Gunless New Yorkers Provide Target Practice for New York Cops…

New York’s Finest used to be the accepted cognomen for the cops in that city, an affectionate identification. Well, unless you were a crook. Now though, it’s not the same. ‘Bloomberg’s Thugs’ might be closer to the Occupiers’ view, though the views of folk who crap all over the place and don’t bathe a whole lot while complaining incessantly about nearly everything INCLUDING Obama leave many of us unsympathetic. Though I can sympathize with complaining about Obama. Maybe pretty soon we’ll be able to complain about Romney. Or not.

But you can’t use ‘New York’s Finest’ to describe allegedly professional law enforcement that, going after a gunman who has just killed an ex boss, shoots 9 perfectly innocent bystanders outside the Empire State Building before the killer ever gets off a shot at the cops. With their pistols, no less. God help the city if cops ever get loose on the streets with submachineguns! This is the law enforcement outfit they’re planning to provide with armed drones, right? Well. sounds like one way to open up more residential rentals…

What impresses me: Mayor Bloomberg thinks only N.Y. law enforcement is qualified to carry guns. Can you tell me, Mayor Bloomberg, any two private citizens able to match the record for shooting innocents just established by these two pros? If the Mayor really wished to protect the cityfolk, seems to me, he’d disarm the cops and grant concealed carry to any civilian who was willing. Though I’d accept excluding those with less than 200/20 eyesight, which sounds like it might rule out at least a couple of cops…

Police Bullets

About Jack Curtis

Suspicious of government, doubtful of economics, fond of figure skating (but the off-ice part, not so much) Couple of degrees in government, a few medals in figure skating; just reading and suspicion for economics ...
This entry was posted in Guns, Law Enforcement, Occupy and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Gunless New Yorkers Provide Target Practice for New York Cops…

  1. --Rick says:

    Here’s a suggestion; try standing in front of an active shooter dodging his bullets from 8 to 10 feet away and count how many times you miss [or shit yourself] in a defensive posture with adrenaline pumping at the speed of thought.

    I’d ask if you’ve ever been shot at or engaged in firefight, but I suspect the answer would be no, which would excuse the simple-mindedness and unrealistic expectations that ooze from this post.

    • jackcurtis says:

      I’ll plead guilty to running amuck with the post; the subject was irresistible. Past that, though: First, the “shooter” didn’t get off a single shot at the two cops before they started firing at him and second, the cops are supposed to be trained, experienced pros, not excitable rookies. Hence my reaction. Hunters disdain rookies who get ‘buck fever’ which leads to indiscriminate firing, law enforcement subject to it deserve more than disdain. I’m sure the lawyers are converging and will wager the city will have to pay.

      You employed a personal attack, assuming that I don’t understand such situations and am therefore incompetent to post an opinion. That should be beneath anyone intelligent enough to be taken seriously, seems to me. It omits the possibility of competent research on subjects (if scientists relied only on personal experience, we’d have no science) and it ignores the fact that I was a U.S. soldier in wartime. Otherwise, you are always welcome to dispute opinions here and I hope you’ll continue to do that.

  2. --Rick says:

    From my understanding of the situation; neither officer had ever been involved in a shooting; this is especially true at such close range. As the video shows, when the murderer turned, he was less than 10 feet from the officers – trained humans; not supermen.
    There is a huge difference between waiting on an unarmed deer and a confirmed killer who is about a rifle’s length away with a gun pointed at you or your partner. There is no such thing as far as I know as perp fever. My son, a veteran Massachusetts State Trooper just confirmed that last. And let me ask you this: so you suppose you’d react any differently to a man who’d just killed a citizen pointing gun at you, or would you let him get the first shot off and hope that he missed as you thought through this ethical dilemma?
    As to the personal attack, what you were doing was making a mockery of an entire police force, mostly composed of men dedicated to maintaining the peace and protecting life and property at a real risk to themselves and the security of their families. They are more than uniforms to be made light of or to be targeted with ridiculous implications of malfeasance or disregard for public safety.
    I, too, was a wartime soldier – a Navy medic serving with a U.S. Marine recon unit from 1969 – 1973, and I have to say that I’ve seen men react exactly as those two police officers did from hundreds of yards away, let alone ten feet. This is the basis for my guess and my doubt of your “experience”.
    I’ve seen instances where the enemy was hung at the wrong end of a bayonet while the holder was still unthinkingly firing rounds in a reaction to the terror of nearly being killed. And there is no better trained force other than special operators and recon team members than the United States Marine infantryman.
    So, I suppose I can make a case that what I am saying comes from an observed and educated perspective. And based on that experience, expressed in a barely cracked open window, I would find it remarkable that your attitude regarding the tragic circumstances the officers found themselves in would provide sufficient cause to “irresistibly run amuck” intellectually making light two people putting themselves on the line on a crowded NY street to eliminate a known danger with unknown intentions.
    With a common sense background, let alone one that included the experience of coming under fire at close range, I simply find your expectation that police should simply bob and weave while out of in the open, two arms lengths from a witnessed killer as they line up the perfect one shot to the head or heart in contradistinction to the reality of my real time observations – now detached and completely science based in calm reflection from the comfort of my home.
    When in trouble, everyone wants a superman in blue to rescue them; when someone else, or the officer himself is in trouble, everyone wants a punch line. Although you didn’t know that I have a son who happened to choose law enforcement and public safety as a career, it should now be clear that I took personal offense at your sophomoric parody of a very real and tragic incident brought on by the dead guy; not the two police officers who were performing their duties as charged.
    Considering the options, these officers will be exonerated, the city will accept responsibility for the wounded and life will move on until the next homicidal maniac shows up looking at someone to shoot over a difference of opinion. Either way, those police officers will never be the same, or will their lives and relationships with family and friends remain the same as it was before the shooting. Those scars never fade. As a combat vet, you, of course know that some wounds just can’t be seen even though they unceasingly hurt like hell.
    As to my being welcome to post comments on your blog, have no fear. With this final reply, I am unsubscribing. I find it difficult to correspond with one who demands other bear thick skin while reacting as if their own skin is so thin they might as well not have any skin at all.

Leave a Reply to --Rick Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s