PDA

View Full Version : Cops shot all nine bystanders at Empire State Building




Dianne
08-26-2012, 02:36 AM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/25/empire-state-building-shooting-nypd-bullets-shot-all-nine_n_1830007.html

Seems like a week or so ago, Bloomberg was saying no individual should have a gun..... leave guns in hands of law enforcement who know how to use them.

New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said all nine bystanders wounded in Friday's Empire State Building shooting had been hit with police gunfire, CNN reported Saturday morning.

According to Kelly, of the nine wounded, three suffered gunshot wounds and six were hit by fragments.

Gunfire broke out shortly after 9 a.m. on Friday when a gunman identified as 58-year old Jeffrey Johnson shot and killed former coworker Steve Ercolino near the Empire State Building.

Johnson attempted to flee the scene, but was thwarted after a construction worker who followed him tipped off police officers.

Police approached Johnson who aimed his gun at the officers before police opened fire, killing him on the spot.

LibertyEagle
08-26-2012, 02:45 AM
lol. Good find.

LibertyRevolution
08-26-2012, 04:17 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/25/justice/new-york-empire-state-shooting/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

Weston White
08-26-2012, 04:26 AM
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED

Now seriously, with friends like the NYPD on your side, who needs enemies like Al Qaeda? ...Oh I "get it", so this must be why our own military has began teaming up with Al Qaeda to fight battles in the Mideast. Ah, so, it all falls into place now. :(

QuickZ06
08-26-2012, 04:55 AM
I f'in knew it. From those videos I could tell the cops lit up everyone. They all need to stick to bicycles and quarters to call actual people that know how to use firearms.

QuickZ06
08-26-2012, 05:05 AM
Ready. Fire. Aim.

Origanalist
08-26-2012, 06:20 AM
Ready. Fire. Aim.

Perfect.

Liberty74
08-26-2012, 07:12 AM
I think someone called it on another thread - that the people shot were probably done so by police.

Just curious...

Can NY city be sued for this by such relatives?

tod evans
08-26-2012, 07:13 AM
I think someone called it on another thread - that the people shot were probably done so by police.

Just curious...

Can NY city be sued for this by such relatives?

Not successfully, see qualified immunity.

NoOneButPaul
08-26-2012, 07:23 AM
Doesn't this kinda squash our argument that allowing everyone to conceal and carry would fix the gun problems?

It says the 9 people got hit by the fragments, not the bullets themselves...

PaulConventionWV
08-26-2012, 08:19 AM
lol. Good find.

//

Valli6
08-26-2012, 08:26 AM
I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that Eric Holder has been suing cities all over the country to lower the test scores required to pass police exams. If there's anything worse than being shot by a bunch of inept cops - it's being shot by a bunch of non-diverse, inept cops.

Dayton’s original eligibility criteria required candidates to score a D and a C on separate tests. The Justice Department is requiring Dayton to accept candidates who get an F on the second exam. Even candidates who fail to meet the most basic requirements can still get hired.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/apr/13/holder-justice-department-defies-supreme-court/?page=all

A federal lawsuit filed on Tuesday accuses Corpus Christi, Texas of discriminating against female applicants to the city's police department by requiring them to pass a physical test that favored men…. The government wants to city to stop using the physical ability test and to develop hiring procedures that comply with Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-07-03/news/sns-rt-us-usa-police-discriminationbre863008-20120703_1_police-department-police-academy-female-officers

pcosmar
08-26-2012, 08:33 AM
Doesn't this kinda squash our argument that allowing everyone to conceal and carry would fix the gun problems?
.

No..
average Joe is both More competent and more responsible that these hired thugs.

PaulConventionWV
08-26-2012, 08:34 AM
Doesn't this kinda squash our argument that allowing everyone to conceal and carry would fix the gun problems?

It says the 9 people got hit by the fragments, not the bullets themselves...

What's your point? There are always going to be gun casualties. It just wouldn't be as bad with concealed carry and open carry.

pcosmar
08-26-2012, 08:42 AM
I think someone called it on another thread - that the people shot were probably done so by police.

Just curious...

Can NY city be sued for this by such relatives?

I did,, post #8 when the story broke.

One dead (suspect) and 4 injured.

I wonder how many were shot by police. ???

i have suspected this in other stories,, but this is the first time (to my knowledge) that it is admitted.
I also expect it to happen more.

As far as anyone suing,, I would imagine City attorneys are quietly making deals to pay off and silence that before any suits are filed.

Dr.3D
08-26-2012, 08:45 AM
Doesn't this kinda squash our argument that allowing everyone to conceal and carry would fix the gun problems?

It says the 9 people got hit by the fragments, not the bullets themselves...
No, those using firearms other than police, know they would be held responsible if they hurt or killed innocent bystanders. Those other than the police would actually be much more careful when using their firearms.

Origanalist
08-26-2012, 08:49 AM
Doesn't this kinda squash our argument that allowing everyone to conceal and carry would fix the gun problems?

It says the 9 people got hit by the fragments, not the bullets themselves...


Three passersby sustained direct gunshot wounds, while the remaining six were hit by fragments, according to New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly. All injuries were caused by police, he said Saturday.

One officer shot nine rounds and another shot seven.


I'm not sure what you're getting at?

Bruno
08-26-2012, 08:52 AM
No, those using firearms other than police, know they would be held responsible if they hurt or killed innocent bystanders. Those other than the police would actually be much more careful when using their firearms.

+ rep

Absolutely spot on.

fisharmor
08-26-2012, 08:56 AM
Doesn't this kinda squash our argument that allowing everyone to conceal and carry would fix the gun problems?

It says the 9 people got hit by the fragments, not the bullets themselves...

Also, don't forget about that whole qualified immunity thing.
Cops can blast holes in whomever they want. We can't.
If there was trouble like this and I did something asinine like spray lead in the general direction of the offender and injured 9 other people, I'd be playing a life-long game of "don't drop the soap".
Thus, there is incentive for the average CHP holder not to act like an asshole - incentive which doesn't exist on the other side of the thin blue line.

Edit: doh, beaten to the punch

AGRP
08-26-2012, 09:08 AM
So being a cop is like being in the movies. Someone tries to run away from gunfire, but the person shooting always has horrible aim.

JK/SEA
08-26-2012, 09:11 AM
I think someone called it on another thread - that the people shot were probably done so by police.

Just curious...

Can NY city be sued for this by such relatives?

may not go anywhere, but the media attention might get 'interesting'...and worth the cost for a Lawyer.

madengr
08-26-2012, 09:11 AM
Doesn't this kinda squash our argument that allowing everyone to conceal and carry would fix the gun problems?

It says the 9 people got hit by the fragments, not the bullets themselves...

Does a bank shot not count in billiards?

I have a tiny fragment of 5.56mm deep in my leg; a ricochet from shooting steel. Luckily it is not in the knee fluid so no surgery was required to remove it. Took about a year for the nerve to regrow to my knee cap skin. Could have easily cut into an artery. I have seen a guys wrist cut fully open from a ricochet. So yes, they are dangerous, even partial fragments.

Now imagine if these cops had been shooting their patrol rifles?

ShaneEnochs
08-26-2012, 09:37 AM
Look at the comments.


if this can happen with trained law enforcement officers' bullets, just think how it would be if a bunch of marginally trained, panicked, vigilante wannabe civilians were doing the "rescuing"....

this is why it's a bad idea, you pro-packers.


Just imagine the scene had bystanders been 'packing'...


If people were armed, it would have been much worse- a whole all-out gunfight like the wild west.


So much for the NRA's talking point that one bystander with a gun could have reduced the body count of any mass shooting. In this case the "bystanders" shot more people than the perp.


It is simply too bad we don't have more armed civilians with less training than the police who could have pulled their guns and saved the day sooner.

What about the pro-gun lobby on this one? Any comments?


they are still saying that if only people were armed I guess they would be happier with 30 - 40 injured


The NYPD did an excellent job.

(if you believe differently, move to New York and join the force and show me a better job)

madengr
08-26-2012, 09:52 AM
The comments are a load of shit. CCW is not about protecting the masses. It's about protecting yourself. No CCW is going to chase someone down a crowded street. CCW won't help if someone shoots you execution style in the head.

Origanalist
08-26-2012, 09:54 AM
Look at the comments.

Consider the source.

madengr
08-26-2012, 10:04 AM
Biggest difference is that a CCW will be held legally responsible for stray bullets. The cops will be given commendations with the legal burden put on the taxpayers.

puppetmaster
08-26-2012, 10:34 AM
Disarm the cops. NOW

donnay
08-26-2012, 10:43 AM
Bloomberg et al that allow the people to be disarmed are Treasonous! The standing army in this country is the gun and badge brigades.

aGameOfThrones
08-26-2012, 10:56 AM
Disarm the cops. NOW


What part of the second amendment don't you understand?



A well regulated police force, being necessary to the security of a Police State, the right of the police to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

NoOneButPaul
08-26-2012, 11:31 AM
What's your point? There are always going to be gun casualties. It just wouldn't be as bad with concealed carry and open carry.
My point is the cops weren't at fault here. They can't direct where the fragments are going to go that's just a freak occurrence.

If everyone was carrying guns and defending themselves a lot more people would be hit with fragments that weren't even the shooters fault.

Doesn't that decrease safety?

I'm as against gun-control as anyone but this was the first response I heard online today and I kinda need a solid counter argument to it other than "we'll shoot better than cops"

pcosmar
08-26-2012, 11:42 AM
My point is the cops weren't at fault here. They can't direct where the fragments are going to go that's just a freak occurrence.

That has got to be one of the stupidest arguments I have ever heard.

It is obvious that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. And NO understanding of ballistics or Proper firearm use
"They can't direct where the fragments are going"

:(

Ender
08-26-2012, 11:48 AM
My point is the cops weren't at fault here. They can't direct where the fragments are going to go that's just a freak occurrence.

If everyone was carrying guns and defending themselves a lot more people would be hit with fragments that weren't even the shooters fault.

Doesn't that decrease safety?

I'm as against gun-control as anyone but this was the first response I heard online today and I kinda need a solid counter argument to it other than "we'll shoot better than cops"

If everyone as carrying there would have been no shooting in the first place.

Anti Federalist
08-26-2012, 11:48 AM
That has got to be one of the stupidest arguments I have ever heard.

It is obvious that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. And NO understanding of ballistics or Proper firearm use
"They can't direct where the fragments are going"

:(

Rule number 1 - Do not point a gun at anything you do not intend to kill or destroy.

Rule number 2 - Know your target and what is beyond.

madengr
08-26-2012, 11:52 AM
What part of the second amendment don't you understand?

The part where it (the a bill of rights) applies to the government?

Dianne
08-26-2012, 11:53 AM
Funny, I heard Fox for a few minutes and they were saying the guy who shot his boss was being evicted. Then they said nine people were injured, but they did not mention it was from police fire. Scared of Bloomberg, I guess.

TheTexan
08-26-2012, 12:04 PM
No..
average Joe is both More competent and more responsible that these hired thugs.

Average Joe is also much more liable. Liability tends to increase competency, responsibility, accuracy

tod evans
08-26-2012, 12:08 PM
Cops are by and large idiots, bad shots too.

This issue is about NY cops in NY, since I don't live there all I'm really qualified to say is; "I'd sure like my federal tax dollars to stop funding this lunacy."

TheTexan
08-26-2012, 12:12 PM
My point is the cops weren't at fault here. They can't direct where the fragments are going to go that's just a freak occurrence.

I believe the cops shot somewhere in the ballpark of ~16 shots?

And they hit 9 people. Accidentally.

The amount of negligence and failure to accomplish such a feat is astonishing. Were they aiming for those people?

thoughtomator
08-26-2012, 12:41 PM
I believe the cops shot somewhere in the ballpark of ~16 shots?

And they hit 9 people. Accidentally.

The amount of negligence and failure to accomplish such a feat is astonishing. Were they aiming for those people?

Given what is known about cop accuracy and the speed in which the incident wrapped up, I'd say this was (extreme) recklessness, not intent.

Midtown Manhattan during the working day is that crowded, and the ESB is a focal point of activity in and of itself. Any cop on that beat, especially one being handed a gun, should be aware of the normal conditions and how to operate in that context without filling the crowd full of lead. In the name of protocols adopted for "officer safety", they nearly killed a whole bunch of civilians with their banned-in-warfare-by-Geneva-Convention ammunition.

acptulsa
08-26-2012, 12:48 PM
This story inspired me to try to find the Will Rogers quote about New York City cops shooting innocent bystanders by the score. And I found a reference to it--in the New York Times! I was so amazed to see the Times admitting that Will Rogers exists--especially after ignoring the seventy-fifth anniversary of his and Wiley Post's deaths--and admitting that New York City cops could just be more dangerous than the admitted miscreants, that I went to it in amazement, prepared to be impressed.

I'm impressed, all right. I'm impressed how fast this person's bosses at the Times censored this article!

https://www.nytimes.com/1987/08/05/opinion/observer-land-of-the-mouthpiece.html

Anti Federalist
08-26-2012, 01:15 PM
Remember that Greenland NH shooutout and cluster fuck?

I'm waiting on word that, outside of the police chief that was killed, the oater cops were shot by their teammates.

Happens pretty often.

Happened at Waco.

QuickZ06
08-26-2012, 02:16 PM
These safety rules apply to all weapons at all times, and must never be violated.

RULE #1 Treat every weapon as if it were loaded.

RULE #2 Never point a weapon at anything you do not intend to shoot.

RULE #3 Keep your finger straight and off the trigger until you are ready to fire.

RULE #4 Keep weapon on safe until you intend to fire.

pcosmar
08-26-2012, 02:24 PM
The Four Rules

1. All guns are always loaded.
2. Never point the gun at anything you are not willing to destroy.
3. Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on target (and you have made the decision to shoot).
4. Be sure of your target and what is beyond it.
http://www.corneredcat.com/The_Four_Rules/

1. All guns are always loaded!
2. Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy!
3. Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target!1
4. Always be sure of your target!
http://www.thegunzone.com/therules.html

Even Wiki,,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_safety




RULE #4 Keep weapon on safe until you intend to fire.
^ Canadian rule ;)

madengr
08-26-2012, 02:27 PM
#4 is "know your target and what is beyond it".

Some guns don't have safeties; notably the brand cops use most often.

pcosmar
08-26-2012, 02:30 PM
#4 is "know your target and what is beyond it".

Some guns don't have safeties; notably the brand cops use most often.

I believe their rule is,,
Blast away in the general direction of,, until threat is eliminated.

Origanalist
08-26-2012, 02:34 PM
I believe their rule is,,
Blast away in the general direction of,, until threat is eliminated.

I think this sums it up pretty well;


Ready. Fire. Aim.

coastie
08-26-2012, 03:58 PM
#4 is "know your target and what is beyond it".

Some guns don't have safeties; notably the brand cops use most often.

All guns come with safeties, its the index finger of the hand holding the gun.

Dr.3D
08-26-2012, 03:59 PM
I believe their rule is,,
Blast away in the general direction of,, until threat is eliminated.
Seems they would be better off with shotguns if that is the case. The results would be pretty much the same.

coastie
08-26-2012, 04:06 PM
Seems they would be better off with shotguns if that is the case. The results would be pretty much the same.

Even at 25 yds, the spread pattern of 00 buck is not that big at all. You can hit just one person out of a crowd at 10 yds with just bird shot.

Its a lot easierr to miss with a shotgun than people think....

thehungarian
08-26-2012, 04:48 PM
Why do policeman need guns? Wouldn't pepper spray, a fit physique and competency in some basic hand-to-hand combat be, dare I say, safer?

LibertyRevolution
08-26-2012, 07:24 PM
He had much better aim than the cops, 5 headshots to coworker victim:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/26/us/new-york-empire-state-shooting/index.html?eref=rss_topstories


My point is the cops weren't at fault here. They can't direct where the fragments are going to go that's just a freak occurrence.
I don't think fragmentation would have been as much of a problem if they were not firing rounds into the flower pot and the ground...

Really poor aim.. I'm not sure they were aiming at all until about the 10 shot in..
When he pulled the gun on them, they panicked and just started shooting...

Murray N Rothbard
08-26-2012, 08:16 PM
Though I'm obviously not a fan of government police forces, I'm giving the involved cops a pass on this. At close range when self-preservation is the issue, speed is what matters. Hard to fault them for that. It is also hard to blame them for the number bystander injuries. Multiple shots at short range can exit the target and disperse over very wide angles, hitting just about anyone standing in the vicinity. Almost impossible for the cops to account for bystanders in this situation. The only criticism I can really make is they fired an excessive number of shots.

pcosmar
08-26-2012, 08:23 PM
Though I'm obviously not a fan of government police forces, I'm giving the involved cops a pass on this. At close range when self-preservation is the issue, speed is what matters. Hard to fault them for that. It is also hard to blame them for the number bystander injuries. Multiple shots at short range can exit the target and disperse over very wide angles, hitting just about anyone standing in the vicinity. Almost impossible for the cops to account for bystanders in this situation. The only criticism I can really make is they fired an excessive number of shots.


Location
New York

Why does this not surprise me?

Tell me Murray, how much experience do you have with guns..? Hunting or military experience?

Target practice even?


Almost impossible for the cops to account for bystanders in this situation.

Wrong. Oh,, so very wrong.
Bystanders should have been their very first consideration,, before drawing their arm..
Hell,, before even picking one up and carrying it.

Weston White
08-26-2012, 09:49 PM
Though I'm obviously not a fan of government police forces, I'm giving the involved cops a pass on this. At close range when self-preservation is the issue, speed is what matters. Hard to fault them for that. It is also hard to blame them for the number bystander injuries. Multiple shots at short range can exit the target and disperse over very wide angles, hitting just about anyone standing in the vicinity. Almost impossible for the cops to account for bystanders in this situation. The only criticism I can really make is they fired an excessive number of shots.

So now how many people did the “shooter” actually kill versus the responding police units? Doesn’t this incident seem very similar to what had supposedly occurred at Columbine and most likely other mass-shooting incidents? Meaning that there were eyewitness accounts that many of the students shot during the Columbine shooting spree were actually shot by arriving police units, to which you say they should not be held accountable, whereas an ordinary “civilian” would be facing manslaughter charges at the very minimum.

And isn’t this yet one more very good reason why all law enforcement personnel should not be permitted to carry side-arms larger than 9mm as a departmental standard?

idiom
08-26-2012, 09:57 PM
http://i.imgur.com/hwECr.jpg

bunklocoempire
08-26-2012, 10:11 PM
Originally Posted by NoOneButPaul

Doesn't this kinda squash our argument that allowing everyone to conceal and carry would fix the gun problems?


No..
average Joe is both More competent and more responsible that these hired thugs.

Damn straight.

'Average Joe' doesn't get paid time-off for "mistakes".

'Average Joe' isn't doing it for a paycheck.

'Average Joe' is already on scene more able to assess the situation.

'Average Joe' is actually held accountable for his actions.

Ender
08-26-2012, 10:46 PM
I repeat:

If everyone as carrying there would have been no shooting in the first place.

Root
08-27-2012, 06:31 AM
Has anyone ever heard of an incident where a concealed or open carry permitted citizen shot multiple bystanders while trying to subdue one perpetrator? I haven't.

QuickZ06
08-27-2012, 08:05 AM
Has anyone ever heard of an incident where a concealed or open carry permitted citizen shot multiple bystanders while trying to subdue one perpetrator? I haven't.

71 years if age, in crowed "room". Just hit the perps......cops minutes away. Everyone walked out alive and unharmed thanks to this upstanding citizen.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBjzdvSloG8&oref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fresults%3Fsear ch_query%3Dold%2Bman%2Bshoots%2Binternet%2Bcafe

Acala
08-27-2012, 08:54 AM
No..
average Joe is both More competent and more responsible that these hired thugs.

Yup. Statistically, cops shot the wrong person far more often than private citizens.

tod evans
08-27-2012, 08:58 AM
Yup. Statistically, cops shot the wrong person far more often than private citizens.

Ya' know that's really amazing considering that cops are absent during the commission of most crime.....

Acala
08-27-2012, 09:06 AM
Though I'm obviously not a fan of government police forces, I'm giving the involved cops a pass on this. At close range when self-preservation is the issue, speed is what matters. Hard to fault them for that. It is also hard to blame them for the number bystander injuries. Multiple shots at short range can exit the target and disperse over very wide angles, hitting just about anyone standing in the vicinity. Almost impossible for the cops to account for bystanders in this situation. The only criticism I can really make is they fired an excessive number of shots.

No. Speed is NOT what matters. Shot placement is what matters. You are much better off taking more time to aim your shot than you are spraying bullets down range in hopes of hitting something. Also, if the cops are using good hollow point ammo, there shouldn't be much over-penetration. The fact is that what happens is the cops, who are not particularly well-trained in marksmanship, instigate a confrontation unskillfully, resort to gunfire too quickly, and out of excitement substitute volume of fire for aimed fire. the consequences are predictable.

Acala
08-27-2012, 09:09 AM
Ya' know that's really amazing considering that cops are absent during the commission of most crime.....

Cops are at something of a disadvantage in some ways. As a private citizen you are probably witnessing the crime taking place and so have first-hand knowledge of which varmint needs shooting. When the cops arrive they don't know who is who. Which is one reason they need to keep their guns holstered longer.

QuickZ06
08-27-2012, 09:10 AM
It is called spray and pray for a reason.

tod evans
08-27-2012, 09:25 AM
Cops are at something of a disadvantage in some ways. As a private citizen you are probably witnessing the crime taking place and so have first-hand knowledge of which varmint needs shooting. When the cops arrive they don't know who is who. Which is one reason they need to keep their guns holstered longer.

In most "crime" cops serve no purpose other than to take a report and investigate........(I don't include drug raids in my definition of "crime")

Criminals who use weapons generally try to avoid cops and do their damnedest to be long gone before the cops arrive.

This gives rise to the question of why should a public scribe be armed?..........Cops are rarely involved in actually stopping crime and most "police" forces now have militarized units complete with body armor and machine-guns..Oh-yeah, they need to defend themselves while taking reports and investigating...........and shoot dogs who bark..

Dr.3D
08-27-2012, 09:27 AM
Cops are at something of a disadvantage in some ways. As a private citizen you are probably witnessing the crime taking place and so have first-hand knowledge of which varmint needs shooting. When the cops arrive they don't know who is who. Which is one reason they need to keep their guns holstered longer.
I suppose it would really confuse them if they saw everybody around them with a pistol. They probably wouldn't know which direction to spray their ammo.

Shredmonster
08-27-2012, 10:28 AM
Doesn't this kinda squash our argument that allowing everyone to conceal and carry would fix the gun problems?

This does not make sense. Not one iota of sense. So you want people to not have the ability to defend themselves. Friggen brilliant. You have no clue of reality.

I suggest looking up the actual stats of how many crimes are stopped by guns from permit carrying citizens. I will give you a clue - it is waaaaaaaaaaaay more than actual crimes committed by guns. Look it up.

Now onto a different point. Cops in many areas might fire 150 practice rounds A YEAR. Yeah - a year. Cops are typically accurate something like 20% of the time within 20 feet. And only 40% of the time within about 4 feet. How do I know ? They teach you this when you take your carry permit.

By comparison gang members are accurate 70% of the time. Why ? Because they shoot quite often.

Carry permit holders and gang members are better shots than most cops. Not the tactical teams and such but the average cop.

So would you rather have a cop defend you or practice and defend yourself ?

Pericles
08-27-2012, 02:30 PM
If it takes 16 rounds to stop a bad guy, there are some serious issues there. Even allocating 8 rounds each to the two police officers .... If you can't put a bad guy down in 3 rounds or less, you will have some serious issues when facing a competent opponent.

NoOneButPaul
08-27-2012, 02:32 PM
This does not make sense. Not one iota of sense. So you want people to not have the ability to defend themselves. Friggen brilliant. You have no clue of reality.

I suggest looking up the actual stats of how many crimes are stopped by guns from permit carrying citizens. I will give you a clue - it is waaaaaaaaaaaay more than actual crimes committed by guns. Look it up.

Now onto a different point. Cops in many areas might fire 150 practice rounds A YEAR. Yeah - a year. Cops are typically accurate something like 20% of the time within 20 feet. And only 40% of the time within about 4 feet. How do I know ? They teach you this when you take your carry permit.

By comparison gang members are accurate 70% of the time. Why ? Because they shoot quite often.

Carry permit holders and gang members are better shots than most cops. Not the tactical teams and such but the average cop.

So would you rather have a cop defend you or practice and defend yourself ?

Already made it clear im completely against gun control and only offered up the question because that's what the people across the internet were saying.

Basically the response in this thread is "we shoot better than cops"

OK, well the average American still isn't going to respect that response or even believe it.

We can't win these arguments if we don't have a resonable counter-argument.

If everyone had guns, and everyone started shooting, more bullet fragments would have hit more people.

Can someone, ANYONE, debunk this?

The best answer i've seen so far is that the shooter would have been shot before it even started so it wouldn't have been a problem.

Pericles
08-27-2012, 02:35 PM
One of the main points about a libertarian society is the concept of personal responsibility. The problem is the idea that wearing a uniform of some type obviates personal responsibility because one is now an "official" and thus ones actions accrue the aura of authority.

DamianTV
08-27-2012, 02:37 PM
So where is that AF post that says you are 8 times more likely to be killed by a cop than a terrorist?

pcosmar
08-27-2012, 02:38 PM
If it takes 16 rounds to stop a bad guy, there are some serious issues there. Even allocating 8 rounds each to the two police officers .... If you can't put a bad guy down in 3 rounds or less, you will have some serious issues when facing a competent opponent.

Especially since this encounter was at approximately 10 feet.

And 3 rounds were removed from victims intact (not ricochet)
That means that the gun was aimed at an unarmed innocent when the trigger was squeezed.

Piss poor shooting.

Pericles
08-27-2012, 02:43 PM
Especially since this encounter was at approximately 10 feet.

And 3 rounds were removed from victims intact (not ricochet)
That means that the gun was aimed at an unarmed innocent when the trigger was squeezed.

Piss poor shooting.

Absolutely no fire discipline. Cops and the Army are notorious for that.

jbauer
08-27-2012, 02:47 PM
I'm not reading all 8 pages but I'm sure someone has already pointed out thats why the cops need the billions of rounds they've orders so they can practice :)

pcosmar
08-27-2012, 02:51 PM
The best answer i've seen so far is that the shooter would have been shot before it even started so it wouldn't have been a problem.

Several.
This could have been handled differently at several points. With or without the use of firearms at all.

Had there been armed civilians he may well have been hit by several bullets,,properly placed,
It is also possible that the victim ,,if he was so armed, could have defended himself.

After the fact,, without firearms,, he could have been identified,,and photographed..Then apprehended at a later time and place.
Even the police (if you justify their existence) could have followed,, and waited for either a better,,less crowded location. Or distract and capture him, disarming him before he could bring draw his weapon.

This massive display of incompetence was not necessary.

bunklocoempire
08-27-2012, 03:06 PM
One of the main points about a libertarian society is the concept of personal responsibility. The problem is the idea that wearing a uniform of some type obviates personal responsibility because one is now an "official" and thus ones actions accrue the aura of authority.

It really is this simple.

And likewise having only respect for a uniform and not of a simple mundane is a recipe for fail.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, when I was being raised and taught right and wrong, my parental unit's only focus was my fellow 'mundane'.

I had no concept of police doing any 'policing' whatsoever.

My folks taught me that if I trespassed or did anything else I wasn't supposed to be doing to my fellow mundane, the mundanes were the ones that would be doing the shooting.

I was also taught that protecting our things and ourselves was our own responsibility.

The police were only there to write reports, write tickets/collect revenue, maybe direct traffic, and investigate afterwards.

We're living with the results of shunning responsibility and misplaced respect.

idiom
08-27-2012, 06:40 PM
The more disturbing idea is that operations that have authority without responsibility attract or develop people who abuse their power and enjoy it.

That is to say, if you liked too shoot bystanders instead of becoming a serial killer why not become a cop?

AFPVet
08-27-2012, 07:07 PM
Even at 25 yds, the spread pattern of 00 buck is not that big at all. You can hit just one person out of a crowd at 10 yds with just bird shot.

Its a lot easier to miss with a shotgun than people think....

Indeed. Even with a cylinder barrel, the buckshot charge stays together for a bit. You have to be outside in order for it to really spread. I fired a 3" shell of 00 buck out of a 28" barrel with modified choke and it took it about 200 or so yards to really spread to a nice horizontal spray of around 30 feet wide.

madengr
08-27-2012, 07:13 PM
Try the Hornaday TAP if you want some tight buckshot.

LibertyRevolution
08-27-2012, 09:27 PM
FPSrussia having fun playing with different type of shotgun shells:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=SP9ED6B6AA7A8C2CDC&feature=player_detailpage&v=RP4FjODPDFA#t=46s

Turn off annotations to get rid that stupid bar across the screen

If you like shotguns, watch this video, he has some badass ammo.

MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2
08-27-2012, 11:09 PM
Does a bank shot not count in billiards?

lol. No shit. They were just hit by fragments. lol



My point is the cops weren't at fault here. They can't direct where the fragments are going to go that's just a freak occurrence.

If everyone was carrying guns and defending themselves a lot more people would be hit with fragments that weren't even the shooters fault.



I'm pretty sure I'm responsible for where my "fragments" go.

'concealed permit" holders are not extra police. They are simply taking responsibility for protecting themselves. If they find it just or needed to protect others, I assume they will for the most part, but they will know what they are getting themselves into and if they have not thought that entire process through, they need to think more and carry less until they know their role and plans.

To me, that means I insure my safety, my little girl's safety, and anyone with me. We all act accordingly. Everyone else had the option to bring their own gun. There might be times where you have moral obligations to protect other people, but I guess people like me aren't the type to shoot "bullets" or "fragments" into crowds.



Ya' know that's really amazing considering that cops are absent during the commission of most crime.....

Good point. They're just shooting people willy nilly after the fact.