Cops furious at 'don't-kill' bill

[EvilleDoug]

Now what happens if the BG has an artificial leg, the cop shot him/her in that leg and then get dropped?

This has to be the dumbest thing I have read in a while. I can see it now, this passes and the BGs come out from behind every rock knowing that if the cops come, they will not be killed...only shot in the leg/arm and then taken to the hospital and tended too by state doctors and state taxes.

Leave it to NY to have some great IDEAS, .... not!

Le Doug

 

[JBusch8899]

Now what happens if the BG has an artificial leg, the cop shot him/her in that leg and then get dropped?

This has to be the dumbest thing I have read in a while. I can see it now, this passes and the BGs come out from behind every rock knowing that if the cops come, they will not be killed...only shot in the leg/arm and then taken to the hospital and tended too by state doctors and state taxes.

Leave it to NY to have some great IDEAS, .... not!

Le Doug

I'm a fairly decent shot myself, but a moving target and a required shot to an appendage? This bill in the first step to law enforcement disarmament, and a monumental rationale to disarm the populace.

Though it may not be such a bad idea to a one specific appendage.... if its a sex offender.

 

[kludge]

Shot with gun = deadly force. Period.

If deadly force is not required, then the trigger should not be pulled.

If you hit someone with a bullet in an arm or a leg, and hit one of the arteries, they could be just as dead as if they are hit COM.

You can bleed out from your femoral artery faster than the EMT can get into his ambulance.

 

[patton487]

Speaking for all the criminals, I hope is passes. If it does, I'm moving to NY. The work environment for us criminals here in Indiana is getting entirely to violent.

 

[mrjarrell]

Maybe if NY cops would stop unloading on people who aren't an imminent threat this wouldn't be an issue. Their reputation for massive overkill of innocent victims is legendary. Do you really need to shoot a person 30 or 40 times?

 

[lashicoN]

Maybe if NY cops would stop unloading on people who aren't an imminent threat this wouldn't be an issue. Their reputation for massive overkill of innocent victims is legendary. Do you really need to shoot a person 30 or 40 times?

Only if they are a zombie and you didn't realize until shot 39 that you have to aim for the head.

 

[lashicoN]

Normally, I'd scoff at the stupidity of such a bill, and declare that if passed it would be time for the cops to relocate or find new professions.

However, the cops never spoke up for their fellow citizens, who are denied the right to defend themselves. Cops aren't a special class of people, and deserve no more right to defend themselves and others than their fellow citizens. Perhaps they should speak out against the laws victimizing their fellow citizens, and they would gather a bit of support from them.

Wow, I agree with Joe Williams. That's weird to say.

Not only did the cops not speak up when the NY government infringed on its citizens right to keep and bear arms, but they ENFORCED those laws. They enforce anti-American laws, enforce hi-cap bans, deny women the right to carry because she showed a "lack of interest in the sport". Too bad to NY cops. At least they get the opportunity to shoot someone in the leg. Most honest NY citizens can't even do that. The whole state needs a government make-over. Looks like the criminals win, once again. Isn't it obvious that the mob took over the government. "First we'll disarm the citizens who we mug, then the cops!"

 

[38special]

First, they tie the arms of our troops. Now, our police.

 

[mrjarrell]

What "our"? Do you live in NY?

 

[YukYuPhat]

I think I finnally found something more crazy than the "Couragous Restrait" medal they want to offer Soldiers who do not fire when in a firefight because of COB's...

 

[T-rav]

Next thing ya know they will give them whistles only

I find it insane that NYC has a HUGE crime problem and now they are slowly disarming the officers and putting them in a even greater threat.

 

[Bill of Rights]

why dont they just take guns away from cops? makem use their tasers only.

people are SO stupid. if i was a cop in NY and this passed i would be GONE!!! All they are doing is setting these cops up to fail before they even start. not cool to play with peoples lives like that. ive said it before, NY is a stupid city with stupid people, and the smart people who stay are stupid too. same with californians, and i have family there.

This was my thought. "Go ahead. Pass it. See how your city looks when all the cops have a bad case of the "blue flu"." It's moronic to expect this when the only reason they should be shooting in the first place is when there is a threat to life.

I'd be all for this bill if each legislator would agree to patrol the streets of NYC one night per week (or two consecutive nights every two weeks), following the guidlines that they want the full time officers to follow.
Add this to the bill and see how many support it then.

No, I can't agree, but only because when the legislators see what conditions the cops are working under, they'd immediately legislate us into a police state.

Normally, I'd scoff at the stupidity of such a bill, and declare that if passed it would be time for the cops to relocate or find new professions.

However, the cops never spoke up for their fellow citizens, who are denied the right to defend themselves. Cops aren't a special class of people, and deserve no more right to defend themselves and others than their fellow citizens. Perhaps they should speak out against the laws victimizing their fellow citizens, and they would gather a bit of support from them.

The logic is sound, but I have to ask if two wrongs make a right?

First, they tie the arms of our troops. Now, our police.

What "our"? Do you live in NY?

Are you intentionally being argumentative, mrjarrell? I think it's pretty obvious the reference is to society's/citizens', inclusive.

Next thing ya know they will give them whistles only

I find it insane that NYC has a HUGE crime problem and now they are slowly disarming the officers and putting them in a even greater threat.

Amen. NYC is the only place in the US I've ever heard of where they actually have some police officers who work unarmed. (this from a story of two of them dying in (IIRC) a pizza place where they'd stopped for a bite to eat, several months (maybe a year or so) ago).

If I did that job anywhere and that law passed, I'd not only participate in a "sick-out", I'd be the one to suggest it to my fellow officers.

There is duty and professionalism and then there is painting yourself like a duck in a shooting gallery.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[E5RANGER375]

Maybe if NY cops would stop unloading on people who aren't an imminent threat this wouldn't be an issue. Their reputation for massive overkill of innocent victims is legendary. Do you really need to shoot a person 30 or 40 times?

what they didnt tell you is that 600 rounds were expended, and the target only hit 30 times.

 

[Joe Williams]

Maybe if NY cops would stop unloading on people who aren't an imminent threat this wouldn't be an issue. Their reputation for massive overkill of innocent victims is legendary. Do you really need to shoot a person 30 or 40 times?

Maybe they need to go back to their .38s, so they can only fire six times before having to reload, since they seem to be trained to fire to weapon empty.

 

[Cat-Herder]

They get the leadership they deserve. If they want to make silly laws, let them.

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

how are they gonna hit an arm or a leg when most of the time they cant hit anything at all?

Maybe instead of running your mouth all the time about how cops can't shoot, their training sucks, etc you offer your obviously superior skills (for free) and teach us all how to shoot. You know, the one shot/one kill skills that cops so desperately need because none of us can hit the broad side of a barn even if we were standing inside.

 

[mrjarrell]

So what was the Sean Bell case that spurred this legislation? I happen to remember it, for those not familiar with it here's a bit from Wikipedia on it.

The Sean Bell shooting incident took place in the New York City borough of Queens on November 25, 2006, in which one Latino and two African-American men were shot a total of fifty times by a team of both plainclothes and undercover NYPD officers, killing one of the men, Sean Bell, on the morning after his bachelor party, and severely wounding two of his friends.[1] The incident sparked fierce criticism of the police from some members of the public and drew comparisons to the 1999 killing of Amadou Diallo.[2] Three of the five detectives involved in the shooting went to trial[3] on charges ranging from manslaughter to reckless endangerment, and were found not guilty.[4]

They murdered Sean Bell and came close to doing the same to his friends, then concocted a story to cover their butts. Unfortunately, a jury let them off, as all too often happens. Incidents like this call for drastic measures, especially when there's history in that department of overshooting. This legislation is a direct result of the actions of the police, that's where the blame lies.

 

[mrjarrell]

Maybe they need to go back to their .38s, so they can only fire six times before having to reload, since they seem to be trained to fire to weapon empty.

That might not be a bad idea.

 

[RA8]

If whoever is passing this law can sprint 50 yards, wrestle someone for 3 minutes, then stand up and draw, fire and hit a moving target in the arm with 100% accuracy, then yes. go for it.

 

[Thumper]

Maybe instead of running your mouth all the time about how cops can't shoot, their training sucks, etc you offer your obviously superior skills (for free) and teach us all how to shoot. You know, the one shot/one kill skills that cops so desperately need because none of us can hit the broad side of a barn even if we were standing inside.

Don't let some people bother you frank.I know you have been very honorable i back leo 100%.Some people don't understand though.