NYC cop defends self ... because he can

jimpeel

New member
"These career criminals ran into the wrong guy, it turns out."

That's because all of the right guys are disarmed and vulnerable. Cops get to defend their lives and property; while the rest of NYC gets to depend on the benevolence of the perpetrator as to whether they live or die. The cops bear arms in a holster while the citizenry are left to bear the arms attached to their shoulders.

http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2006Dec31/0,4670,OfficerShot,00.html

Off-Duty NYC Cop Shot at Robbery Scene

Sunday, December 31, 2006

By DAVID B. CARUSO, Associated Press Writer

NEW YORK — The escape of two masked men making their getaway from a Queens bank disintegrated into a bloody gunfight Saturday when they tried to hijack a car from an off-duty policeman.

Officer John Lopez was shot once in the thigh after he leaped from his car and chased the men down a busy city street but he returned fire and seriously wounded his attacker, police said.

The suspect was hospitalized in critical condition with gunshot wounds to his abdomen and leg. His alleged accomplice was captured by officers who found him hiding underneath a parked car with a bag of money at his side.

"Today, another one of our finest has gone beyond the call of duty," Mayor Michael Bloomberg said after visiting Lopez in the hospital. "These career criminals ran into the wrong guy, it turns out."

Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said the alleged robbers were repeat felons believed to be responsible for two other bank heists in the same neighborhood this month.

The suspects were identified as Joseph Pennington and Dion Mines. The were under police guard Saturday and authorities were not sure if they had attorneys.

Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
 
Bloomberg and the legislators in NY were elected, so it must not bother New Yorkers too much to be disarmed. If it did they wouldn't keep electing pro-criminal legislators.
 
WAAAAAAA!!!
The police can carry guns but I can't!!!
WAWAWAAAAAAAAA!!!
Your only responce to a couple of thugs being taken off the streets is to whine and complain.:rolleyes:
Was that REALLY your very first responce to this story?
Was there a moment when you gave a thumbs up to the LEOs involved?
If the gun laws bother you so much, either move to a gun friendly state or do what I did.
Shut up,carry anyway and take your chances!
 
"Your only responce to a couple of thugs being taken off the streets is to whine and complain."

No, it is not whining but a legitimate complaint.There are thousands of New Yorkers who did not vote for Bloomburg or Pataki or Spitzer or Schumer or Hillary. Problem is New York has become a third world country where self reliance and individual initiative are stifled and entitlements are used to buy votes and keep people in line. Police are a class onto themselves and have privileges the common man lacks in a state that has become far worse than the British monarchy we originally rebelled against.

People do move out in droves. Manufacturing has bailed out, leaving a "Service Economy" that produces nothing and uses up wealth. Pretty soon there will be nothing left but government workers and entitlement recipients, and all the real work done by illegals.
 
K80,
Are you suggesting that private citizens should be able to do exactly the same things the police do?

Regarding the initial post, I guess it just annoys me when someone can look at situation in which law enforcement did a great job and took two pieces of societal garbage off the streets and ONLY extract from it the fact that the general population isn't allowed, by law, to carry firearms.
No kudos whatsoever to the LEOs.
One of them shot a cop.
Do you think they would have hesitated to shoot jimpeel if need be?

Like I said, if you don't like the law, either break it or move , and take your chances.
Unless you think there is a chance to change the law via politics.
 
Das Boot can we amend that statement to "Either CHANGE IT or move". Breaking the law will only reinforce the anti's claims that "We" are not to be trusted to obey the laws concerning firearms.
 
littlmac,
I'll accept that.:)
I just put that out there as another option.
Not the right one possibly, but an option none the less.;)
 
If the gun laws bother you so much, either move to a gun friendly state or do what I did.
Shut up,carry anyway and take your chances!

DasBoot, with advise like that, why don`t you move to New York and see how far you get if that same crime with the off duty officer happens to you.


"Today, another one of our finest has gone beyond the call of duty," Mayor Michael Bloomberg said after visiting Lopez in the hospital. "These career criminals ran into the wrong guy, it turns out."
 
DasBoot, with advise like that, why don`t you move to New York
WSM,
I left there after 48 very exciting years, so I'm no stranger to the streets of NYC.
And I carried, illegally, for many years when I was in the jewelry business and while driving a cab at night for extra $.
It saved my butt on several occassions.
see how far you get if that same crime with the off duty officer happens to you.
I don't follow you on that part!:confused:
 
"Today, another one of our finest has gone beyond the call of duty," Mayor Michael Bloomberg said after visiting Lopez in the hospital. "These career criminals ran into the wrong guy, it turns out."

The Mayor is very clearly pointing out that the police have NO duty to actually stop crime, only to step in after the fact & try to find someone to blame it on.

And I agree that it is a real shame that if a private citizen did this he would be arrested & charged with several crimes.

In the state I live in you are not permitted to use deadly force to protect money or property. The officer should have let the robbers have his car & called an ON DUTY police officer to handle the situation. If he had, he may not have been shot. Actually that would have resulted in NO ONE being hurt.
 
An LEO is ALWAYS on duty whether he/she likes it or not.
Your responsibilities don't end when your shift ends.

Today, another one of our finest has gone beyond the call of duty,"
Sorry Mayor!
He didn't go "beyond" it.
He did what he was supposed to do.
 
NYC LEO's are required to carry off duty, or at least they were when I lived there. Some cities give the LEO's the option of carrying or not, and some actually prohibit off duty carry. About a year ago in Chicago a female LEO was stalked by two thugs. Being off duty, the LEO had her firearm in her purse, but of course the two perps assumed she was just another unarmed civilian since handgun OWNERSHIP is prohibited in Chicago, let alone concealed carry. When she drew on them and arrested the two, local news media had the same reaction as is stated in the NYC article, "they picked on the wrong person". It amazes me that the anti-gun crowd never seems to get it that maybe we would be better off if honest citizens had a smiliar ability to an off duty LEO to protect themself from crime. A pro-CCW group here is Illinois has a video that says Illinois would rather allow a woman to be robbed, raped, beaten and left for dead than to allow her the ability to defend herself with a firearm. There are many who carry here in Illinois, illegally, and "take their chances" as Das Boot has said. That's why it is so rarely reported in the press that an armed citizen stopped a crime from occuring with their firearm. The crimes are stopped, but the gun bearing citizen never reports it to anyone out of legitimate fear of being arrested for illegal carry.
 
In the state I live in you are not permitted to use deadly force to protect money or property. The officer should have let the robbers have his car & called an ON DUTY police officer to handle the situation. If he had, he may not have been shot. Actually that would have resulted in NO ONE being hurt.

The supposition is "may not have been shot" and goes downhill from there.
Sarah Brady logic.according_to_sarah.jpg

badbob
 
Quote:
see how far you get if that same crime with the off duty officer happens to you.

I don't follow you on that part!


What I meant was, if that was you instead of that off-duty officer on that shooting, you can bet on it Bloomberg would not be congratulating you. You would be facing criminal charges for illegal carry and murder. You got guts to carry that long illegally when you lived there. :eek:
On ther hand, I don`t think Jimpeel was complaining about the cop defending himself. He is pointing out that if a citizen did the shooting he/she would be facing so much crap they would hound him/her for life.
 
WSM,
What I meant was, if that was you instead of that off-duty officer on that shooting, you can bet on it Bloomberg would not be congratulating you. You would be facing criminal charges for illegal carry and murder
That is true to some degree.
First of all, I would not fire on someone FLEEING a bank robbery.
Secondly, if I was confronted, as I have been in the cab, with someone trying to take my car, I may or may not have used my gun.
Is the car worth jail time?

As for jimpeel, I see your point now.
But a little acknowledgement for what the cop did would've been nice.
And I do believe in every citizens right to carry.
 
DasBoot

If the gun laws bother you so much, either move to a gun friendly state or do what I did.
Shut up,carry anyway and take your chances!

Was that REALLY your very first responce to this story?

A. Read my profile and you will find that I DO live in a gun friendly state.

B. I moved from California to Colorado for precisely that reason.

C. When I lived in CA I carried concealed and "took my chances". That was when it was still a misdemeanor.

D. Take it as an anti-LEO rant if you want to. The fact is that he was able to defend himself through deadly force. What of the guy in the car ahead of his or the guy behind? They would have been at the mercy of these thugs.

E. Yes. That was my first reaction to the story; "Once again, the privileged are able to survive an attack."
 
Are you suggesting that private citizens should be able to do exactly the same things the police do?
No. I simply want to be able to defend myself and my family with equal or superior force to that which is being brought to bear against me regardless of where I am. How often do you read about how a cop shot a "knife wielding suspect"? If they can do it, why can't I?

One of them shot a cop.
Do you think they would have hesitated to shoot jimpeel if need be?

Yes, if I were the guy in the car ahead of, or behind, the cop you would likely be correct. If you are going to argue a point you should refrain from making the other guy's argument for him.
 
That's why it is so rarely reported in the press that an armed citizen stopped a crime from occuring with their firearm.

The press will not report on cases where a firearm was instrumental in stopping a crime. Look at the school shootings such as Pearl, MS and how they were covered. Joel Myrick stopped Luke Woodham and most stories neglected to mention that Myrick was armed when he arrested Woodham.

Read the following. It is quite informative.

http://keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=687

...

In April 1998, a 14-year-old middle school student in Edinboro, Pennsylvania, walked into a school dance with a .25-caliber handgun and opened fire, killing a science teacher and wounding several students. He turned to flee, but the owner of the hall, James Strand, armed with a shotgun, chased him into a field. When the boy stopped to reload, Strand captured him and held him until police arrived 11 minutes later.

Out of 596 TV, newspaper, and magazine stories on the Edinboro crime, just 35 mentioned Strand, reports economist John Lott, author of More Guns, Less Crime, in a 1999 National Review article. Even when the media did report Strand's story, they didn't report all of it. The New York Daily News said only that Strand had "persuaded" the shooter to surrender. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution said Strand chased the shooter down and "held him until police came."

Much the same is true in the case of Joel Myrick, says Lott. Out of 687 stories he found on the shootings in Pearl, just 19 made reference to Myrick. Some of those that mentioned him left his gun out of the story. CBS's Dan Rather, for example, reported, "Myrick eventually subdued the gunman." How he "subdued" him Rather didn't say.

In May 1998, 15-year-old Kip Kinkel walked into the crowded cafeteria of Thurston High School in Springfield, Oregon, and opened up on students with a .22-caliber semiautomatic rifle. He shot wildly at first, then started singling students out for death. At one point Kinkel walked up to a student who was lying on the floor, placed the rifle to her head, and attempted to fire three times, but nothing happened. Wrestler Jacob Ryker, shot through the lung in the first wave of bullets, charged the 15 feet separating him from Kinkel, tackled him, and disarmed him. Had Ryker not done so, the toll could have been much higher than the roughly two dozen injuries and two deaths the shooting caused.

In a Nightline broadcast shortly after the shooting, ABC's Ted Koppel credited Ryker with halting the shooting. But once the details of the shooting were out of the way, the program quickly turned into another debate on gun control. Koppel and his reporters never explained how it was that Ryker knew when to attack Kinkel; the hero could have been doing nothing more than making himself a better target in a suicidal charge. It turned out that Ryker and his family were hunters and target shooters. From the sounds the gun made, Ryker knew Kinkel was out of ammunition. Ryker's parents credited his familiarity with firearms with helping to stop the shooting.

...
 
Change it or move out . I read that somewhere . I'm suprised that the Jews didn't think of that in 1939 Nazi Germany . I'll keep this short and on point . Anyone that wants to carry openly with no problem OR is willing to take a one day class and carry concealed then Arizona is for you . I might be able to help just a little . If you are a machinist or a welder go to Laron.com . That's where I work and they are hiring every day IF you are any good . You can get back up to $1500 moving expenses after your 60 day probation . I am very familiar with New York City . I am a refugee from Woodside , Queens myself . The Sullivan Law is a blessing to bad guys . So many times the anti's will go to a gun store and try to make the owner break the law . How many times have they gone to Harlem and found a guy selling handguns out the trunk of a car and perform a citizens arrest . Stop laughing , it MIGHT happen ...... OK , you're right IT WON'T !!!!!
 
Well many DID move out of Germany when things started getting bad. My grandmother on my moms side left Poland in 1937 to come to America in fact.
 
Back
Top