City Cops Furious at 'Don't-Kill' Legislation

M

MaineCWPtraining

Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
1,200
Likes
34
Location
Harrison, Maine
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
cops041639.jpg


City cops are livid over a legislative proposal that could handcuff the brave officers involved in life-and-death confrontations every day -- requiring them to shoot gun-wielding suspects in the arm...

READ MORE
 
I propose that ANYONE putting forth such proposals be required to participate in a live-fire exercise and given the chance to "shoot to wound".
 
That has to be THE STUPIDEST THING EVER PROPOSED!!!!! the absolute idiocy of some people really does amaze me , although I don't know why....by now it should be expected....
 
Jose said:
As the target.
Click to expand...

Nothing so crass or lacking in a lesson/teachable moment. Let them experience just how stressful it is to face an armed opponent who wants to kill you and you have to try to "wing" them.
 
QUOTE=FPrice;1436220]Nothing so crass or lacking in a lesson/teachable moment. Let them experience just how stressful it is to face an armed opponent who wants to kill you and you have to try to "wing" them.[/QUOTE]

I am surprised they don't make it so that you have to shoot the gun out of their hands..that way you won't injure them at all...We must all remember the bad guys have rights you know......and by shooting them in the arm you are taking away their ability to perform their jobs (Stealing, mugging, rape etc.) but that's ok cause Almighty O will make sure they are taken care of with some type of new entitlement program....[puke2][puke2][
 
All this law is going to do is initate another level of investigation to justified shootings, costing the tax payers millions of additional dollars to investigate justified shootings to determine if the officer (who was justified in using deadly force) attempted to shoot to disable rather then shoot to kill.
Beyond that, you'll be opening officers and police departments to increased litigation in wrongful death law-suits while forcing police officers in a life or death situation to consider, "If I draw AND fire, I may lose my job, my house, my savings and go to jail. Is it worth it?"
 
Paladino, whose association represents 5,100 investigators, said he showed the bill last week to Vice President Joe Biden, who scoffed and suggested it be dubbed "The John Wayne Bill" because it demands sharp-shooting skills of the kind only seen in movies.

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/...ill_bill_SkSRn51FKIeHqY85ZHJSYI#ixzz0owf4uaVM
Click to expand...

I don't think the bill has a chance in hell becoming law. You have to seriously question the sanity of those who wrote the bill.
 
When you are all over your outrage at handcuffing cops in a firefight, read the end of the article.
THE PROPOSAL
Section of Assembly Bill A02952
“A police officer or peace officer . . . uses such force with the intent to stop, rather than kill . . . and uses only the minimal amount of force necessary to effect such stop.”
THE CURRENT LAW
Section of state Penal Law S 35.15(2)(a)(ii)
“A person may not use deadly physical force upon another person . . . unless: he or she is . . . a police officer or peace officer or a person assisting a police officer or a peace officer at the latter’s direction.”
Click to expand...

That's way too many ellipses for my taste so...

Now read the current law in situ and with the proper context.
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/PEN/ONE/C/35/35.15

The proposed bill
http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?default_fld=&bn=+A02952 &Text=Y
 
I think this bill is perfect actually, and I would vote in favor of it. I will be watching it closely and I hope it spreads to other cities and states. It would all but ELIMINATE my #1 occupational safety concern. I can now go to work every day knowing that my chance of dying that day is GREATLY reduced and if I am hit anywhere but in the arm by a bullet I will make a nice bonus on top of my days earnings. Ahhhhh, we are finally getting to where we can operate with almost absolute impunity.

Sincerely,
Every Criminal
 
terraformer said:
When you are all over your outrage at handcuffing cops in a firefight, read the end of the article.


That's way too many ellipses for my taste so...

Now read the current law in situ and with the proper context.
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/PEN/ONE/C/35/35.15

The proposed bill
http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?default_fld=&bn=+A02952 &Text=Y
Click to expand...

In other words they want to make the law just that much more difficult to understand, prompting every cop to question whether or not they should shoot a criminal who is currently using deadly force. What if a cop shoots to wound and the criminal bleeds out anyway, or the cirminal moves and instead of it being a flesh wound, it becomes a fatal wound, the cop is now going to be scrutinized, potentially lose their job and face jail time. No matter how you look at it, all this is going to do is lead to a lot more dead good people. I'm usually for any legislation that treats cops like average citizens, but this is way too far in my opinion. It's setting the cops a step below average citizens.
 
Pete85 said:
In other words they want to make the law just that much more difficult to understand, prompting every cop to question whether or not they should shoot a criminal who is currently using deadly force. What if a cop shoots to wound and the criminal bleeds out anyway, or the cirminal moves and instead of it being a flesh wound, it becomes a fatal wound, the cop is now going to be scrutinized, potentially lose their job and face jail time. No matter how you look at it, all this is going to do is lead to a lot more dead good people. I'm usually for any legislation that treats cops like average citizens, but this is way too far in my opinion. It's setting the cops a step below average citizens.
Click to expand...

You are spot on. This is more confusing than helpful. Also, they don't specify deadly force, but unlawful force, which I suspect is different. They also say that cops can't shoot fleeing suspects. So some of this seems to be codifying in law stuff that already is in law or case law. I am betting there is something we are missing here like a local news story on cops shooting unarmed fleeing suspects or some other such BS. It doesn't make the bill the right thing to do, but I think it would likely clarify it's intent (that of rank political pandering).
 
derek said:
I don't think the bill has a chance in hell becoming law. You have to seriously question the sanity of those who wrote the bill.
Click to expand...

I agree, but I think support for something like this is, unfortunately, much more widespread than you may think. I think the general population at large thinks its quite possible, and easy, to simply "wound" a criminal by shooting them in the arm or leg in order to stop an attack. After Paul Langone killed the attacker at MGH most of the people I work with were asking "why couldn't he just shoot him in the leg? or shoot the knife out of his hand?". They couldn't wrap their heads around the fact that even if it was an on duty police officer responding it would have ended the same way. They were pretty much horrified to learn that deadly force is a line to be crossed and is not some spectrum on which "wound" is on one end and "kill" is on the other.
 
I was trained to shoot to stop, while aiming at center of mass. If shots to center of mass don't stop the miscreant, I was trained to aim at the head. But that may not be what the drafters of this legislation intend...
 
cb1 said:
I agree, but I think support for something like this is, unfortunately, much more widespread than you may think. I think the general population at large thinks its quite possible, and easy, to simply "wound" a criminal by shooting them in the arm or leg in order to stop an attack. After Paul Langone killed the attacker at MGH most of the people I work with were asking "why couldn't he just shoot him in the leg? or shoot the knife out of his hand?". They couldn't wrap their heads around the fact that even if it was an on duty police officer responding it would have ended the same way. They were pretty much horrified to learn that deadly force is a line to be crossed and is not some spectrum on which "wound" is on one end and "kill" is on the other.
Click to expand...

Set phasers on stun...

This whole thread, and the moonbat mentality in your examples in particular, reminds me of the lethal weapon movie where he shoots the guy in the leg and he falls into the pool and drowns after getting caught up in the solar cover anyhow.
 
terraformer said:
Set phasers on stun...

This whole thread, and the moonbat mentality in your examples in particular, reminds me of the lethal weapon movie where he shoots the guy in the leg and he falls into the pool and drowns after getting caught up in the solar cover anyhow.
Click to expand...
Jack Bauer "shooting to wound" last week... [sad2]

Of course then he goes completely postal on the Russians... [laugh]
 

Similar threads

NY cops kill man firing at mugger
2
Replies
56
Views
1K
jkelly1229
J
Additional new caselaw affirms: the police and the courts believe cops are allowed to kill people
2 3 4
Replies
91
Views
2K
ThePreBanMan
ThePreBanMan
Never open your door to cops. EVER!!!
2 3
Replies
72
Views
3K
Agnotology
Agnotology
hope this this belongs here....don't look if you get offended easily
2
Replies
33
Views
1K
frenchman
frenchman
Mexican mayoral candidate Alfredo Cabrera assassinated at point-blank range at campaign rally
Replies
12
Views
415
rewster
rewster
Back
Top Bottom