Okay, that is not exactly spray & pray but the one that got away took an innocent life.

 

 

and let me guess.. you would have done a better job... 2am... lunatic with a gun.. multiple innocent people... individuals screaming.. god only know what lighting conditions... 

 

how would you have handled it? with your super high level of training in urban combat...

 

 

i get it.. its sad someone died.. but you have NO idea what went on in there.. and you have no idea if it would have been way worse without the police responding... 

but I know... cop kills innocent person... prime time to post the article.. capitalize on a tragedy... 

I dont know the cop.. or what training he had.. or if he did the best job that he could.. but I do know what he walked into was probably a nightmare.. 

you should think about ALL these things before jumping to conclusions.. 

Qualifying is showing proficiency.

Sorry but shooting at stationary paper target between 7-15yds doesn't teach a person to discern what is beyond the target. 

 

Look at what happened months ago when the 2 NYC officers shot at the guy who killed his boss. That was a spray & pray scenario as multiple bystanders were getting tagged by "friendly fire".

Well posted

. The constitution protects you from the government, not from being a douche on a privately owned forum.

 

Sure, I agree with you 100%. That's why I told the other poster to take a hike.

 

I could have worded that differently, but I chose to keep it civil.

Qualifying is showing proficiency.

Showing proficiency at what? Hitting a paper target in a range while under very little stress? Many LEOs are only required to do just that. I'm not trying to be argumentative but I know quite.a.few cops who, if push came to shove, id rather rely on my marksmanship than their's because they are terrible shots. I can't imagine how they would perform under pressure.

 

edit: the training argument and this shooting are two different things IMO. we obviously don't know the details of the shooting so hard to comments either way. my comments are directed at training in general not officer.

Sorry but shooting at stationary paper target between 7-15yds doesn't teach a person to discern what is beyond the target. 

 

Look at what happened months ago when the 2 NYC officers shot at the guy who killed his boss. That was a spray & pray scenario as multiple bystanders were getting tagged by "friendly fire".

 

Good point, shooting paper targets is NOT the same as hitting a moving target.

Sorry but shooting at stationary paper target between 7-15yds doesn't teach a person to discern what is beyond the target.

 

Look at what happened months ago when the 2 NYC officers shot at the guy who killed his boss. That was a spray & pray scenario as multiple bystanders were getting tagged by "friendly fire".

Its not between 7 and 15 yards only. The 4 Firearms rules are followed and stressed. You can figure out what they are.

 

So you are saying that if a person is shooting and killing a hundred people behind you and he has 1000 people behind him do you shoot and risk it?

A buddy who is a NYC cop. He's a good shot but his daily routine requires him to issue tickets. 

 

Same goes with a buddy who's a NJ cop -- absolutely no firearm training other than shooting at a target to qualify. 

So you base the ability of 37500 NYC Cops on that one, and the 38257 NJ Leo's on the one NJ cop???  Interesting.

Its not between 7 and 15 yards only. The 4 Firearms rules are followed and stressed. You can figure out what they are.

 

So you are saying that if a person is shooting and killing a hundred people behind you and he has 1000 people behind him do you shoot and risk it?

 

The officer in question better be a good shot, if I was hit by friendly fire I would sue the **** out of the department.

The PTC and the AG both respectfully disagree with you.

Of course...

Sure, I agree with you 100%. That's why I told the other poster to take a hike.

 

I could have worded that differently, but I chose to keep it civil.

Obviously you arent getting the point of who the Douche is sparky...Lets see, you post a  snarly liktte "this is why some cops shouldnt have guns" without even reading the article..nevermind not even bothering to get the Agency Correct (Pro-tip there sonny, Nassau County is NOT part of NYC).   I have the feeling you wont last long here.

and let me guess.. you would have done a better job... 2am... lunatic with a gun.. multiple innocent people... individuals screaming.. god only know what lighting conditions... 

 

how would you have handled it? with your super high level of training in urban combat...

 

 

i get it.. its sad someone died.. but you have NO idea what went on in there.. and you have no idea if it would have been way worse without the police responding... 

but I know... cop kills innocent person... prime time to post the article.. capitalize on a tragedy... 

I dont know the cop.. or what training he had.. or if he did the best job that he could.. but I do know what he walked into was probably a nightmare.. 

you should think about ALL these things before jumping to conclusions.. 

I never said or hinted that I could have done any better so let's not play that game. 

 

My problem is with the flawed system in NYC which severly hinders people from using a firearm to protect themselves (and family) but forces victims to rely on an armed force that has no duty to protect the citizens.

 

Read my posts above -- I don't blame the officers. 

No duty to protect?

Its not between 7 and 15 yards only. The 4 Firearms rules are followed and stressed. You can figure out what they are.

 

So you are saying that if a person is shooting and killing a hundred people behind you and he has 1000 people behind him do you shoot and risk it?

It's funny how many people will say all citizens should be allowed to conceal carry b/c if a shooting started they might be able to stop it.... even if they killed an innocent person but stopped the killer it would possibly save more lives. However a cop hits an innocent bystander there is a lynch mob ready and waiting.

We can all agree that the system especially with gun owners is flawed...

I never said or hinted that I could have done any better so let's not play that game. 

 

My problem is with the flawed system in NYC which severly hinders people from using a firearm to protect themselves (and family) but forces victims to rely on an armed force that has no duty to protect the citizens.

 

Read my posts above -- I don't blame the officers. 

 

your sarcastic emoticon says it all....

 

and it just sets off the hate.. 

 

"cant make this up"

 

"spray and pray" - and this guy didnt even read the article... 

 

 

that guy could be a highly trained shooter.. you have NO idea.. the people in that home may not even be able to legally own firearms...

 

 

my point is.. dont do what the "other side" does and drag tragedies through the street screaming for blood... especially when we really have NO idea what happened.. 

No duty to protect?

 

Sounds like the cop put himself in harm's way to protect these college students. 

It's funny how many people will say all citizens should be allowed to conceal carry b/c if a shooting started they might be able to stop it.... even if they killed an innocent person but stopped the killer it would possibly save more lives. However a cop hits an innocent bystander there is a lynch mob ready and waiting.

 

 

this..

Not all cops are gun nuts. Not all are as proficient as the next one. It is what it is. Are some Civilians better trained sure. Its an unfortunate situation.

Obviously you arent getting the point of who the Douche is sparky...Lets see, you post a  snarly liktte "this is why some cops shouldnt have guns" without even reading the article..nevermind not even bothering to get the Agency Correct (Pro-tip there sonny, Nassau County is NOT part of NYC).   I have the feeling you wont last long here.

 

I have no problem with people calling me a Douche, but based on what you typed, well...YOU came over as a Douche aswell, congrats!

 

Let's see, did I ever say it was in NYC? No, I didn't.

 

You have a feeling I won't last here long? I would have to respectfully disargee with that statement.

No duty to protect?

 

Correct.

 

Castle Rock v. Gonzales

 

Warren v. District of Columbia

 

and others.

 

7 out of 8 on target in a hi pressure situation not to bad.

Ordinarily. But when you consider that the other round killed an innocent victim, describing that as 'not too bad' is pretty disgusting.

I've always been told you are responsible for every round that comes out of your gun.

The cop f'ed the pooch. He killed the victim. Bad guy, probably not. Will he think about this every day for the rest of his life? Probably.

But he still f'ed up.

So you base the ability of 37500 NYC Cops on that one, and the 38257 NJ Leo's on the one NJ cop???  Interesting.

Nope. 

This is a sad day for all involved.  The MSM will play this to the hilt.  Too bad nobody had a firearm to defend themselves with.  Prayers to the Cops and the girl's family.

 

Dave

 

"cant make this up"

 

 

that was actually me and it had nothing to do with the efficacy of the officer only the unbelievable nature of the event. irony isnt the right word to use in a sensitive situation but she was probably a bit relieved to see an officer show up only to have it turm out the way it did.

your sarcastic emoticon says it all....

 

and it just sets off the hate.. 

 

"cant make this up"

 

"spray and pray" - and this guy didnt even read the article... 

 

 

that guy could be a highly trained shooter.. you have NO idea.. the people in that home may not even be able to legally own firearms...

 

 

my point is.. dont do what the "other side" does and drag tragedies through the street screaming for blood... especially when we really have NO idea what happened.. 

The "face palm" emoticon was not meant for sarcasm. If that was my intent, I would have used 

Some people take an oath to protect...

Again I smh at a pointless thread aimed to bash LEO from somebody who has no idea about the job but thinks he does because he watches COPS on TV. Close this mind numbing argumentative bullshit thread

Some people take an oath to protect...

I don't disagree. That is honorable. It is unfortunate that the courts have ruled it isn't a requirement though. By law, there is no obligation to do so. I would hope most would still treat it as an obligation.