Yes, there is another thread dealing with the NYC "mass shooter" (as I've seen him called by some mainstream media sources), but that thread is focusing on the FIRST shooter, if you remember, there were a lot of other shooters that followed, and they were wearing badges.
11 people were shot if I am correct. The gunman only shooting one of those people, his intended victim. The rest were shot by the police...
The gunman was taken down in quite literally a hailstorm of gunfire that was originally twisted by the police and media to sound like a "gun fight". It was no gun fight, as a matter of fact, the gunman never shot at the police.
The final story reads like this: The gunman killed his intended victim, and began walking down the street, he was pointed out to LEO's by passerby's and they cornered him... the gunman began to raise the firearm according to police, and they opened fire... they managed to shoot 9 innocent bystanders who were going about their day, and the number of rounds that was unleashed is in the multiple dozens...
Here is where the discussion starts... WHAT THE HELL WERE THE COPS THINKING FIRING SO MANY ROUNDS IN PUBLIC WHEN A SINGLE OFFICER COULD HAVE DONE THE JOB???
I know many LEO's will read this, and I want you to know that my intention is not to go out ranting on police, I want YOUR input here,
Being a born and raised Upper West side kid in NYC I know that your average NYC police officer is NOT properly sufficient in the use of a firearm, not to mention they are essentially NEVER in a situation where it would be okay to open fire in this manner, as they are in a crowded city of millions.... they often never shoot their firearms (hell I remember this just from asking cops about their guns on the street when I was a kid), and I wouldn't trust them to put 5 out of 10 rounds on a person at 25yrds with rapid fire... Only a properly trained combat pistol marksman could do that under life/death pressures.
If a gunman is about to shoot at cops, he must be taken stopped, one well placed bullet will do that... maybe two if he hits the ground and raises the gun again... these officers managed to add 9 people to the casualties list (thank god none were mortally shot).
I'm sorry but this is a joke... between Aurora Police saying they would have arrested anyone who took armed action against the theater shooter, and now Anti-gun ranting Michael Bloomberg's cops grossly over-reacting and wounding 9 bystanders (and then being PRAISED by Bloomberg) I am at a complete loss for any sort of consistency...
Anyone care to elaborate? Would you have pulled off 12 shots (as some officers did) at a man already clearly down for the count/dead and on the ground when you know LOTS of innocent bystanders are downrange of your target? This reminds me of a when a group of dogs gets together and one starts barking so all the others go crazy barking and then they don't stop... they just keep going. In this case those barks were bullets... just saying...
The man shot and killed his intended victim, but that still remains the only person he shot at... he did not shoot randomly at bystanders as first reports indicated (matter of fact those reports were probably misreporting the police rounds hitting civilians), and even though he may or may not have begun to wave his handgun at the police, that doesn't mean to open fire necessarily... Especially in the manner they did.
11 people were shot if I am correct. The gunman only shooting one of those people, his intended victim. The rest were shot by the police...
The gunman was taken down in quite literally a hailstorm of gunfire that was originally twisted by the police and media to sound like a "gun fight". It was no gun fight, as a matter of fact, the gunman never shot at the police.
The final story reads like this: The gunman killed his intended victim, and began walking down the street, he was pointed out to LEO's by passerby's and they cornered him... the gunman began to raise the firearm according to police, and they opened fire... they managed to shoot 9 innocent bystanders who were going about their day, and the number of rounds that was unleashed is in the multiple dozens...
Here is where the discussion starts... WHAT THE HELL WERE THE COPS THINKING FIRING SO MANY ROUNDS IN PUBLIC WHEN A SINGLE OFFICER COULD HAVE DONE THE JOB???
I know many LEO's will read this, and I want you to know that my intention is not to go out ranting on police, I want YOUR input here,
Being a born and raised Upper West side kid in NYC I know that your average NYC police officer is NOT properly sufficient in the use of a firearm, not to mention they are essentially NEVER in a situation where it would be okay to open fire in this manner, as they are in a crowded city of millions.... they often never shoot their firearms (hell I remember this just from asking cops about their guns on the street when I was a kid), and I wouldn't trust them to put 5 out of 10 rounds on a person at 25yrds with rapid fire... Only a properly trained combat pistol marksman could do that under life/death pressures.
If a gunman is about to shoot at cops, he must be taken stopped, one well placed bullet will do that... maybe two if he hits the ground and raises the gun again... these officers managed to add 9 people to the casualties list (thank god none were mortally shot).
I'm sorry but this is a joke... between Aurora Police saying they would have arrested anyone who took armed action against the theater shooter, and now Anti-gun ranting Michael Bloomberg's cops grossly over-reacting and wounding 9 bystanders (and then being PRAISED by Bloomberg) I am at a complete loss for any sort of consistency...
Anyone care to elaborate? Would you have pulled off 12 shots (as some officers did) at a man already clearly down for the count/dead and on the ground when you know LOTS of innocent bystanders are downrange of your target? This reminds me of a when a group of dogs gets together and one starts barking so all the others go crazy barking and then they don't stop... they just keep going. In this case those barks were bullets... just saying...
The man shot and killed his intended victim, but that still remains the only person he shot at... he did not shoot randomly at bystanders as first reports indicated (matter of fact those reports were probably misreporting the police rounds hitting civilians), and even though he may or may not have begun to wave his handgun at the police, that doesn't mean to open fire necessarily... Especially in the manner they did.