police shoot bystanders, charge mentally ill man with assault

Well there is also one other point about why lots of agencies don't use simunition or even air soft or even paintball. It's also the same reason you don't get any regular defensive training either.

Liability of someone getting hurt during training.

Oh, don't get me wrong. I just think you're full of shit.

75 yards.

25 yard head shots.

This guy.

So...what's that whole "protect and serve", deal?
Mindless gibberish that happens to sound like words, like "God bless you", after a sneeze?

I can't accept that a cop's number one job is to make it safely home. That is certainly one of many priorities. But his job is related to his purpose. His purpose is not to recklessly endanger the public at the first hint of a vague threat to himself. His purpose is to serve the public. That doesn't mean he has to jump in front of a bullet for me. It does mean he can't panic and put a bullet in me because he got spooked by something. If cops want to protect themselves at the expense of the public, then they should never complain when someone like me views them as a walking hazard.

And you are wrong.

Let's say they wait and he does pull a gun. They are already behind the curve reacting to his threat "I'm going to kill myself" and putting his hand into his pants as if to draw a weapon out. Now they are going to be even more behind the curve when he starts shooting.

Maybe he shoots himself. In that case you and the others would probably whine about why they were to slow to stop him. Why didn't they shoot him as he put his hand in his pants.

Maybe he shoots them. In that case you and the others would probably whine about why they were to slow to stop him. Why didn't they shoot him as he put his hand in his pants.

Maybe he shoots others. In this case you for sure are going to be complaining about why they were to slow to stop him. Why didn't they shoot him as he put his hand in his pants.

Do you notice a pattern?

It's easy to proclaim that they are wrong but as attested to in the video I linked above and other training I can tell you that use of force can happen in a split second. I can not claim what it is like to be in a situation with gunfire. I can tell you about a couple times I was getting ready to draw. Things went from 0 to 60 in less then a heartbeat. Inside the jail with use of forces I can tell you the same thing. Use of force can literally happen so fast that you are on the defense until you turn the tide.

As none of us was there we do not know what the officers saw or actually heard. We don't know how much time elapsed from contact to the shooting.

Nor did they fire wild shots. They aimed at a moving target and missed.

If you want to complain that NYPD sucks at shooting I would agree but the fault is not with the officers. It's with their leadership within the department and the city politicians who are not interested in training because of the costs issues. It's much cheaper to train to the minimum standard as required by the state then it is to actually train officers to shoot better.

And you are wrong to say a cops highest priority should not be their own personal survival. There is no oath, rule, regulation, law or even unwritten rule that says law enforcement shall lay their life down in the line of duty to protect the public. That a great many officers however do sacrifice themselves to protect others is a great testament to those officers. They did that not because you think it should be required of them but because it was who they are.

That's fancy marketing that some agencies put on the side of their cars.

So yes it's mindless gibberish.

I do notice a pattern. That's an awful lot of "maybe". Here's another maybe: Maybe he doesn't have a gun. Crazy assumption, what with the not having seen a gun or anything that could be mistaken for one. Maybe when you have a 12lbs trigger and shitty marksmanship skills, you shouldn't fire at a vague threat when there are people in the line of fire.

It's extremely easy for me to proclaim that taking shots beyond your ability in a crowded area at a supposed threat that has not proven himself to be armed is negligent and reckless. Yes, very easy.

We know what they didn't see. A weapon.

I made this clear in my last post, but I'll repeat it. I don't expect cops to shield civilians from bullets with their own mortal flesh. I DO expect them to value the public's safety AT LEAST as much as their own. This means not doing what NYPD did in this particular instance. Which was to make things much worse than they had to be. If cops are going to be so concerned with making it home at night that they spray bullets at every "furtive movement" then I'd rather they just stay home.

You have an unrealistic view of police.

You automatically assume these guys panicked and that's why they missed.

Police are not machines. They are just as human as anyone else. Maybe these two did panic. Maybe they didn't. We weren't there and we weren't in their heads at the time of the shooting.

We need to fix that.

And as backed up by statistical evidence few officers, even the ones in the NYPD (as provided by Spaceturkey), are involved in shootings. So your fear of police spraying bullets at every "furtive movement" is not only not backed up by the numbers but exposes your ignorance of what police actually do.

They are working on it.

One simple, simple rule (actually a command) to follow. Children, the developmentally disabled, monkeys.....hell developmentally disabled infant monkeys can learn this command:

"HANDS UP!" Yep....dirt simple. You might even say "HANDS WHERE I CAN SEE EM'" if you're not into the whole brevity thing. That solves everything. Hands in the air, you can't reach for anything, situation deescalates, everyone goes home alive. I'm scratching my head (couldn't even do that with my hands up) wondering how anyone could find fault with this. Any religious or cultural caveats about putting your hands in the air that would offend anybody? Actually it should be taught to our kids from the second they are allowed to play out on their own, and/or attend school.
Actually if you see an agitated cop heading your direction you should drop to your knees and put your hands up - now you're not going to run off or shoot anyone.

I can't STAND being around cops/game wardens because IMO I'm always potentially always doing something wrong and it could cost me money. That said, being a combat vet I do indeed know what it's like to have people hate me and want to kill me, and how it can keep you on edge. Thus when you see me point a gun at you, (or I'm even carrying one) follow your gut instinct and do what the fuck I say first, THEN bitch about it once the situation is rectified. Don't compete for a Darwin award.

IIRC, there is an unwritten rule regarding emergency services and first responders.

"The rescuers life is always more valuable than that of the victim." That is a person in emergency services has no legal or moral obligation to put the life of the endangered or a victim's life ahead of their own.

I assume it is the same for law enforcement officers.

By the way, in regards to what was said above about obeying the instructions of law enforcement officers, I can't count the number of people (mainly young minority males) who boldly claim that

"Nobody is going to tell me what to do!".

Which of course is bat insane.

so does that include putting third parties in danger or causing them harm to protect themselves?

Now, I know someone might say that police officers VOLUNTEERED to do a job to put themselves in danger.

I have my doubts. I read Gene Roddenberry's biography and he became a police officer so he would "have a regular paycheck and plenty of free time to write".

Nothing there about a desire to put his life on the line for the public.

By the way, Gene Roddenberry DID draw and fire his gun while serving as a police officer. A dog had been run over and was mortally wounded, in extreme pain in the road. So Roddenberry drew his pistol and put it out of its misery.

It was Christmas Day. His first while on the job.

Without these young minority males COPS and similar shows would never get on the air.

Oldfella this guy was on drugs and acting bonkers. Regardless of what anyone thinks of the situation and what the cops did I think we can all agree that if the cops had told this guy to put his hands up in the air he would not have complied.

So not knowing what this guy was reaching for (and lacking psychic abilities) what would any of us had done if we were the cops? Sorry, acting bonkers and out of control in public (thus endangering everyone) you roll your dice and take your chances.

Back in the 1970s, you know when network television actually did real news programs, NBC had a nicely done special about what police officers face.

They had a number of scenarios played out where a person at a scene started to pull out something and they then froze the screen at a critical moment and said

"If that is a gun, you're dead" (meaning if the police officer doesn't already have their gun out and firing by that point then they would be killed).

It always struck with me. They had all kinds of scenarios. Police responding in a darkened building to a report of a burglar encountering a man in a darkened stairwell. Turns out he was the building handyman and he was carrying a large wrench.

Police responding to a domestic dispute and a woman in a nightgown screaming at them as they put her husband in a police car. The woman suddenly pulls out a revolver and unloads it at the police.

Police responding to a man near the beach when they have warnings of an armed serial rapist in the area. The man continues to walk toward them despite repeated verbal warnings. When the guy is nearly within arms reach he pulls something out of his pocket. It is an ID Card that says that he is deaf.

That show has stuck with me all these years. It showed just how uncertain the situation can be and how regular run of the mill patrol officers have to make instantaneous life or death decisions in the most adverse circumstances.

Geez, and I thought you said I was the one who shouldn't be presuming what was in someone's head.

None the less, I'm still waiting for a satisfactory answer as to why they are trained to go for their guns first when statistically they miss 4/5 shots. How is that not reckless endangerment on their part other than they've got badges on?

Because a bullet is pretty much the only way of stopping someone's actions with any high level of certainty.

Tasers? Tasers can be almost completely ineffective. Hell to ward off a taser all you need to do is be wearing a heavy coat, layered clothing or sometimes just be a fat guy.

Look at Rodney King of the infamous Rodney King Beating (and Riots). He was hit by two taser shots and still got up quickly.

are you purposely ignoring the point that the NYPD misses 4/5 of the shots they fire? These cops aren't being adequately trained to be using a gun, let alone when.

If their training is inadequate then improve their training. Missing 4 out of 5 shots doesn't necessarily mean their training is bad because in any kind of shootout with armed criminals, a fair number of shots can be fired by the police which are largely unaimed. In other words just to force the criminals to take cover and not be able to fire.

Also when a police officer does use it gun, it can be a fast moving surprise situation where the police officer might well be doing multiple things at once, drawing and firing their weapon, calling for backup, taking cover, et cetera.

Firing at a person isn't like shooting those people outlines on the range.

umm, yeah.. that's the idea.

of course, a lot of that training hinges on them learning something besides shooting the mentally compromised out of fear for their personal safety. Preferably non lethal.

How do you know if someone on the street is "mentally compromised" within just a few seconds of encountering them?

Perhaps we should require all of them to wear big orange vests like deer hunters do.

That's not feasible, just replace all their shirts with these.

I think whatever drew the cops to the scene in the OP might be a pretty standard example...

or should we just shoot the mentally ill on sight as a pre emptive measure?