I recall the original coverage, and the officer who fired 31 rounds did not realize he had fired 31 rounds. In his mind, he fired a round, experienced a malfunction, and reloaded, firing ( to his awareness ) only another couple of rounds. This information goes towards a discussion of the auditory exclusion, perceptual changes, etc that you experience under combat stress.....changes ANYONE can experience under stress. The officer actually shot to slide lock, but perceived it as being some other type of malfunction, did a reload and continued the fight. How many of us posting on this board have experienced similar levels of stress under fire that we could reasonably predict how we would react in a similar situation?
NY cops acquitted
- Thread starter pitz96
- Start date
- Status
I recall the original coverage, and the officer who fired 31 rounds did not realize he had fired 31 rounds. In his mind, he fired a round, experienced a malfunction, and reloaded, firing ( to his awareness ) only another couple of rounds. This information goes towards a discussion of the auditory exclusion, perceptual changes, etc that you experience under combat stress.....changes ANYONE can experience under stress. The officer actually shot to slide lock, but perceived it as being some other type of malfunction, did a reload and continued the fight. How many of us posting on this board have experienced similar levels of stress under fire that we could reasonably predict how we would react in a similar situation?
I've researched this case quite thoroughly. I am not gonna sit here and write an essay; some people will defend these cops 'til they are blue in the face, but I will say this: sometimes people manage to get into careers that they have no business being in. Far too often, there are police officers walking the streets that have no business carrying a gun and getting themselves in this sort of situation.The badge tends to receive much less respect because of these people. There is a reason that, sometimes, the most innocent and law-abiding people are afraid of police.
tc556 guy wrote:
True, all of that can happen. BUT, don't you think officers should be trained to a higher standard, to be able to "work through" those "combat problems" and be more in control of themselves and their weapons?
Yes they are human and prone to human mistakes, but their training should be better, then you can effectively weed out the ones who do not perform well, or come unhinged during stressful situations.
Thats why SF training is so tough. So they can find out which people can hack it and which ones can't BEFORE the SHTF.
True, all of that can happen. BUT, don't you think officers should be trained to a higher standard, to be able to "work through" those "combat problems" and be more in control of themselves and their weapons?
Yes they are human and prone to human mistakes, but their training should be better, then you can effectively weed out the ones who do not perform well, or come unhinged during stressful situations.
Thats why SF training is so tough. So they can find out which people can hack it and which ones can't BEFORE the SHTF.
Kreyzhorse
New member
I agree the above can happen (I've never heard my rifle shot when hunting) but when this was compounded by the fact that the officer "thought the gentleman in the car was pulling a gun" and the officer "thought that fire was being returned at him" it clearly spells out a situation where this officer might be a danger to himself and/or others. I would certainly think twice before I allowed him back on the street with a firearm.
Training to be more prepared for a shooting doesn't mean that you WILL be; every sitaution is different. From what i recall, NYPD has an extensive shooting program
As to the first point, if the officer perceived that he was in danger, how exactly does that perception alone mean that he should not be on the street? You have to go with what a person perceives at the time of the shooting to establish whether a shooting was legal, not things known after the fact. At the time of the shooting, the officers believed they were facing armed men.
I'll just be the devil's advocate for a moment. Cops (one, at least, of whom was African-American, so no reactionary racism on his part) observe that they're being attacked by somebody in a motor vehicle. There are several people in the motor vehicle. It's night time. (That means, to those of you who don't understand, that the sun's not out, and the interior of the car would be dark.)
One of the car's occupants had previously made a threat to "get his gun." In this situation, how the hell do we sit at a keyboard and second-guess how many shots should have been fired?? Been fine with me if they'd fired 151 shots, as long as a threat inside the car was perceived. What would you expect the cops to do, wait until they see the flash of gunfire from inside the car and/or see one of their buddies lying wounded or dead on the pavement?
Good grief! The defense attorneys really did the smart thing by having somebody trained to make decisions try the case, rather than a jury composed of folks like some of you posting here. The problem is seating a jury comprised of the peers of the thugs, not the peers of the cops.
Also, I'd appreciate it if somebody would copy and paste some of those statutes that give cops specifically more authority to exercise lethal force than any other citizens.
One of the car's occupants had previously made a threat to "get his gun." In this situation, how the hell do we sit at a keyboard and second-guess how many shots should have been fired?? Been fine with me if they'd fired 151 shots, as long as a threat inside the car was perceived. What would you expect the cops to do, wait until they see the flash of gunfire from inside the car and/or see one of their buddies lying wounded or dead on the pavement?
Good grief! The defense attorneys really did the smart thing by having somebody trained to make decisions try the case, rather than a jury composed of folks like some of you posting here. The problem is seating a jury comprised of the peers of the thugs, not the peers of the cops.
Also, I'd appreciate it if somebody would copy and paste some of those statutes that give cops specifically more authority to exercise lethal force than any other citizens.
All of you Chairborne Rangers can go back to reading your SWAT magazines and playing Counter Strike. Unless you have actually BEEN in a gunfight, you have absolutely no say in how they should be conducted. These 4 decorated offciers had ZERO shootings throughout their thousands of arrests, and tens of thousands of stop and frisks in high crime neighborhoods. They followed a thug who just made a comment to "get his gun" to his car, and when approached by the undercover, he rammed the cop while his other thug passenger reached for what was perceived to be a weapon. He then rammed the police van that came behind him, then rammed it AGAIN as he continued to flee. The WHOLE SHOOTING was over in 12 seconds. Ever hear gunfire outside a range with your hearing protection on? Deafening gunfire, flashes from the guns AS WELL AS reflections of gunfire off the glass of the car, smoke, screeching tires, smashing cars, ALL in 12 seconds AFTER your partner yells "He's got a gun" and is hot by a car and you're gonna start counting rounds? One of the thugs (all 3 had extensive records, involving guns and drugs, and don't tell me experienced street cops can't tell a thug with prison time behind him) was hit 16 TIMES and still lived. How good is your aim when you're shooting at a moving target? And the number of shots fired is irrelevant. Cops are trained to shoot until the threat is over, not to count their rounds. How many shots will YOU fire when you 100% believe that you're about to die and your wife is about to be a widow and your kids orphans?
It all comes down to who you believe. Do you believe the 3 recidivist felons with the 50 million dollar lawsuit, who'se testimony changed every time they opened their mouths, or 4 decorated detectives with not one shooting between them?
Typical thug behavior is what this shooting off the ground. Homicides are UP 26% SO FAR this year in NYC. Seems the cops don't trust the public to support them when dealing with the savages out there. Thank God I'm retired. Let them kill each other.
It all comes down to who you believe. Do you believe the 3 recidivist felons with the 50 million dollar lawsuit, who'se testimony changed every time they opened their mouths, or 4 decorated detectives with not one shooting between them?
Typical thug behavior is what this shooting off the ground. Homicides are UP 26% SO FAR this year in NYC. Seems the cops don't trust the public to support them when dealing with the savages out there. Thank God I'm retired. Let them kill each other.
Wildalaska
Moderator
Perhaps before anyone else pontificates about the alleged facts of the case, one should locate and read carefully the Judges decision on the case, especially that which refers to the buddies of the dead man. Kind ways of calling folks liars.
Again brilliant move for the defense and the public...since now all of those who screech about the CJS can see how a criminal verdict is rendered.
Search and ye shall find.
Wildheylookitsstillsnowing(24hourssofar)mustbeasignofaglobalwarmingcrisisAlaska TM
Again brilliant move for the defense and the public...since now all of those who screech about the CJS can see how a criminal verdict is rendered.
Search and ye shall find.
Wildheylookitsstillsnowing(24hourssofar)mustbeasignofaglobalwarmingcrisisAlaska TM
Accountability
It all comes down to one word; "accountability".
If a citizen were to fire 31 rounds at a vehicle that had simply "brushed" up against them then they would probably be arrested and sentenced to prison.
If an officer fires 31 rounds at a vehicle that had simply "brushed" up against them then that is jusifiable homicide.
I dont believe a double-standard should apply to citizens and police officers. Simply put, if your weapon goes off then you should be held strictly accountable.
In this case, an innocent man was killed because of some words and making an attempt to drive away from the scene. The practice of shooting fleeing felons ended in the 60s folks.
My opinion is that the police were trigger happy in this scenario and they are back pedaling in order to save themselves from a tragic scenario. They should be held strictly accountable for their actions. Even if there was one procedural flaw, then the victim's families should be compensated, the officers fired from the force and tried/convicted of at the very least manslaughter.
Civilians are held accountable for their actions and so should police officers. When I was speeding on the highway and got my ticket, I sure had a lot of reasons that neither the officer or the judge would listen to. I would assume that they would not listen to my reasoning if I shot at a vehicle 31 times either. However, I bet they would listen if I had a gun and badge.
9/11 gave police officers a lot of credibility, but its incidents like these where innocent men's lives are taken where that credibility goes away very fast. I would not trust another NY police officer after reading about an incident like this one.
All you guys out there that think and believe officer's can handle weapons better then civilians need to look at the many videos of youtube and read of incidents like this one. I believe that police cant handle their weapons because they are not held accountable for their actions.
Dont forget, one of the officers apologized for their actions indicating to me that they felt they were wrong:
"I'd like to say sorry to the Bell family for the tragedy," Cooper said.
Hey pal, sorry doesnt bring back Sean Bell and you should pay for your criminal acts just like a civilian would pay for theirs.
It all comes down to one word; "accountability".
If a citizen were to fire 31 rounds at a vehicle that had simply "brushed" up against them then they would probably be arrested and sentenced to prison.
If an officer fires 31 rounds at a vehicle that had simply "brushed" up against them then that is jusifiable homicide.
I dont believe a double-standard should apply to citizens and police officers. Simply put, if your weapon goes off then you should be held strictly accountable.
In this case, an innocent man was killed because of some words and making an attempt to drive away from the scene. The practice of shooting fleeing felons ended in the 60s folks.
My opinion is that the police were trigger happy in this scenario and they are back pedaling in order to save themselves from a tragic scenario. They should be held strictly accountable for their actions. Even if there was one procedural flaw, then the victim's families should be compensated, the officers fired from the force and tried/convicted of at the very least manslaughter.
Civilians are held accountable for their actions and so should police officers. When I was speeding on the highway and got my ticket, I sure had a lot of reasons that neither the officer or the judge would listen to. I would assume that they would not listen to my reasoning if I shot at a vehicle 31 times either. However, I bet they would listen if I had a gun and badge.
9/11 gave police officers a lot of credibility, but its incidents like these where innocent men's lives are taken where that credibility goes away very fast. I would not trust another NY police officer after reading about an incident like this one.
All you guys out there that think and believe officer's can handle weapons better then civilians need to look at the many videos of youtube and read of incidents like this one. I believe that police cant handle their weapons because they are not held accountable for their actions.
Dont forget, one of the officers apologized for their actions indicating to me that they felt they were wrong:
"I'd like to say sorry to the Bell family for the tragedy," Cooper said.
Hey pal, sorry doesnt bring back Sean Bell and you should pay for your criminal acts just like a civilian would pay for theirs.
Comments like your are the reason cops don't choose a jury trial and opt for a bench one. Imagine placing your fate into the hands of 12 people who are ignorant of the law and vote their opinion? Your opinion means nothing, and neither does mine. A judge has to follow the law, and even cop hating judges don't like seeing their judgements overturned. According the the LAW, the cops were within their rights to fire.
And since when does "brushing" up against someone leave an imprint of your jeans on the bumper? The cop was struck while he was jumping up onto the hood of the car that was driving at him.
And the officer who fired 31 shots fired AFTER the initial officer yelled "GUN", was struck and fired. How many shots will you fire when you think you're about to die? In that cop's mind, the possibility of a gun was no longer reasonable belief, but a certifiable fact. And the law doesn't specify how many shots you can fire, so whether it's 1, 31, or 131 is irrelevant.
I've noticed lots of guys at the range I go to hate cops. I figure it's because they couldn't pass the psych test, or just hate them because they don't like being told what to do. Either way, when a cop gives you an order, either follow it or suffer the consequences.
These cops are heroes. How many of us on this board would have frozen up and crapped their pants?
Good guys win this one. Bell is in the ground where he put himself.
And since when does "brushing" up against someone leave an imprint of your jeans on the bumper? The cop was struck while he was jumping up onto the hood of the car that was driving at him.
And the officer who fired 31 shots fired AFTER the initial officer yelled "GUN", was struck and fired. How many shots will you fire when you think you're about to die? In that cop's mind, the possibility of a gun was no longer reasonable belief, but a certifiable fact. And the law doesn't specify how many shots you can fire, so whether it's 1, 31, or 131 is irrelevant.
I've noticed lots of guys at the range I go to hate cops. I figure it's because they couldn't pass the psych test, or just hate them because they don't like being told what to do. Either way, when a cop gives you an order, either follow it or suffer the consequences.
These cops are heroes. How many of us on this board would have frozen up and crapped their pants?
Good guys win this one. Bell is in the ground where he put himself.
Poor drug dealers, they try to run down the first cop who obviously was a mad man claiming to be a cop and wearing an obviously fake badge, then they ram the unmarked fake police van with the imposter blue lights, then the crazy fake cops shooting. It's ridiculous. Good thing the Guardian and other left wing propoganda rags are on the case.
And good thing the judge called the drug dealers liars.
And good thing the judge called the drug dealers liars.
“I've noticed lots of guys at the range I go to hate cops. I figure it's because they couldn't pass the psych test, or just hate them because they don't like being told what to do. Either way, when a cop gives you an order, either follow it or suffer the consequences.”
This isn’t about hating cops. This is about being held accountable for your actions. The district attorney admitted that there were serious procedural errors made by the officers. The officers have said they were sorry basically admitting fault for the incident.
Civilians are held to a far greater degree of scrutiny and accountability when it comes to the discharge of a weapon at a person. Cops are not held to this same degree of scrutiny and accountability.
If I discharged my weapon negligently, then I would expect myself to go to jail and face civil torts. I would expect to be placed in handcuffs and arrested. The police in this incident get off free without spending one night in jail.
When it comes to my weapon, Im very careful with it as I know that I will be held to the highest standard of accountability. Cops are simply not held to this high standard and a lot of backpedaling occurs by administrators when there is an incident such as this one.
The question is “Where the police wrong in firing their weapons?”. According to the district attorney, there were errors made in this incident. The detectives proclaim that they are sorry. The police were obviously wrong. However, they will be set free by a lax judge who was clearly biased and on the side of law enforcement.
Administrative tricks is what got these officers off instead of cold hard facts.
This isn’t about hating cops. This is about being held accountable for your actions. The district attorney admitted that there were serious procedural errors made by the officers. The officers have said they were sorry basically admitting fault for the incident.
Civilians are held to a far greater degree of scrutiny and accountability when it comes to the discharge of a weapon at a person. Cops are not held to this same degree of scrutiny and accountability.
If I discharged my weapon negligently, then I would expect myself to go to jail and face civil torts. I would expect to be placed in handcuffs and arrested. The police in this incident get off free without spending one night in jail.
When it comes to my weapon, Im very careful with it as I know that I will be held to the highest standard of accountability. Cops are simply not held to this high standard and a lot of backpedaling occurs by administrators when there is an incident such as this one.
The question is “Where the police wrong in firing their weapons?”. According to the district attorney, there were errors made in this incident. The detectives proclaim that they are sorry. The police were obviously wrong. However, they will be set free by a lax judge who was clearly biased and on the side of law enforcement.
Administrative tricks is what got these officers off instead of cold hard facts.
First of all, you're not fooling anybody. Your adjectives you use to describe the cops (trigger happy, negligent) tell us all we need to know. Then you tell us about your speeding ticket that you got and the judge or cop didn't want to hear your excuse. Then you say you'll never trust the NY cops ever again, depsite the FACT that NY cops fire their weapons FAR LESS then other departments and based on a couple of isolated incidents. You gonna bring up Amadou Diallo now? It was 9 years ago.
Procedural ERRORS are not criminal acts. And saying you're sorry does not do anything other then express remorse for your actions. It does NOT make them criminal.
And by the way, cops could care less if you like them, trust them, admire them, hate them, or want to be one of them. When you are directed to do something by one, you do it. Failure to follow instructions can cause bad things to happen. And why don't you explain (since you're obviously an expert) how these "trigger happy" cops made it through 15 years in some of the worst neighborhoods in America, while responding to tens of thousands of man with a gun calls, shots fired calls, robbery in prgress, etc, and take hundreds of guns off the streets, while NEVER firing a shot?
"Civilians are held to a far greater degree of scrutiny and accountability when it comes to the discharge of a weapon at a person. Cops are not held to this same degree of scrutiny and accountability."
Hoo Boy! You have NO idea how wrong you are! Cops are limited in what they carry, and how they use them. Civilians aren't even CLOSE to the same level of scrutiny that a cop gets. The first thing they do when a cop gets into a shooting is pull out his shooting range scores. My old TO used to kick our asses if we shot more than 85 during requals. Keep racking up those 100's at paper and it will bite you in the ass if you ever DO get into a shooting. EVERY complaint you ever got, whether justifed or not, is used against them. A duty captain immediately removes ALL weapons you own (inclusing rifles and shotguns) if you fire your weapon after a shooting. If you legally own the gun you use to shoot someone, you don't say a thing and you call a lawyer. Cops are COMPLELLED to answer questions that may incriminate them within 48 hours, and even if they DO beat the criminal charges, they can still look forward to deptartment charges, where they can lose their job even though they've been found innocent, and of course the ever present civil rights violations!
Go shoot some paper at the range. It won't shoot back, tough guy.
Procedural ERRORS are not criminal acts. And saying you're sorry does not do anything other then express remorse for your actions. It does NOT make them criminal.
And by the way, cops could care less if you like them, trust them, admire them, hate them, or want to be one of them. When you are directed to do something by one, you do it. Failure to follow instructions can cause bad things to happen. And why don't you explain (since you're obviously an expert) how these "trigger happy" cops made it through 15 years in some of the worst neighborhoods in America, while responding to tens of thousands of man with a gun calls, shots fired calls, robbery in prgress, etc, and take hundreds of guns off the streets, while NEVER firing a shot?
"Civilians are held to a far greater degree of scrutiny and accountability when it comes to the discharge of a weapon at a person. Cops are not held to this same degree of scrutiny and accountability."
Hoo Boy! You have NO idea how wrong you are! Cops are limited in what they carry, and how they use them. Civilians aren't even CLOSE to the same level of scrutiny that a cop gets. The first thing they do when a cop gets into a shooting is pull out his shooting range scores. My old TO used to kick our asses if we shot more than 85 during requals. Keep racking up those 100's at paper and it will bite you in the ass if you ever DO get into a shooting. EVERY complaint you ever got, whether justifed or not, is used against them. A duty captain immediately removes ALL weapons you own (inclusing rifles and shotguns) if you fire your weapon after a shooting. If you legally own the gun you use to shoot someone, you don't say a thing and you call a lawyer. Cops are COMPLELLED to answer questions that may incriminate them within 48 hours, and even if they DO beat the criminal charges, they can still look forward to deptartment charges, where they can lose their job even though they've been found innocent, and of course the ever present civil rights violations!
Go shoot some paper at the range. It won't shoot back, tough guy.
RedneckFur
New member
If it results in the death of an innocent person, then it very well should be a criminal act. Dont forget, cops are civilians too, and should be subect to the very same treatment under the law as somone who doesnt wear a badge.
TexasSeaRay
New member
Look up the concept of Imminent Danger.pfch1977 said:
The fact the these cops apologized DOES NOT mean in any way that they are guilty or innocent or anything else "justice-related." What it means is that they are sorry that someone lost their life and they are sorry that a bad situation turned worse and escalated to the point that gunfire came into play.
And the District Attorney is an ass for saying what he said. I have zero regard for big city District Attorneys and US Attorney's who are politically motivated rather than responsible to their.
pfch1977 said:
This statement right here clearly indicates that you simply do not know what you are talking about. It is WRONG and I despise people who use their intentional ignorance to defame cops.
Your credibility is severely lacking because your knowledge of facts is damn near non-existent.
Until it improves, I'm simply adding you to my "Ignore List." That way, I won't even have to waste so much as a second reading your asinine "facts."
Jeff
Well, time for my $.02. And that is as much as my opinion is worth.
These cops were in plainclothes, with an unmarked police car. From what I read right after it happened. The people in the car probably thought a group of thugs was trying to take them. Sure the people in the car may have contributed a bit, but for all they knew they were talking crap to another group of people like them.
The cops screwed up, an innocent man is dead. Losers all around. The cops put themselves into the position when they could have probably walked away and reported the incident later. I don't know. To me, it seems that the cops didn't know when to back down and got in over their heads. They knew they were cops and perhaps under the stress of the situation forgot that they were plainclothes and that everyone else DIDN'T know that.
Doesn't matter what I think, a man is dead and nothing is going to bring him back.
These cops were in plainclothes, with an unmarked police car. From what I read right after it happened. The people in the car probably thought a group of thugs was trying to take them. Sure the people in the car may have contributed a bit, but for all they knew they were talking crap to another group of people like them.
The cops screwed up, an innocent man is dead. Losers all around. The cops put themselves into the position when they could have probably walked away and reported the incident later. I don't know. To me, it seems that the cops didn't know when to back down and got in over their heads. They knew they were cops and perhaps under the stress of the situation forgot that they were plainclothes and that everyone else DIDN'T know that.
Doesn't matter what I think, a man is dead and nothing is going to bring him back.
- Status