believe
that all police are highly trained marksmen when that is simply not the
reality. The average officer gets pretty minimal firearms training and
the average officer is not a firearms hobbyist.

"Christopher M." wrote:
>
> "Pete C." > wrote in message
> .com...
> >
> > "Christopher M." wrote:
> >>
> >> "Pete C." > wrote in message
> >> .com...
> >> >
> >> > graham wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> "Andy" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> > OT: Craziness in NYC!!!
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Noon TV news reported earlier this morning, a crazed gunman at the
> >> >> > Empire
> >> >> > State building in midtown Manhattan at 34th Street and Fifth Avenue
> >> >> > shot
> >> >> > randomly at passers by. Two dead, nine injured.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > The mayor reported some injured were, in the confusion, were shot by
> >> >> > police.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Crazy nuts to my left <---> crazy nuts to my right!!!
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Crazy!
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Andy
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Guns don't kill people!
> >> >>
> >> >> But people with guns sure as hell do!
> >> >
> >> > Police with guns sure do. As a non-criminal civilian your odds are much
> >> > higher for being shot by careless police than by a civilian.
> >>
> >> You could make the same argument with car chases. But if no one enforces
> >> the
> >> law there's chaos. The thin blue line must be preserved.
> >
> > Have you noted that nearly everywhere the police now have rules
> > prohibiting nearly all car chases? Nearly every car chase scenario ends
> > worse than simply letting the suspect get away and finding them later in
> > a safer environment. In this NYC case the police did not have an active
> > shooter to respond to until they initiated the confrontation, prior to
> > that they had a suspect leaving the area, nothing more.
>
> How do you know the suspect wasn't planning to shoot more people? Could you
> read his mind?

You don't know, and at that point the police hadn't ever observed the
suspect with a weapon at all. They were not responding to a "active
shooter", they were responding to a report of a shooting and a suspect
leaving the area, nothing more.

On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 23:46:47 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

>On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 17:12:52 -0400, George >
>wrote:
>
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>> Point a gun at me and I'm shooting. That is the only fact I need.
>>
>>How many times when on a crowded street?
>>
>
>I don't know. None of us know. We can sit at a computer and calmly
>say what "should" take place, but unless you are in that situation,
>you don't know what you really will do.

With a gun pointing at them most folks would totally forget they have
a gun and **** their pants... they know damn well if they reach for
their gun they'd be dead before they can wrap their hand around it.

I know a gal who was a manager in an upscale candy store in NYC, when
the robber pointed his gun at her and said show me the money she
lifted her sweater and flashed her bare boobs, he forgot all about the
cash register, ogled her for a minute and left the store... I swear
this is true, she was my aunt, she was BUILT! Her name is Bessie,
coulda been Bossy. She's still alive, about ninety now, lives in a
nursing home in Brooklyn, she was one tough Brooklyn chick.

On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 11:34:51 -0500, "Pete C." >
wrote:



>>
>> While at least one poster thinks they should have followed him to a
>> better location, he turned and drew his gun. Only one possible and
>> sensible response to that. Shoot. Shoot first if you can.
>
>Yes, he turned and drew (but didn't fire) *after* they confronted him.
>Until that time he was nothing more than a suspect leaving the area. The
>police didn't even witness him doing anything, they only were told by a
>bystander.

What should they have done at that point. Invite him to afternoon tea
to discuss the circumstances? Shooting seems more sensible to me, but
you are free to do as you think fits the situation.

On 8/25/2012 7:06 PM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
> zxcvbob wrote:
>>
>> Point of order: *It was the cops who shot the passers-by*
>>
>> It started out as a routine homicide inside the ESB; one shooter and
>> one targeted victim he had a grudge against. When the shooter was
>> getting away cops outside the building opened fire into the crowd,
>> killing the bad guy and injuring a bunch of bystanders.
>
> My friend was a NYC cop for 20 years, and he took target practice seriously.
> The other guys couldn't shoot straight.


An old friend is a police chief in a medium size city and I have been to
LEO events and shoot at a local LEO range because he invites me and I
can absolutely confirm that what people see on TV say about every cop
being able to shoot a gun out of someones hand at 200 feet is pure
fantasy. Many require repeated attempts just to pass basic qualification.


And I can't imagine why it is "cop hating" to question the actions of
police officers in a free country. Firing 16 rounds on a crowded street
from 8 feet away is what we might expect to see in a movie where they
were fighting a space alien.



>
> When a situation demanded that he shoot and kill, he did. Other cops fired
> shots that went into the walls, fortunately.
>
>

On 8/25/2012 9:11 PM, Christopher M. wrote:
> "Pete C." > wrote in message
> .com...
>>
>> "Christopher M." wrote:
>>>
>>> "Pete C." > wrote in message
>>> .com...
>>>>
>>>> graham wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Andy" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> OT: Craziness in NYC!!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Noon TV news reported earlier this morning, a crazed gunman at the
>>>>>> Empire
>>>>>> State building in midtown Manhattan at 34th Street and Fifth Avenue
>>>>>> shot
>>>>>> randomly at passers by. Two dead, nine injured.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The mayor reported some injured were, in the confusion, were shot by
>>>>>> police.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Crazy nuts to my left <---> crazy nuts to my right!!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Crazy!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Andy
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Guns don't kill people!
>>>>>
>>>>> But people with guns sure as hell do!
>>>>
>>>> Police with guns sure do. As a non-criminal civilian your odds are much
>>>> higher for being shot by careless police than by a civilian.
>>>
>>> You could make the same argument with car chases. But if no one enforces
>>> the
>>> law there's chaos. The thin blue line must be preserved.
>>
>> Have you noted that nearly everywhere the police now have rules
>> prohibiting nearly all car chases? Nearly every car chase scenario ends
>> worse than simply letting the suspect get away and finding them later in
>> a safer environment. In this NYC case the police did not have an active
>> shooter to respond to until they initiated the confrontation, prior to
>> that they had a suspect leaving the area, nothing more.
>
> How do you know the suspect wasn't planning to shoot more people? Could you
> read his mind?
>

Consider the whole series of events. Guy shoots and kills former boss
and it is witnessed by construction workers. The construction worker
finds cops on foot patrol and points out the person. Cops pursue the
person with no weapon in sight until they either confront him or he
spots them .


>
> W. Pooh (AKA Winnie P.)
>
>

Brooklyn1 wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 23:46:47 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 17:12:52 -0400, George >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>> Point a gun at me and I'm shooting. That is the only fact I need.
>>> How many times when on a crowded street?
>>>
>> I don't know. None of us know. We can sit at a computer and calmly
>> say what "should" take place, but unless you are in that situation,
>> you don't know what you really will do.
>
> With a gun pointing at them most folks would totally forget they have
> a gun and **** their pants... they know damn well if they reach for
> their gun they'd be dead before they can wrap their hand around it.
>
> I know a gal who was a manager in an upscale candy store in NYC, when
> the robber pointed his gun at her and said show me the money she
> lifted her sweater and flashed her bare boobs, he forgot all about the
> cash register, ogled her for a minute and left the store... I swear
> this is true, she was my aunt, she was BUILT! Her name is Bessie,
> coulda been Bossy. She's still alive, about ninety now, lives in a
> nursing home in Brooklyn, she was one tough Brooklyn chick.


Does she still have nice tits?

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 11:34:51 -0500, "Pete C." >
> wrote:
>
> >>
> >> While at least one poster thinks they should have followed him to a
> >> better location, he turned and drew his gun. Only one possible and
> >> sensible response to that. Shoot. Shoot first if you can.
> >
> >Yes, he turned and drew (but didn't fire) *after* they confronted him.
> >Until that time he was nothing more than a suspect leaving the area. The
> >police didn't even witness him doing anything, they only were told by a
> >bystander.
>
> What should they have done at that point. Invite him to afternoon tea
> to discuss the circumstances? Shooting seems more sensible to me, but
> you are free to do as you think fits the situation.

You know full well that they should not have initiated a confrontation
in a crowded area when there was no justification to do so at that time.

On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 15:58:42 -0500, zxcvbob >
wrote:

>Brooklyn1 wrote:
>> On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 23:46:47 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 17:12:52 -0400, George >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Point a gun at me and I'm shooting. That is the only fact I need.
>>>> How many times when on a crowded street?
>>>>
>>> I don't know. None of us know. We can sit at a computer and calmly
>>> say what "should" take place, but unless you are in that situation,
>>> you don't know what you really will do.
>>
>> With a gun pointing at them most folks would totally forget they have
>> a gun and **** their pants... they know damn well if they reach for
>> their gun they'd be dead before they can wrap their hand around it.
>>
>> I know a gal who was a manager in an upscale candy store in NYC, when
>> the robber pointed his gun at her and said show me the money she
>> lifted her sweater and flashed her bare boobs, he forgot all about the
>> cash register, ogled her for a minute and left the store... I swear
>> this is true, she was my aunt, she was BUILT! Her name is Bessie,
>> coulda been Bossy. She's still alive, about ninety now, lives in a
>> nursing home in Brooklyn, she was one tough Brooklyn chick.
>
>
>Does she still have nice tits?

I've no idea, I haven't seen her in some 40 years. Last I heard she
has alzheimers and probably wouldn't know me. But I imagine she still
has nice tits, just a lot lower. My mother had three younger
sisters... when I was a toddler I remember seeing all my mom's
sister's tits all the time. It was war time, all the men including my
father were off fighting the war, all the women worked in factories
for the war effort, when they were home they took turns caring for me.
Money and goods were scarce, there wasn't much heat in winter, I spent
a lot of time swaddled in cleavage.

"George" > wrote in message
...
> On 8/25/2012 9:11 PM, Christopher M. wrote:
>> "Pete C." > wrote in message
>> .com...
>>>
>>> "Christopher M." wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "Pete C." > wrote in message
>>>> .com...
>>>>>
>>>>> graham wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Andy" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> OT: Craziness in NYC!!!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Noon TV news reported earlier this morning, a crazed gunman at the
>>>>>>> Empire
>>>>>>> State building in midtown Manhattan at 34th Street and Fifth Avenue
>>>>>>> shot
>>>>>>> randomly at passers by. Two dead, nine injured.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The mayor reported some injured were, in the confusion, were shot by
>>>>>>> police.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Crazy nuts to my left <---> crazy nuts to my right!!!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Crazy!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Andy
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Guns don't kill people!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But people with guns sure as hell do!
>>>>>
>>>>> Police with guns sure do. As a non-criminal civilian your odds are
>>>>> much
>>>>> higher for being shot by careless police than by a civilian.
>>>>
>>>> You could make the same argument with car chases. But if no one
>>>> enforces
>>>> the
>>>> law there's chaos. The thin blue line must be preserved.
>>>
>>> Have you noted that nearly everywhere the police now have rules
>>> prohibiting nearly all car chases? Nearly every car chase scenario ends
>>> worse than simply letting the suspect get away and finding them later in
>>> a safer environment. In this NYC case the police did not have an active
>>> shooter to respond to until they initiated the confrontation, prior to
>>> that they had a suspect leaving the area, nothing more.
>>
>> How do you know the suspect wasn't planning to shoot more people? Could
>> you
>> read his mind?
>>
>
> Consider the whole series of events. Guy shoots and kills former boss and
> it is witnessed by construction workers. The construction worker finds
> cops on foot patrol and points out the person. Cops pursue the person with
> no weapon in sight until they either confront him or he spots them .

So the construction workers read the guys mind. The construction workers
read his mind, and learned that he wanted to kill his former boss. And since
the guy had no weapon in sight that meant that his shooting activities were
over, and he was on his way to Weight Watchers.


W. Pooh (AKA Winnie P.)

On 8/26/2012 7:23 PM, Christopher M. wrote:
> "George" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 8/25/2012 9:11 PM, Christopher M. wrote:
>>> "Pete C." > wrote in message
>>> .com...
>>>>
>>>> "Christopher M." wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Pete C." > wrote in message
>>>>> .com...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> graham wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Andy" > wrote in message
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>> OT: Craziness in NYC!!!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Noon TV news reported earlier this morning, a crazed gunman at the
>>>>>>>> Empire
>>>>>>>> State building in midtown Manhattan at 34th Street and Fifth Avenue
>>>>>>>> shot
>>>>>>>> randomly at passers by. Two dead, nine injured.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The mayor reported some injured were, in the confusion, were shot by
>>>>>>>> police.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Crazy nuts to my left <---> crazy nuts to my right!!!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Crazy!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Andy
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Guns don't kill people!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But people with guns sure as hell do!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Police with guns sure do. As a non-criminal civilian your odds are
>>>>>> much
>>>>>> higher for being shot by careless police than by a civilian.
>>>>>
>>>>> You could make the same argument with car chases. But if no one
>>>>> enforces
>>>>> the
>>>>> law there's chaos. The thin blue line must be preserved.
>>>>
>>>> Have you noted that nearly everywhere the police now have rules
>>>> prohibiting nearly all car chases? Nearly every car chase scenario ends
>>>> worse than simply letting the suspect get away and finding them later in
>>>> a safer environment. In this NYC case the police did not have an active
>>>> shooter to respond to until they initiated the confrontation, prior to
>>>> that they had a suspect leaving the area, nothing more.
>>>
>>> How do you know the suspect wasn't planning to shoot more people? Could
>>> you
>>> read his mind?
>>>
>>
>> Consider the whole series of events. Guy shoots and kills former boss and
>> it is witnessed by construction workers. The construction worker finds
>> cops on foot patrol and points out the person. Cops pursue the person with
>> no weapon in sight until they either confront him or he spots them .
>
> So the construction workers read the guys mind. The construction workers
> read his mind, and learned that he wanted to kill his former boss. And since
> the guy had no weapon in sight that meant that his shooting activities were
> over, and he was on his way to Weight Watchers.
>
>
> W. Pooh (AKA Winnie P.)
>
>
OK, but I wrote nothing like that. Maybe read what I wrote and give it
some consideration.

"George" > wrote in message
...
> On 8/26/2012 7:23 PM, Christopher M. wrote:
>> "George" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On 8/25/2012 9:11 PM, Christopher M. wrote:
>>>> "Pete C." > wrote in message
>>>> .com...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Christopher M." wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Pete C." > wrote in message
>>>>>> .com...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> graham wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Andy" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>> OT: Craziness in NYC!!!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Noon TV news reported earlier this morning, a crazed gunman at the
>>>>>>>>> Empire
>>>>>>>>> State building in midtown Manhattan at 34th Street and Fifth
>>>>>>>>> Avenue
>>>>>>>>> shot
>>>>>>>>> randomly at passers by. Two dead, nine injured.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The mayor reported some injured were, in the confusion, were shot
>>>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>>>> police.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Crazy nuts to my left <---> crazy nuts to my right!!!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Crazy!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Andy
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Guns don't kill people!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But people with guns sure as hell do!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Police with guns sure do. As a non-criminal civilian your odds are
>>>>>>> much
>>>>>>> higher for being shot by careless police than by a civilian.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You could make the same argument with car chases. But if no one
>>>>>> enforces
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> law there's chaos. The thin blue line must be preserved.
>>>>>
>>>>> Have you noted that nearly everywhere the police now have rules
>>>>> prohibiting nearly all car chases? Nearly every car chase scenario
>>>>> ends
>>>>> worse than simply letting the suspect get away and finding them later
>>>>> in
>>>>> a safer environment. In this NYC case the police did not have an
>>>>> active
>>>>> shooter to respond to until they initiated the confrontation, prior to
>>>>> that they had a suspect leaving the area, nothing more.
>>>>
>>>> How do you know the suspect wasn't planning to shoot more people? Could
>>>> you
>>>> read his mind?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Consider the whole series of events. Guy shoots and kills former boss
>>> and
>>> it is witnessed by construction workers. The construction worker finds
>>> cops on foot patrol and points out the person. Cops pursue the person
>>> with
>>> no weapon in sight until they either confront him or he spots them .
>>
>> So the construction workers read the guys mind. The construction workers
>> read his mind, and learned that he wanted to kill his former boss. And
>> since
>> the guy had no weapon in sight that meant that his shooting activities
>> were
>> over, and he was on his way to Weight Watchers.
>>
>>
>> W. Pooh (AKA Winnie P.)
>>
>>
> OK, but I wrote nothing like that. Maybe read what I wrote and give it
> some consideration.

I'm so wasted.


W. Pooh (AKA Winnie P.)

On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 16:48:14 -0500, "Pete C." >
wrote:



>> >
>> >Yes, he turned and drew (but didn't fire) *after* they confronted him.
>> >Until that time he was nothing more than a suspect leaving the area. The
>> >police didn't even witness him doing anything, they only were told by a
>> >bystander.
>>
>> What should they have done at that point. Invite him to afternoon tea
>> to discuss the circumstances? Shooting seems more sensible to me, but
>> you are free to do as you think fits the situation.
>
>You know full well that they should not have initiated a confrontation
>in a crowded area when there was no justification to do so at that time.

No, I don't know. I've had tried to stop him.

What would you have done?

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 16:48:14 -0500, "Pete C." >
> wrote:
>
> >> >
> >> >Yes, he turned and drew (but didn't fire) *after* they confronted him.
> >> >Until that time he was nothing more than a suspect leaving the area. The
> >> >police didn't even witness him doing anything, they only were told by a
> >> >bystander.
> >>
> >> What should they have done at that point. Invite him to afternoon tea
> >> to discuss the circumstances? Shooting seems more sensible to me, but
> >> you are free to do as you think fits the situation.
> >
> >You know full well that they should not have initiated a confrontation
> >in a crowded area when there was no justification to do so at that time.
>
> No, I don't know. I've had tried to stop him.
>
> What would you have done?

I would have followed the suspect from a safe distance since at that
point there was nothing more than a bystander report indicating the
suspect had shot someone. If the suspect confronted me and drew a weapon
I would of course have shot them, however I would not have emptied the
mag nor missed most of the shots. If in following the suspect they went
into a less crowded area such as an alley I would then have confronted
them, which would presumably have led to the same shooting, but in a
safer area.

On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 09:15:00 -0500, "Pete C." >
wrote:



>>
>> What would you have done?
>
>I would have followed the suspect from a safe distance since at that
>point there was nothing more than a bystander report indicating the
>suspect had shot someone. If the suspect confronted me and drew a weapon
>I would of course have shot them, however I would not have emptied the
>mag nor missed most of the shots. If in following the suspect they went
>into a less crowded area such as an alley I would then have confronted
>them, which would presumably have led to the same shooting, but in a
>safer area.


That sounds good on paper, but since we were not there, we don't know
how practical that would be. Too much distance in NYC and it would be
easy to get lost.

Even though you think you'd not have taken more shots, you did not
have the gun pointed at you. You may react differently that you
think.

zxcvbob > wrote:

>graham wrote:

>> Guns don't kill people!
>>
>> But people with guns sure as hell do!

>Point of order: *It was the cops who shot the passers-by*

>It started out as a routine homicide inside the ESB; one shooter and one
>targeted victim he had a grudge against. When the shooter was getting
>away cops outside the building opened fire into the crowd, killing the
>bad guy and injuring a bunch of bystanders.

For what it's worth the cops shot low so that nobody would be fatally
injured, and that in fact was the outcome. Nobody in New York expects
cops to not shoot at bad guys.

Steve