NY State Bill: Officers should shoot to stop, not to kill

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Aug 11, 2007
Messages
423
Location
NY
Bill: Officers should shoot to stop, not to kill

Video on link http://www.cbs6albany.com/news/state-1274218-assembly-officers.html

May 25, 2010 6:36 PM
Chris White

ALBANY -- A bill in the Assembly would change drastically police policy in New York State in the way officers use their weapons.

The bill, sponsored by Assemblywoman Annette Robinson (D-Bedford-Stuyvesant), would instruct police and peace officers to use their weapons only with the intent to stop and not to kill a person.

“There is no justification for terminating another's life when a less extreme measure may accomplish the same objective,” states a memo that accompanies the bill.

Officers would instead be instructed to try to shoot a suspect in the arm or the leg.

“In recent years, the killing of criminal suspects by police has focused the public attention on how police respond when the suspect is a member of an ethnic minority,” the memo states. “The issue is highly controversial, with critics accusing the police of racism while supporters deny any racism and assert that the killings have been in good faith or an unfortunate mistake.”

And officer who did kill with that intent would not be penalized, according to the proposed legislation.

Police work is guided by the use of force continuum.

Lethal force, according to the National Institute of Justice, should only be used “if a suspect poses a serious threat to the officer or another individual.”

Troy Police Chief John Tedesco says the intentions are good but aren't practical. "You are going to put officers lives in danger. What we really want is for the officer not to think but we want the offcier to be able to react. He doesn't want to stop and say well gee if I don't hit this fellow in the shoulder, i'm probably going to prison. There's going to be cops out on the streets getting killed over this legislation."

The proposed bill has no Senate sponsorship and no votes in the Assembly as of Tuesday May 25th.

One Capital source says the bill is virtually dead in the Assembly anyway.
 
Last edited:
I was taught in the Academy NEVER shoot to wound, it means you yourself did not believe you had the right to employ deadly physical force. Not to mention the danger to bystanders as you are forced to aim for a MUCH smaller and rapidly moving target. NYPD already has a hit percentage of 17%, how much lower will this drive it, notto mention how much more will the city pay out in lawsuits, for those missed rounds hitting grandma in the wheelchair down the block?
 
Officers would instead be instructed to try to shoot a suspect in the arm or the leg.
PPLLEEASSE. Most shots miss already. Also to the extent that being shot in the arm or leg is less likely to kill, it is also less likely to stop AFAIK. Have these folks presented any risk analysis (supported by statistical data) to support their proposed position or is this just babbling out of pure ignorance?
 
High Pressure Glue guns to be issued to police. New weapon mandates 3 officers to carry tank system, and one EMT to clear unintentionally blocked airways...

Police cruisers to be replaced with Stretch Hummer 2's to accomodate new minimum patrol size
 
+1 to Lorenzo Rojo

Our rule is to "shoot to stop the threat" but we are trained to shoot center mass.... It serves the same purpose.
 
Officers would instead be instructed to try to shoot a suspect in the arm or the leg.
The mantra of someone who has never tried it, especially under stress at a moving target.

[SARCASM]While they are at it they should be instrusted to simply shoot the weapon out of the BG's hand! Or maybe put a round down the BG's barrel so his gun won't fire?[/SARCASM]
 
This is the problem when people totally unfamiliar with guns and how they work try to regulate them. Anyone remember Rep McCarthy's list of bannable features and she couldn't describe half of them?
 
Phasers on stun!:rolleyes:

I can say with the utmost confidence that the police union wouldn't let this naive piece of nuttyness become law without a fight.

This says it all:

The proposed bill has no Senate sponsorship and no votes in the Assembly as of Tuesday May 25th.

One Capital source says the bill is virtually dead in the Assembly anyway.
 
I would say it is safe to say they already "shoot to stop". COM happens to be the place to shoot that works to stop most reliably. It may also result in more deaths than other hits, but that is incidental to the fact that police and everyone else carrying a gun should be training to shoot to stop the threat.

Not everyone involved in a shootout with cops is killed. If "shooting to kill" were the objective, the cops would attempt to just summarily execute everyone they get in a fight with, whether or not the threat was stopped first.
 
Annette Robinson (D-Bedford-Stuyvesant)
This, folks, is all you need to know.

Bed-Stuy is one of the poorest areas of Brooklyn with a higher-than-NYC-average crime rate. As a result, residents there always feel like they're victims of racism by NYPD.

Anyone else catch her party affiliation?
 
Unfortunately, sometimes death is the result of shooting someone. :rolleyes: While killing may not be a specific intent, if the situation did not justify killing, it did not justify shooting at all and they should have used an intermediate level of force.
 
"I aimed for his arm, but missed and hit him in the forehead. The department doesn't provide sufficient training."
 
Officers would instead be instructed to try to shoot a suspect in the arm or the leg.

Hmmm... considering how much success it seems that most folks (cops included ... maybe "especially") in simply hitting the center of mass of an active, mobile, aggressive bad guy, who's something near 20" wide on average, hitting s 4" thick arm or 6-8" thick leg -- on purpose -- should be a piece of cake. Especially considering how they tend to flail around at much higher speed and in a more random path than does a torso.

Can't wait to see the new NYPD qualifying target...
 
Officers would instead be instructed to try to shoot a suspect in the arm or the leg.

While we're on the subject, I suggest they just shoot the gun/knife/bat/etc out of the BG's hand.
 
"I aimed for his arm, but missed and hit him in the forehead. The department doesn't provide sufficient training."
Reminds me of the movie Tango & Cash
"Kneecaps on 3...2...1" *BangBang*
(bad guy is shot twice in the forehead)
"My sights are off"
"Mine too"
 
What a great idea. They could teach the officers to shoot for that nerve in the arm that would cause them to instantly drop the gun. I remember a great movie where they did that...oh yeah, her partner died because of it.

Who does this congresswoman just ask we take their guns completely away and issue them bullhorns, they could hurl blistering harsh language at them. And since it is illegal for people to disregard officer commands, especially vulgar ones, it will all work out nicely.

I swear, when a senator submits a bill like this, is should be printed out, and nailed to every telephone pole in her district so all her constituents can see what they are doing out there.
 
Having seen the skill of several Indiana State Police and various deputy sheriffs in this state, the idea of insisting these people take a more challenging target is an invitation to disaster.

Assuming NY LEO's have the same level of marksmanship if this bill were passed it would encourage crime as if you are innocent and standing by you are going to get shot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top