Export thread

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/05/n...ice-near-times-square.html?smid=re-share&_r=0

So the dude is running in and out of traffic in New York City. Bunch of people gather around. Cops show up, the guy reaches in his pocket...BLAM BLAM BLAM!! But they MISS the guy completely. Instead, they hit two women standing around watching the fun. They do tase him, though.

Now they've charged the guy with two counts of assault - each with a possible penalty of 25 years - because they say he caused the mayhem and that the injuries were HIS fault, not the fault of the officers firing while around a crowd.

Meanwhile, the officers are getting a paid vacation - suspended with pay.

Love me some New York City cop stories.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/05/n...ice-near-times-square.html?smid=re-share&_r=0

Tough decision there. If they did think he was pulling out a weapon and posed immediate danger and harm to those around them, firing at him might not be a bad choice, depending on one's capability with a weapon. If they were close enough to taser him, though, then the gunshots shouldn't have missed. I'm guessing they were still too far away (or too "keyed up") to make a good shot, and only after having scared him with the initial shots did they get close enough to taser him.
Still really sketchy. Seems like better choices could have been made.

As far as charging him with harm and damage caused by the police during his capture, that's standard procedure and supported by law. Only when the officers are proven to have acted outside their rules and regulations can the suspect dodge such charges.

This is what can turn a minor crime, such as car theft, into a major crime - leading a car chase through the city, resulting in deaths due to police cars crashing, even if you weren't involved directly in the crash.

Of course it gets uglier if the person the police are trying to capture is innocent of the original suspected crime, but subsequently becomes culpable for injuries or damage due to their flight from police.

NYPD hits innocent civilians AGAIN? Not surprising at all. Seems like we get a report of this ever 6 months.

*turns days since police shoot innocent people sign back to 0* see what I did there guys?

From the article it sounds like they had time to surround him and get close. If the officers were in range to use tasers and didn't, this is stupid. If not, and it was the only option they felt they had, dudes gotta deal with the consequences of his actions.

stienman said:

Of course it gets uglier if the person the police are trying to capture is innocent of the original suspected crime, but subsequently becomes culpable for injuries or damage due to their flight from police.

Click to expand...

Fleeing from the police is kinda stupid thing to do when you're innocent.

Shawnacy said:

Fleeing from the police is kinda stupid thing to do when you're innocent.

Click to expand...

...assuming you know they're police, yes.

--Patrick

Shawnacy said:

Fleeing from the police is kinda stupid thing to do when you're innocent.

Click to expand...

The story does point out he was emotionally disturbed, and the police were there to begin with because he was lurching in and out of traffic. So it's hard to say just how rational he was at the time.

Also, wouldn't he be charged with wreckless endangerment. Assult seems like a stupid and incorrect charge.

Wait, I checked the article and he IS being charged with wreckless endangerment. Carry on.

Isn't NYPD infamous for their poor marksmanship? Something to do with their handguns having an extremely high trigger weight or somesuch... 12lb?

There's some discussion about it on a police forum. Sounds like with training trigger pull weight shouldn't matter.

http://www.realpolice.net/forums/ask-cop-112/101995-does-nypd-still-require-heavy-trigger.html

Also, with single action-capable sidearms, it really doesn't matter unless they're hip shooting, and they shouldn't be hip shooting in crowded areas anyway.

--Patrick

PatrThom said:

Also, with single action-capable sidearms, it really doesn't matter unless they're hip shooting, and they shouldn't be hip shooting in crowded areas anyway.

--Patrick

Click to expand...

The nypd requires all firearms to be double action.

stienman said:

The nypd requires all firearms to be double action.

Click to expand...

Right, but there's a difference between "Double Action" and "DAO (or Double Action-Only)"
Hmm...it looks like the terms may have undergone some change. When I say "DA," I mean what Wikipedia refers to as the "traditional" double-action.

--Patrick