Empire State building shooting: Cops fire 16 rounds and injure 9, kill shooter

Quote from Danman114 : Does their profession some how make it acceptable that they injured 9 people with their gunfire? Would those bullets have hurt those people more if the people shooting the murderer were private citizens simply intent on stopping a murderer who drew a gun on them?

Dan, baiting wont work. Are you finding a quote where I said it made it acceptable?
What I wrote is it is the sworn duty and job of the police to catch armed criminals and there is no such duty for CW carriers.

Your argument is analogous to saying the average citizen speeding is equal to fire trucks speeding because speeding fire trucks kill people on occasion.

Secondly I dont want to be drawn into a CWW argument. there are lots of well trained CWW
people and a lot of dangerous fools as well. that is a side argument you guys were having with others.

My point was against the absurd contentions by the OP who clearly has no and knows kn one in law enforcement, and who seemed unaware that the NYPD did exactly what almost every other jurisdiction teaches. These two officers were EXEMPLARY in their performance. They may have save dozens of lives. They clearly had excellent training

Quote from aero : Dan, baiting wont work. Are you finding a quote where I said it made it acceptable?

Your original quote, where you hide by some level of training these people had, as if it makes a difference to those wounded or in their overall actions. All I simply asked was if you would let private citizens pass in a similar fashion that you believe these cops should?

Quote from aero : What I wrote is it is the sworn duty and job of the police to catch armed criminals and there is no such duty for CW carriers.

I don't think it's possible to know what sort of code a person lives by simply by looking if they carry a fire arm or not. I don't think it's outside the realm of possibilities that a person with the means (CW) would see a murderer walking from a crime and feel the exact same obligation to stop that man that the cops did.

Quote from aero : Your argument is analogous to saying the average citizen speeding is equal to fire trucks speeding because speeding fire trucks kill people on occasion.

I am just trying to keep a consistent system of morality in judging the actions of others. I don't really know if I can blame the cops for what they did in stopping that murderer, but I don't think I would change my stance if were a private citizen in those cop's places. Would you?

Quote from aero : Secondly I dont want to be drawn into a CWW argument. there are lots of well trained CWW people and a lot of dangerous fools as well. that is a side argument you guys were having with others.

Same with cops, am I right?

Quote from aero : My point was against the absurd contentions by the OP who clearly has no and knows kn one in law enforcement, and who seemed unaware that the NYPD did exactly what almost every other jurisdiction teaches. These two officers were EXEMPLARY in their performance. They may have save dozens of lives. They clearly had excellent training

We don't know anything for a fact except that they killed the murderer, and harmed 9 innocent people in the process. Hypothesizing about how many individuals (whether dozens, hundreds, or millions) they may have saved doesn't do anyone any good.

I think the best way to determine if what they did was acceptable is to look at the exact same situation except it being private individuals operating in the exact same fashion as the cops.

If two private citizens approached the murderer with guns out, ordering him to stop, and then firing 17 or so rounds when he pulls out a weapon, and 9 unfortunate people were injured, how would you feel?

Quote from aero : I wasnt referring to contract positions. Rather tha people with prior police training are preferred for roles such as military policing and urban patrol in many missions

I was merely trying to agree with you, that yes, those with law enforcement training have been utilized in both Iraq and Afghanistan. I assume you're referring to those in the reserves, and yes, those in LE that are in the reserves/Guard. are often utilized where their LE skills can be used.

If you think it's their firearms skills that make them in demand, you're sadly mistaken.

Quote from aero : I have. the NYPD is held in very high regard. You keep saying otherwise with no data as to the opinion of other professionals. Saying NY has more problem shooting than smaller towns cities or rural areas is pretty meaningless.

Then I have doubts you know many in law enforcement. NYPD's poor performance in shootings is well known in LE circles. Heck, it's well known in civilian circles. Are you unaware of some of their more notorious shootings [wikipedia.org], where they fired 30, 40, 50 rounds or more?

And you keep saying that I provided no documentation. I did. NYPD's own stats, showing that they had hit ratios as low as 15-20% in some years.

Ask your friends/family if their department's hit ratios are that low. The largest city near me has had 75%+ hit ratios. And yes, I know that to be true. PM me, and I'll be glad to give you contact info for their training coordinator who can verify.

And lest you think NYPD has some kind of corner on the market for being exposed to violence, there are many cities where the average officer works more dangerous areas, with far less officers per population on the street, and is more likely to be in a shooting.

Quote from aero : IAnd its'nt a matter of opinion that these two cops went through rigorous training. They were part of the NYPD anti terrorism team

Yes, you've repeated yourself many times. I get it. Your opinion is that they're some kind of hot shit. I don't share that opinion, and I've spent significant time, including shooting matches, with officers from that department, as well as other large cities. I like my friends from NYPD, and they're a blast to drink with, but if I was looking for help in a gunfight, I'd call my LAPD Metro or LASO SEB buddies, who can shoot rings around them.

Quote from aero : My point was against the absurd contentions by the OP who clearly has no and knows kn one in law enforcement, and who seemed unaware that the NYPD did exactly what almost every other jurisdiction teaches. These two officers were EXEMPLARY in their performance. They may have save dozens of lives. They clearly had excellent training

These two officers were Lucky.

The subject has both of them at gunpoint before both officers can even point their guns at him. After watching the video a few more times, I think it's likely the subject was looking for a "suicide by cop". imho, he clearly could have shot one or both of the officers had he wanted to.

Quote from Danman114 : Quote from aero : Dan, baiting wont work. Are you finding a quote where I said it made it acceptable? What I wrote is it is the sworn duty and job of the police to catch armed criminals and there is no such duty for CW carriers Your original quote, where you hide by some level of training these people had, as if it makes a difference to those wounded or in their overall actions. All I simply asked was if you would let private citizens pass in a similar fashion that you believe these cops should?

That is BS I wrote no such thing, there is no such thing saying it is "acceptable"
That is a strawman. How would you like if I said you had said "so you wrote you think it is ok that the murderer not be pursued?"

What I wrote is the OP was proved completely wrong. I stand by that. All the experts have said that lacking retreat to cover (and from the video they have said there was none), their training -- used nationwide -- woudl be to shoot center mass until the suspect was completely down. From the video and what experts from viewing it, that is exactly what the cops did.

Quote from Danman114 : Quote from aero : What I wrote is it is the sworn duty and job of the police to catch armed criminals and there is no such duty for CW carriers. I don't think it's possible to know what sort of code a person lives by simply by looking if they carry a fire arm or not.

Where is that in the law? Your "code", my "code" soemone else's "code" and armed people shooting are exactly the kind of talk that gives impetus to the anti-gun rights movement. It was the murderers "code" to kill his former colleague in vengeance.

So I can walk into any government office, say the FBI director's and do his job, and say it is part of my "code?"

Do you understand some people have a specified job, for which they are hired, and accountable and other people do not have that job?

The "code" that matters is the law code of NY

Quote from Danman114 : I don't think it's outside the realm of possibilities that a person with the means (CW) would see a murderer walking from a crime and feel the exact same obligation to stop that man that the cops did.

They have no training in arrest procedures, they are not officers of the court. They are not hired by the public to do so.
There are some highly constrained citizen's arrest provisions. It has also been recognized by every court that in those circumstances citizens making arrests will be held to HIGHER standards, and do not have the same rights and responsibilities as cops int eh same situation -- especially when it comes to any harm those citizens might cause while conducting a citizens arrest.

So you are arguing directly against established law.

Quote from Danman114 : but I don't think I would change my stance if were a private citizen in those cop's places. Would you?

The law does see those as very different. Your personal opinion on why the law is wrong is up to you, but your not understanding why the law is that way doesnt win your argument.
And can think many reasons why the stance would be different.
The city of NY has resources, it has insurance. If these shootings were negligent (and probably even if not) the people injured can get settlements, some recompense. there is no such guarantee with any tom dick or harry. Police have certified training in arrest procedures, rights protections, avoiding doing things that will create problems in prosecution, and yes threat assesments dealing with armed people in public places that CW do not universally get..

Quote from Danman114 : We don't know anything for a fact except that they killed the murderer, and harmed 9 innocent people in the process. Hypothesizing about how many individuals (whether dozens, hundreds, or millions) they may have saved doesn't do anyone any good.

again who said "millions"?
We know plenty of facts
When someone murders someone it isn't a wild hypothesis. again the police didn't just have a compelling reasons to beleive he was armed, but also had reason to beleive he had and would use his weapon, and could and had fired already , and had killed already someone. That we know.
We also know the police procedure in that case. And all the experts say from the tape that they seem to have followed it exactly.
We know they had no cover. We know he was about four to five feet away with his hand raised and a semiauto pistol raised at cops. we know he was an armed and dangerous murderer.

Quote from Danman114 : I think the best way to determine if what they did was acceptable is to look at the exact same situation except it being private individuals operating in the exact same fashion as the cops.

You are 100% wrong and the law say so. Moreover the first shooter could claim self defense if a private CW carrier ordered him to stop and raised a weapon on a public street. The police ordering him to stop was a lawful order. It would often not be a lawful order for a private citizen to give.

I think you are sadly proving that some CW permit holders are not well trained, In new York a citizen cant make an arrest without himself witnessing the felony. Police can.
Citizens are not cops. Police are charged by the public, by the citizenry, with doing certain things. the citizenry did not charge a private individual with doing those things.

The entire citizenry of NY is responsible for the actions of these police. If they polcie do something negligent that causes harm the entire citizenry will have to try ad recompense any victims. That is not the case with a private citizen.

Quote from Danman114 : If two private citizens approached the murderer with guns out, ordering him to stop, and then firing 17 or so rounds when he pulls out a weapon, and 9 unfortunate people were injured, how would you feel?

If two armed private citizens approached another armed citizen and a shootout ensued, they all would and shoot go to jail, regardless of anyone getting hurt.

Quote from Elmer : These two officers were Lucky. The subject has both of them at gunpoint before both officers can even point their guns at him. After watching the video a few more times, I think it's likely the subject was looking for a "suicide by cop". imho, he clearly could have shot one or both of the officers had he wanted to.

I think more likely they had excellent training.As the perp pulls his gun, the cops moved repositioned themselves apart to disperse the perps aim, and upholstered their guns and fired just as he took aim. Textbook and probably the result of many f hours in handgun training

This was probably the result of the federal level extensive anti terrorism training these cops had.

And since there was an unfired shell ejected from the perps gun, it looks very likely he took one shot which misfired.

Quote from Elmer : NYPD's poor performance in shootings is well known in LE circles. Heck, it's well known in civilian circles.

Now I am certain you dont know anyone in law enforcement. NYPD is held as a highly admired model when it comes to training./

Citing Diallo makes it clear you are reaching. That is one case from 15 years ago. That is out of hudnreds of thousands of police actions including thousands involving weapons
take the LAPD, they have many more problem shootings and cases of abuse. Compared to the NYPD, they are keystone cops

Quote : Yes, you've repeated yourself many times. I get it. Your opinion is that they're some kind of hot shit.

it is my "opinion" that these guys were part of the FBI trained anti terrorism squad, and they had hundreds of hours in extra weapons and threat training? No. Taht is a fact

Quote from aero : Now I am certain you dont know anyone in law enforcement.

Quote from aero : NYPD is held as a highly admired model when it comes to training.

I'll let you have the last word on that.....

Quote from aero : That is BS I wrote no such thing, there is no such thing saying it is "acceptable" That is a strawman. How would you like if I said you had said "so you wrote you think it is ok that the murderer not be pursued?"

By 'acceptable' I mean do you think the officers should be punished (not whether it was a desired outcome). If you think they shouldn't be punished, then there actions were acceptable. If they should be punished, their actions are unacceptable.

As far as not pursuing, had the officers said, "Gee, if I chase a guy who just murdered someone through downtown f'ing Manhattan, I run the real risk of hurting or killing a bunch of unarmed civilians." I would have thought that to be totally acceptable.

Quote from aero : They have no training in arrest procedures, they are not officers of the court. They are not hired by the public to do so. There are some highly constrained citizen's arrest provisions. It has also been recognized by every court that in those circumstances citizens making arrests will be held to HIGHER standards, and do not have the same rights and responsibilities as cops int eh same situation -- especially when it comes to any harm those citizens might cause while conducting a citizens arrest.

No one was arrested here, so I'm not sure where you going with this. Also, no one mentioned 'officers of the court', so that's sort of out of left field. If two civilians witness a third murder someone, then approach him to stop him from possibly harming more people, and the target draws a weapon, those two civilians would be well within their rights to shoot at the person to defend themselves.

Quote from aero : The law does see those as very different.

The law is a funny thing. Not only is it ever changing, but often times it's pretty evil. So I'm not really concerned with the law as it is (or was), I'm concerned with whether or not it should be the way it is.

Quote from aero : again who said "millions"?

I said 'millions'. You said 'dozens' and I figured if we're making up hypothetical lives saved, why stop there?

Quote from aero : We know plenty of facts When someone murders someone it isn't a wild hypothesis. again the police didn't just have a compelling reasons to beleive he was armed, but also had reason to beleive he had and would use his weapon, and could and had fired already , and had killed already someone. That we know. We also know the police procedure in that case. And all the experts say from the tape that they seem to have followed it exactly. We know they had no cover. We know he was about four to five feet away with his hand raised and a semiauto pistol raised at cops. we know he was an armed and dangerous murderer.

Believe it or not, I'm not actually arguing against the cops here, I'm unsure with how I feel about it. What I'm trying to figure out is if two CW folks were in that situation, would they be similarly heralded? OR would you all of a sudden give a crap about all those bullets that were flying around downtown Manhattan?

Quote from aero : You are 100% wrong and the law say so. Moreover the first shooter could claim self defense if a private CW carrier ordered him to stop and raised a weapon on a public street. The police ordering him to stop was a lawful order. It would often not be a lawful order for a private citizen to give.

Really? Really? Your saying the law says two people can't attempt to stop a person who just shot another person in the head? And that if those two people approached this murderer, asked him to stop, and the murderer drew their weapon, and the CW carrier fired first, that the soon to be dead person could claim 'self defense'? Is there any successful case of this in the history of the US you can cite? I don't think there is because it's absurd on its face.

Unfortunately, criminals probably aren't as afraid of citizens as they could and should be, and "reasonable" gun laws can make it hard to protect yourself from criminals who don't care about laws.

Fortunately, the guns in New York are in the hands of highly-trained professionals with carry permits.

20-year-old fleeing robbers is shot dead by police officer
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/48950922

Quote : Raymond W. Kelly, the police commissioner, said an officer with his gun drawn was waiting outside the door when the two workers came out. He said Mr. Cuevas “ran full speed into the officer; the two became entangled, at which point we believe the officer accidentally discharged his weapon.” The bullet struck Mr. Cuevas in the back of his left shoulder. He was taken to St. Barnabas Hospital in the Bronx, where he was pronounced dead.

Quote from Deusxmachina : Unfortunately, criminals probably aren't as afraid of citizens as they could and should be, and "reasonable" gun laws can make it hard to protect yourself from criminals who don't care about laws. Fortunately, the guns in New York are in the hands of highly-trained professionals with carry permits. 20-year-old fleeing robbers is shot dead by police officer http://msnbc.msn.com/id/48950922

Yeah, that really makes me want to trust law enforcement to vigilante bumpkins with no training at all.

Quote from agent00f : Yeah, that really makes me want to trust law enforcement to vigilante bumpkins with no training at all.

Or perhaps the ratio of citizens with carry permits that are competent with their firearms, and have good judgement, isn't that different from law enforcement....

Quote from Elmer : Or perhaps the ratio of citizens with carry permits that are competent with their firearms, and have good judgement, isn't that different from law enforcement....

They probably have better judgment than law enforcement since at some point they probably consider they can be sued into oblivion if they do something wrong, unlike law enforcement.

Quote from Deusxmachina : They probably have better judgment than law enforcement since at some point they probably consider they can be sued into oblivion if they do something wrong, unlike law enforcement.

If you think cops don't get sued, you're sadly mistaken. And often cities don't provide the defense for them in those suits, if they are judged to have been acting "out of the scope of their employment", or not in compliance with policy. Guess how hard some of those cities try to make that judgement....

I understand the point you're trying to make, and while there are egregious cases of law enforcement "getting away" with illegal acts, they are many that are also sued into oblivion, sometimes even when they acted properly, or when it truly was a reasonable mistake. Those just tend not to make the news.