The Shotgun Blog
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
It's Not Racist
... but it does seem like overkill.
"The officer who had followed the group on foot was apparently the first to open fire, Kelly said. One 12-year veteran fired his weapon 31 times, emptying two full magazines, Kelly said. "
Now having never been a cop or anything near similar in my life, I cannot for certain tell you how I would act. However, if you are being threatened by a suspect using an automobile as a weapon, I can see a cop firing some shots to disable the driver.
However, if this officer did indeed fire 31 shots and actually had reload, this is a bit unsettling. That does sound like excessive force.
That being said, the usual suspect, one Rev. Al Sharpton is at the forefront of the media denouncing this as racist. With two black, one Hispanic and two white cops all firing away, it isn't. So Al do us all a favour, and shut up.
The police have countered by saying the three suspect in the car had lengthy criminal records. Unless they knew all the identities of those in the vehicle beforehand (which I doubt) and then fired, that doesn't explain the shooting.
This has more to do with tactics and competence than racism.
Posted by Mike The Greek on November 28, 2006 | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference It's Not Racist :
I heard it was NY city's newest law to battle crime....
0 strikes and you're dead.
Posted by: Canadian Observer | 2006-11-28 9:59:22 AM
The NYPD has a reputation for being trigger happy. In 1999, when I lived there, they shot and killed an unarmed African immigrant Amadou Diallo in the Bronx 41 times, hitting him 19 times. Since the only witnesses were the cops themselves, none were ever convicted of anything in the shooting, not even improper use of a firearm! Al Sharpton was at the center of the African-American response to that as well.
However, I think very highly of the NYPD. They truly are one of the better police depts that I've seen. Tronna cops are absolutely totally useless. I tried to report a crime to 911 there once and they told me that it wasn't their business. I replied "then forget it." What an attiude! No wonder Tronna is so awful. Calgary cops are good.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2006-11-28 11:26:00 AM
NY is very dangerous in some places. I heard police don't even enter some parts of the city.
Posted by: Rémi Houle | 2006-11-28 11:58:19 AM
OJ's Lawyer the Late Johnnie Cochrane brought the "race card" into the Courtroom. In Halifax NS, a hoodlum who was jailed for attempted murder, out on
unsupervised day parole, stabbed a visting member of the US Navy to death. The local media led by the
Daily News is playing the race card. The irony is both the alleged killer and victim are Black. For a highly detailed view of the NY shooting go to the
New York Post, and Mirror. MacLeod
Posted by: Jack MacLeod | 2006-11-28 12:14:06 PM
Remi: I lived in NYC for a few years, and never even saw crime the whole time there. It's a very safe city. There are a few rare places that are more dangerous than others. Mayor Giuliani deserves credit for turning NYC around from one of the most dangerous cities to one of the safest.
Toronto on the other hand is increasingly dangerous even in supposedly safe (i.e. white) areas. You people can blame that idiot mayor of yours - whom you just re-elected! - for making your place almost uninhabitable.
Don't get me started on the racism in Toronto.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2006-11-28 12:34:58 PM
Don't get me started on racism. I lived in Houston for years and experienced racism a la black style. They are the only ones allowed to scream "racist", which they do all the time. The whites can just jump in the lake, if they say the black is being racist. It is only one way,"Their way"
Posted by: Freedom of speech | 2006-11-28 1:05:23 PM
I don't know all the details, but I find it astounding that there is a policy in place against shooting someone that is using a car as a weapon.
People are seriously stupid if they think there is a difference between using a car or a gun to kill someone. If these guys were trying to run over police as the article states, then to hell with them, they made their decision and the consequences followed. 51 shots sounds a lot to me also, but how many hit their target before stopping the attempted murder with the vehicle?
It's far too easy to sit back at a computer or watch tv and say these guys are cowboys, most people who criticize have never been in a life and death situation and have no idea what it takes. Furthermore any police officer who pulls a firearm to shoot has made a decision that it's life and death, and therefore lethal force was deemed necessary. There's no such thing as shooting to disable a suspect, that's just tv, movie bullshit and speaks more about the ignorance of the critic than of the person fighting for their life.
Posted by: niv | 2006-11-28 1:05:38 PM
In the event that anyone is curious about the number of shots fired, don’t blame the officers, blame their training. All police officers are trained time and time again to continue to discharge their weapons until the threat is over. In so many words, until the threat is down (as in a person) or as is the case here, until the threat has stopped moving. Their training also forbids them from shooting at a vehicle (which is dumb) but only at the occupants. Firing 31 shots from a 9mm Glock doesn’t take much (if that was their weapon of choice). Even if the driver was hit, it is quite possible the vehicle would continue to accelerate.
As for Al Sharpton, who gives a rodent’s posterior about what he thinks? With these guys, it’s ALL about race. After all, that’s were they make their dollars.
Posted by: Harry | 2006-11-28 6:38:37 PM
"I heard it was NY city's newest law to battle crime....
0 strikes and you're dead."
I heard that this was Canada's newest law to battle self-defense.
0 strikes and you're still killed by your attacker otherwise you are charged.
Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2006-11-28 6:47:14 PM
Please compare the size of a bullet to the size of a car.
Using a car as a weapon, is much more excessive, than unloading a few dozen rounds.
Posted by: Lady | 2006-11-30 10:56:10 AM
Apparently New York City would put our City of Toronto to shame on the homeless in the streets and crime issues.
Toronto is a monument to Lefty politics. They talk about wanting to fix it but their ideologies get in the way.
Posted by: Liz J | 2006-11-30 11:29:16 AM
If you ever get into a card game with Sharpton, you know he's bluffing, because he always plays the race card, and there's only 1 of those, right ?
Posted by: Markalta | 2006-11-30 11:32:45 AM
I know an ex-policeman who once told me about how difficult it is to hit anything with a pistol;
even when standing still with feet braced. Imagine how difficult it would be if you were trying to avoid being killed. He recalled a story where five officers were blazing away in a firefight and after many rounds not ONE hit the perp. Anyone familiar with the use of side-arms would know that it takes a lot of shootin' to do a little actual hittin' when your moving.
Go ahead and try it.
Posted by: Stevie | 2006-11-30 12:22:24 PM
You can't blame Miller for high crime. You can blame him for many things, but not crime.
The South Bronx has a much higher crime rate than the Upper East Side in Manhanttan. The Bronx demographics reveal a population 39% black and 60% Hispanic. St. Louis, with a 52% black population, is the most dangerous city in the US.
Rexdale, Malvern, Jane/Finch corridor and Scarborough are a few of the high crime areas in TO. It's not just coincidence that these areas are also disproportionately black and Tamil.
The blame lies in Ottawa, where successive PMs both LPC and CPC encouraged mass unfettered immigration from non-European counries. Harper plans to increase immigration to 300,000, most of which will end up in TO.
Stop immigration and crime in TO will fall.
Posted by: DJ | 2006-11-30 1:00:56 PM
I appreciate the non-violent, productive contributions from many capitalist, pro-western, civilized East Asians.
Can we somehow limit immigration to those who raise the level of our society rather than drag it down.
Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2006-11-30 5:07:25 PM
A friend of mine had a crazy son, who actually had the nutzoid idea, that the difficulty of hitting the moving target was not real, so he and a buddy of his, tried many times, to drive past eachother, and shoot, and from what I heard, not once was either of them hit. They wasted allot of rounds, apparently, and a few tires, but that was about it. All they heard originally, is that you could not hit a moving target. As to why they would have done that, I have no idea. Someone once said that youth is wasted on the young....
You see, the thing is that we have been inundated with TV where the officer with the 9mm has perfect aim, and can slow his heart rate down quicker than most folks can flick the channel changer. They tend to think that the officer can take aim, and nudge the offender, and that this experience will somehow be a warning, and that the guy who is charging, will suddenly stop and begin a rational dialogue on peace and the benefits of tofu dogs, grass juice, and tokin' with taliban jack, with a bucket full of granola.
Posted by: Lady | 2006-11-30 8:17:47 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.