It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

All 9 people injured in Friday's shooting near the Empire State Building were wounded by Police

page: 6
32
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 25 2012 @ 11:19 PM
link   
These douchebags are so desperate, they will take any measures to regulate gun laws. Desperate I say! tsk tsk.
Expect more...Unbelievable!
edit on 25-8-2012 by PurpleVortex because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 25 2012 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by PurpleVortex
 




These douchebags are so desperate, they will take any measures to regulate gun laws. Desperate I say! tsk tsk.
Expect more i say...Unbelievable!


Must be desperate!

Please tell us how having a shooting in NYC, a city with strict gun laws, will strengthen the cause for banning guns?







edit on 25-8-2012 by AlphaHawk because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2012 @ 11:46 PM
link   


Must be desperate! Please tell us how having a shooting in NYC, a city with strict gun laws, will strengthen the cause for banning guns?


Stricter gun laws wouldn't result in fewer gun-related deaths and injuries. You think it's hard for someone to get a hold of an illegal weapon when he has an agenda in his mind? think again...

ETA: It even proves that even in NYC, a place with strict gun laws incidents like this can happen. It's not a matter of strict gun laws or non strict gun laws, it's about these incidents happening every other week.
edit on 25-8-2012 by PurpleVortex because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kandinsky
1 killer dead and 9 bystanders injured in broad daylight on a crowded street?

Those cops did a good job imo.

Of course, they could have stood still shouting 'Freeze' and run the chance of the gunman emptying his clips into the crowd...

Then we'd be reading a different thread about how bad police are instead of reading this thread about how bad police are. I wonder what scenario would help those police escape a thread about bad they were? If they'd disarmed the man maybe we could have run up a thread that they put people's lives at risk?


Are you being facetious? They were no more than 5 feet away from the guy. Why in god's name would you need to fire 9 shots at somebody who is a few feet away? Aren't these highly trained police officers? Shouldn't they be able to take down a perpetrator standing directly in front of them without firing a total of 16 shots? If not, then they shouldn't be police officers or the police need to rethink their training methods. One shot should have been enough. They shot SIXTEEN TIMES!.
Shooting 9 people in order to stop somebody who shot one person, and you think they did a good job.....



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by PurpleVortex
 


Exactly.

So why the hell would anyone think this incident is another reason for gun control??



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by deadeyedick
This must be some new tactic.
Wound all bystanders so the shooter will have no one to target.
I bet the shooter stood there stunned in awe thinking who's side are you on right before he was taken down.

Civilian "you shot me officer"
Officer "no i saved your life"


Would you rather be injured or dead?



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 12:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maroboduus

Originally posted by Kandinsky
1 killer dead and 9 bystanders injured in broad daylight on a crowded street?

Those cops did a good job imo.

Of course, they could have stood still shouting 'Freeze' and run the chance of the gunman emptying his clips into the crowd...

Then we'd be reading a different thread about how bad police are instead of reading this thread about how bad police are. I wonder what scenario would help those police escape a thread about bad they were? If they'd disarmed the man maybe we could have run up a thread that they put people's lives at risk?


Are you being facetious? They were no more than 5 feet away from the guy. Why in god's name would you need to fire 9 shots at somebody who is a few feet away? Aren't these highly trained police officers? Shouldn't they be able to take down a perpetrator standing directly in front of them without firing a total of 16 shots? If not, then they shouldn't be police officers or the police need to rethink their training methods. One shot should have been enough. They shot SIXTEEN TIMES!.
Shooting 9 people in order to stop somebody who shot one person, and you think they did a good job.....


When was the last time you fired a gun at some one? When was the last time you fired a gun at some on under massive amounts of stress? Have you ever thought about killing some one to protect the many?



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 12:29 AM
link   
Police shoot and wound 9 people...it's ok.

If a crazy gunman shot 9 people...national news for at least a week full of anti gun b.s.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 12:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by SGTSECRET
Police shoot and wound 9 people...it's ok.

If a crazy gunman shot 9 people...national news for at least a week full of anti gun b.s.


Completely out of context.


I can play that game as well:

Police remove one hostile individual that had plans on killing a theater full of innocent people.
Unfathomably they also wounded 9 people in the process.

The gun man was subdued and will face trial, the injured will fully recover.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 12:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Yeats

Originally posted by Maroboduus

Originally posted by Kandinsky
1 killer dead and 9 bystanders injured in broad daylight on a crowded street?

Those cops did a good job imo.

Of course, they could have stood still shouting 'Freeze' and run the chance of the gunman emptying his clips into the crowd...

Then we'd be reading a different thread about how bad police are instead of reading this thread about how bad police are. I wonder what scenario would help those police escape a thread about bad they were? If they'd disarmed the man maybe we could have run up a thread that they put people's lives at risk?


Are you being facetious? They were no more than 5 feet away from the guy. Why in god's name would you need to fire 9 shots at somebody who is a few feet away? Aren't these highly trained police officers? Shouldn't they be able to take down a perpetrator standing directly in front of them without firing a total of 16 shots? If not, then they shouldn't be police officers or the police need to rethink their training methods. One shot should have been enough. They shot SIXTEEN TIMES!.
Shooting 9 people in order to stop somebody who shot one person, and you think they did a good job.....


When was the last time you fired a gun at some one? When was the last time you fired a gun at some on under massive amounts of stress? Have you ever thought about killing some one to protect the many?


Don't be foolish. Being highly trained in the use of guns, and in neutralizing threats at the minimum cost, is a CENTRAL part of their occupation. If they can't shoot a person standing 3 feet directly in front of them without shooting 9 other people in the process, then either their training was faulty or they are highly incompetent. Trying to compare a civilian shooting at somebody to a cop who is trained to do these things is silly, at best. And call me crazy, but even with my limited experience with guns, i'm fairly certain i could hit somebody standing that close to me without shooting 9 times.

If a police officer can't perform their job adequately under stress, then they obviously should not be a police officer to begin with.
edit on 26-8-2012 by Maroboduus because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 12:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Yeats

Originally posted by SGTSECRET
Police shoot and wound 9 people...it's ok.

If a crazy gunman shot 9 people...national news for at least a week full of anti gun b.s.


Completely out of context.


I can play that game as well:

Police remove one hostile individual that had plans on killing a theater full of innocent people.
Unfathomably they also wounded 9 people in the process.

The gun man was subdued and will face trial, the injured will fully recover.


Good job proving my point...Police shoot and wound 9 people...it's ok. Not out of context at all. It is actually what happened. Where are all the 'guns are dangerous not even police can have them' comments? If it were the other way around the conversation on every news station would once again be full of 'take away the evil guns.'



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 12:53 AM
link   
No doubt the NYPD will be going in to damage control big time as all 9 of these victims file a mega law suit against the Police Dept.

One accidental shooting can be forgiven but 9? WTF ?

Those Police officers ought to resign and find a new occupation - that does'nt involve guns!



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 01:05 AM
link   
Wow. Imagine if nobody in the city had guns, other than the criminals. Ban a gun, but you better also ban crime. A driven criminal will break a law, or a ban, to get a gun.

Try not to assume that the police missed their target nine times. Bullets bounce and create shrapnel. NYC is crowded. Let's use facts.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 01:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by zayonara
Wow. Imagine if nobody in the city had guns, other than the criminals. Ban a gun, but you better also ban crime. A driven criminal will break a law, or a ban, to get a gun.

Try not to assume that the police missed their target nine times. Bullets bounce and create shrapnel. NYC is crowded. Let's use facts.


Um, police did miss their target. So you are saying they hit the gunman...and they bounced off creating shrapnel? What are you even talking about? How did they create shrapnel without missing?


Nine bystanders were wounded in the 16-shot volley, all by stray or ricocheting police bullets. None of their injuries was life-threatening, police said. Read more: www.foxnews.com...



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 01:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
But, I thought having more guns at a scene of a shooting would keep people safe???

These are trained police officers...and even they can't control their gunfire in broad daylight. Can you imagine if 5-10 people were armed in Aurora inside a smokey dark movie theater???

Some people want you to believe that if other people were armed, they would have taken down the shooter with one clean shot and been the hero...I think this pretty much proves them wrong.


You make a solid point and I've never thought of it from that angle but definitely understand where you're coming from, but that's a huge variable to throw into play on its own. Just because more people have guns doesn't mean they are all going to be inaccurate and cause more damage, there's nothing to substantiate that claim.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 03:46 AM
link   
dear god, now police and silly rednecks are the reason I wouldnt want to travel thru the wonderful united states of america. What ever happened to the police that should protect the people? They are becoming the real problem.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 03:54 AM
link   
It occurs to me that if the Police are willing to admit this screw up so quickly - what are they trying to hide????



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 05:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Yeats

Originally posted by SGTSECRET
Police shoot and wound 9 people...it's ok.

If a crazy gunman shot 9 people...national news for at least a week full of anti gun b.s.


Completely out of context.


I can play that game as well:

Police remove one hostile individual that had plans on killing a theater full of innocent people.
Unfathomably they also wounded 9 people in the process.

The gun man was subdued and will face trial, the injured will fully recover.


This guy planned on killing a theater full of people?
I missed all of that in the story.
Help fill me in.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 05:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by RomeByFire

You make a solid point and I've never thought of it from that angle but definitely understand where you're coming from, but that's a huge variable to throw into play on its own. Just because more people have guns doesn't mean they are all going to be inaccurate and cause more damage, there's nothing to substantiate that claim.


Honestly, what do you think reality will bear out? Giving more people more guns will lead to people being better trained in how to use them? I do not see a correlation. Aside from that, all the training in the world can go out the window real fast in a crowd. I might draw my gun and be a hero. The guy behind me might plan on being a hero too. The guy on the other side of the target, aiming my way, might also want to be a hero. Hey, we are all well trained so we can control the movement of everyone else in the crowd now, right? Probably not. I cannot get slow people to step aside at the mall let alone guarantee someone will not run in front of one of the many guns being drawn in a crowd.

Just asking if you think the average joe gunpack is better trained than the police?



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 05:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
It occurs to me that if the Police are willing to admit this screw up so quickly - what are they trying to hide????





New York (CNN) -- A disgruntled former apparel designer was killed Friday morning in a hail of police gunfire in front of the Empire State Building after he shot and killed a co-worker and engaged in a gunbattle with two officers, authorities said.
Police officers fired a total of 16 rounds; one officer shot nine while another one shot seven, the New York Police Department said. He reiterated that the officers appeared to have no choice but to shoot Johnson, whose body had 10 bullets wounds in the chest, arms and legs.


If this is to believed then 10 of the 16 bullets that the 2 officers fired went into the gunmen, that leaves 6 bullets which caused injuries in 9 other people. How can 6 bullets injure so many people ??? Something isn't adding up here



new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join