Empire State Shooting

Other discussions not related to the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Empire State Shooting

Post by doodle »

Law enforcement officials in New York City say at least four people have been shot outside the Empire State Building in violence that stemmed from a workplace dispute, and that the gunman has been killed by police.
While I understand gun rights advocates arguments about putting guns in the hands of law abiding citizens making criminals less likely to act, I don't see how this would have played out in the last three gun tragedy's in this country: Batman theater massacre, Sikh temple massacre, Empire State shooting.

Is the vision we have of America one of open gun battles between civilians on the street? I can only imagine the chaos that would have ensued in that theather in Colorado if a bunch of well intentioned civilians had pulled out their guns and started blazing away in that theater.

Are we addressing reality with the "more guns = more safety" argument or are we creating a fantasyland Hollywood argument where every American is the Robocop superhero?
All of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone. - Blaise Pascal
User avatar
Pointedstick
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8883
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by Pointedstick »

Perhaps you are not aware the NYC is probably one of the most highly regulated locations in the country when it comes to guns. It's virtually impossible for a resident to legally acquire a firearm without being extremely wealthy, and even then, you are limited to basically turn-of-the-century technology. NYC is already a paradise of the gun control lobby's vision for America. I fail to see how making a gun more illegal to possess there would have any more of an effect than trying to make murdering your former co-workers more illegal than it already is.
Human behavior is economic behavior. The particulars may vary, but competition for limited resources remains a constant.
- CEO Nwabudike Morgan
TripleB
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 882
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 1:28 am
Contact:

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by TripleB »

Perhaps you are not aware how little firearms training police officers have. If you knew what I knew, you wouldn't want cops having guns either.
User avatar
Ad Orientem
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3483
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 2:47 pm
Location: Florida USA
Contact:

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by Ad Orientem »

TripleB wrote: Perhaps you are not aware how little firearms training police officers have. If you knew what I knew, you wouldn't want cops having guns either.
I know enough that for years I have been saying it was a mistake to issue high capacity semi-autos to beat cops. Only SWAT or specially trained cops with a specific need (like Secret Service) should be carrying those things. The firearms training is inadequate and when you have that many rounds there is a tremendous psychological temptation to adopt the "spray and pray" approach to shooting. The pressure of a life and death emergency where yo have no time to think can overwhelm even very good training. This appears to be what happened here. According to the most recent reports ALL of the bystanders that were shot (everyone besides the initial victim and the perp) were hit by the police!

Ordinary beat cops should be issued revolvers. When you only have six rounds you are going to be more careful about what you are shooting at.
Trumpism is not a philosophy or a movement. It's a cult.
User avatar
Pointedstick
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8883
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by Pointedstick »

You think semi-auto handguns are bad, nowadays they keep AR-15s in their patrol cars! I find the increasing militarization of the police to be a very worrying trend, since these are people who lack the rigorous training of actual soldiers and retain all the legal protections of cops. As a result you have a lot of wannabee soldiers carrying powerful weaponry in public that they are poorly trained in but have authorization to fire without experiencing most of the legal consequences that you or I would be exposed to should they misuse them. Case in point: today's negligent shooting of ten bystanders by police officers. How much you wanna bet nobody on the NYPD ends up experiencing any real consequences as a result of their negligent discharges and assaults with a deadly weapon that left ten innocent people injured?
Human behavior is economic behavior. The particulars may vary, but competition for limited resources remains a constant.
- CEO Nwabudike Morgan
User avatar
MediumTex
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 9096
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 11:47 pm
Contact:

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by MediumTex »

Barney Fife was only allowed to carry one bullet and it was kept in his shirt pocket.

I don't recall anyone in Mayberry ever getting shot by a cop spraying bullets into a crowd.

Andy didn't carry a gun at all.

Image

If ordinary citizens in NYC are not allowed to buy, own or carry guns, why are the cops carrying guns?  In Britain the cops don't carry guns for similar reasons, right?
Q: “Do you have funny shaped balloons?”
A: “Not unless round is funny.”
User avatar
Pointedstick
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8883
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by Pointedstick »

MediumTex wrote: If ordinary citizens in NYC are not allowed to buy, own or carry guns, why are the cops carrying guns?  In Britain the cops don't carry guns for similar reasons, right?
Because King Bloomberg wants an army.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -City.html
Human behavior is economic behavior. The particulars may vary, but competition for limited resources remains a constant.
- CEO Nwabudike Morgan
User avatar
Ad Orientem
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3483
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 2:47 pm
Location: Florida USA
Contact:

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by Ad Orientem »

MediumTex wrote: Barney Fife was only allowed to carry one bullet and it was kept in his shirt pocket.

I don't recall anyone in Mayberry ever getting shot by a cop spraying bullets into a crowd.

Andy didn't carry a gun at all.

Image

If ordinary citizens in NYC are not allowed to buy, own or carry guns, why are the cops carrying guns?  In Britain the cops don't carry guns for similar reasons, right?
The problem is that New York is within convenient driving distance of jurisdictions where guns are sold with almost no restrictions. A study from about 5 years ago showed that about half of all guns used in the commission of a felony in NY were bought in Virginia.
Trumpism is not a philosophy or a movement. It's a cult.
Gumby
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4012
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 8:54 am

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by Gumby »

MediumTex wrote:If ordinary citizens in NYC are not allowed to buy, own or carry guns, why are the cops carrying guns?  In Britain the cops don't carry guns for similar reasons, right?
Right or wrong, NYC cops started carrying a lot more firepower almost immediately after 9/11. And, to be honest, most (though not all) New Yorkers feel safer seeing the police have that kind of firepower (particularly since most New Yorkers don't want to carry a gun with them at all times). Keep in mind that NYC is probably the world's most prominent and symbolic terrorist target.
Last edited by Gumby on Fri Aug 24, 2012 11:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Nothing I say should be construed as advice or expertise. I am only sharing opinions which may or may not be applicable in any given case.
User avatar
MediumTex
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 9096
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 11:47 pm
Contact:

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by MediumTex »

Gumby wrote:
MediumTex wrote:If ordinary citizens in NYC are not allowed to buy, own or carry guns, why are the cops carrying guns?  In Britain the cops don't carry guns for similar reasons, right?
Right or wrong, NYC cops started carrying a lot more firepower after 9/11. And, to be honest, most (though not all) New Yorkers feel safer seeing the police have that kind of firepower (particularly since most New Yorkers don't want to carry a gun with them at all times). Keep in mind that NYC is probably the world's most prominent and symbolic terrorist target.
I don't have a problem with cops carrying guns as long as they are committed to being proficient in their use.

I would be a lot like Andy Griffith if I was in charge of a police department.  All of the Barney Fife's would only be given one bullet.
Q: “Do you have funny shaped balloons?”
A: “Not unless round is funny.”
Gumby
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4012
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 8:54 am

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by Gumby »

MediumTex wrote:
Gumby wrote:
MediumTex wrote:If ordinary citizens in NYC are not allowed to buy, own or carry guns, why are the cops carrying guns?  In Britain the cops don't carry guns for similar reasons, right?
Right or wrong, NYC cops started carrying a lot more firepower after 9/11. And, to be honest, most (though not all) New Yorkers feel safer seeing the police have that kind of firepower (particularly since most New Yorkers don't want to carry a gun with them at all times). Keep in mind that NYC is probably the world's most prominent and symbolic terrorist target.
I don't have a problem with cops carrying guns as long as they are committed to being proficient in their use.

I would be a lot like Andy Griffith if I was in charge of a police department.  All of the Barney Fife's would only be given one bullet.
Yeah, but I don't think most New Yorkers care how skilled the police are at target practice. They just want to believe that a terrorist will be riddled with bullets if he tries to launch an attack. Not saying it's rational. I'm just saying that the people of New York felt safer when the big guns were first issued to the police in Times Square. Fear was running high, and many New Yorkers remain nervous about terrorism to this day.
Nothing I say should be construed as advice or expertise. I am only sharing opinions which may or may not be applicable in any given case.
User avatar
Pointedstick
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8883
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by Pointedstick »

Gumby wrote: Yeah, but I don't think most New Yorkers care how skilled the police are at target practice. They just want to believe that a terrorist will be riddled with bullets if he tries to launch an attack. Not saying it's rational. I'm just saying that the people of New York felt safer when the big guns were first issued to the police in Times Square. Fear was running high, and many New Yorkers remain nervous about terrorism to this day.
To quote John Adams: "Remember, Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There was never a democracy that did not commit suicide."
Human behavior is economic behavior. The particulars may vary, but competition for limited resources remains a constant.
- CEO Nwabudike Morgan
User avatar
MediumTex
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 9096
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 11:47 pm
Contact:

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by MediumTex »

Gumby wrote:
MediumTex wrote:
Gumby wrote: Right or wrong, NYC cops started carrying a lot more firepower after 9/11. And, to be honest, most (though not all) New Yorkers feel safer seeing the police have that kind of firepower (particularly since most New Yorkers don't want to carry a gun with them at all times). Keep in mind that NYC is probably the world's most prominent and symbolic terrorist target.
I don't have a problem with cops carrying guns as long as they are committed to being proficient in their use.

I would be a lot like Andy Griffith if I was in charge of a police department.  All of the Barney Fife's would only be given one bullet.
Yeah, but I don't think most New Yorkers care how skilled the police are at target practice. They just want to believe that a terrorist will be riddled with bullets if he tries to launch an attack. Not saying it's rational. I'm just saying that the people of New York felt safer when the big guns were first issued to the police in Times Square. Fear was running high, and many New Yorkers remain nervous about terrorism to this day.
This reminds me of that ridiculous stunt the government pulled after 9/11 of putting National Guard troops in airports with unloaded guns.  I remember flying around that time and marveling at how the National Guard troops made the airport feel like a Potemkin Village.

It worried me a lot more to think that some of them might have live ammunition than it did to think that they were basically just props in a carefully designed simulation of actual security.
Q: “Do you have funny shaped balloons?”
A: “Not unless round is funny.”
User avatar
Tortoise
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2752
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 2:35 am

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by Tortoise »

Have any of you watched the CCTV footage of the police shooting the suspect?

It's unfortunate that so many innocent bystanders got shot, but in the video footage the suspect clearly pulls a gun out of his bag when he sees the cops. That's when the cops unload on him.

Those of you who have experience with guns should know that shooting a fixed target is difficult enough. Shooting a moving target is even harder. And shooting a moving target under stress... well, that's harder yet. Police officers are trained, but they're not superhuman. Don't expect superpowers from them.
User avatar
Pointedstick
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8883
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by Pointedstick »

Tortoise wrote: Have any of you watched the CCTV footage of the police shooting the suspect?

It's unfortunate that so many innocent bystanders got shot, but in the video footage the suspect clearly pulls a gun out of his bag when he sees the cops. That's when the cops unload on him.

Those of you who have experience with guns should know that shooting a fixed target is difficult enough. Shooting a moving target is even harder. And shooting a moving target under stress... well, that's harder yet. Police officers are trained, but they're not superhuman. Don't expect superpowers from them.
One thing I noticed was that the guy barely moves his feet after he pulls the gun out, and you'll notice that after he's got it out, even after several seconds he hasn't fired yet. I suspect it's a suicide-by-cop.

You're absolutely right of course, but let's not forget that shooting armed moving targets is a part of their job. Police officers are actually notoriously badly trained. I think it's an embarrassment that engaging a stationary gunman at about 20 feet resulted in 9 other casualties. I would wonder whether destroying the civilian shooting culture has resulted in cops themselves who can't really shoot.

http://www.pagunblog.com/2012/08/24/som ... bloomberg/
Human behavior is economic behavior. The particulars may vary, but competition for limited resources remains a constant.
- CEO Nwabudike Morgan
User avatar
MediumTex
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 9096
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 11:47 pm
Contact:

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by MediumTex »

It didn't look like there were even any people around the suspect.

So 10 people were hit by police rounds, and only one of them was the suspect?

That's pretty poor shooting.
Q: “Do you have funny shaped balloons?”
A: “Not unless round is funny.”
User avatar
Ad Orientem
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3483
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 2:47 pm
Location: Florida USA
Contact:

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by Ad Orientem »

MediumTex wrote: It didn't look like there were even any people around the suspect.

So 10 people were hit by police rounds, and only one of them was the suspect?

That's pretty poor shooting.
In the early 1980's when 95% or more of police were armed with revolvers the number of rounds discharged per officer in a shooting was two. In 2007 it was 7.5. The percentage of high intensity gun battles (Hollywood style) remains so low as to be statistically insignificant. But the number of rounds being fired by cops has more than tripled.
Trumpism is not a philosophy or a movement. It's a cult.
User avatar
MachineGhost
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 10054
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:31 am

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by MachineGhost »

Image deleted by moderator CraigR. Please be civil.
Last edited by MachineGhost on Sun Aug 26, 2012 10:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"All generous minds have a horror of what are commonly called 'Facts'. They are the brute beasts of the intellectual domain." -- Thomas Hobbes

Disclaimer: I am not a broker, dealer, investment advisor, physician, theologian or prophet.  I should not be considered as legally permitted to render such advice!
TripleB
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 882
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 1:28 am
Contact:

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by TripleB »

Tortoise wrote: Police officers are trained, but they're not superhuman. Don't expect superpowers from them.
More than 95% of all police officers get zero handgun training outside of what little they learn in the academy. They shoot their guns every 6 months for a few minutes to "qualify" which in many departments entails hitting a 2 foot by 2 foot target at 10 yards. A buddy of mine is a law enforcement firearms instructor who supervises this biannual training and you'd be shocked to hear that more than one police officer showed up with a gun that was rusted shut internally, because he didn't touch it in 6 months and didn't bother to maintain it at all. That's who shows up when you call 911.

Yet if a civilian wanted to pay out of pocket to go to the range and shoot 100 rounds a week and maintain excellent proficiency, they would not be allowed in NYC.

Studies have shown officer involved shootings have about a 10% hit rate. Meaning they shoot 10 times to hit the suspect once.

Are police superhuman? Absolutely not. But most do not bother training unless they have a personal interest in it, which few do. It's hard to defend them when as an aggregate, they don't bother to train.

The police state that Bloomberg is creating is terrifying. He's already been caught acting significantly outside of his jurisdiction and then claiming he has the right to fight terrorism that may attack NYC even if it's being planned hundreds of miles outside of his state. Within his city, he's installed a network of license plate scanners, CCTV cameras, given poorly trained officers access to "assault weapons" with high capacity "clips" and initiated warrantless searches of random civilians walking through the street.

This is all funded by the tax dollars generated by the $3 hotdogs in central park that 20 cents of which goes into the food, 20 cents to the vendor and the rest in permits and taxes to sell it. Boycott NYC if you like freedom.

On the flip side, we go to a 180 degree inverse place like Phoenix AZ that is as oppose as NYC as possible and Sheriff Arpaio is up to similar piss-on-the-constitution-and-don't-apologize tactics. He'll do whatever he wants and not apologize. One of his deputies stole confidential attorney-client work product, from within a courthouse, by blatantly stealing it off the defendant's table when no one was looking. The officer photocopied the material and handed it over to investigators. The judge demanded the officer return the materials and apologize. Sheriff Arpaio ordered his officer to not comply with the judge. The judge said "oh ok, sorry to bother you." In another case, Sheriff Arpaio sent his SWAT team into a civilian auditor's office who was investigating him for fraudulent fundraising and embezzlement. The SWAT team seized the evidence against him and denied access to the auditors.

On one hand we have Bloomberg, making us "free" through the Liberal path, and on the other we have Arpaio making us "free" through the conservative path, yet both are simply disregarding the constitution and doing whatever the heck they want with impunity.
Last edited by TripleB on Sat Aug 25, 2012 8:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Pointedstick
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8883
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by Pointedstick »

TripleB, that was amazing. I'm copying that into my "interesting internet snippets" text file.
Human behavior is economic behavior. The particulars may vary, but competition for limited resources remains a constant.
- CEO Nwabudike Morgan
User avatar
Tortoise
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2752
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 2:35 am

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by Tortoise »

Pointedstick wrote: One thing I noticed was that the guy barely moves his feet after he pulls the gun out, and you'll notice that after he's got it out, even after several seconds he hasn't fired yet. I suspect it's a suicide-by-cop.
How do you know he hadn't fired yet? There's no sound on the video, and I can't tell which guns were firing when. No muzzle flashes or puffs of smoke that I can see. Anyhow, another possibility is that the suspect attempted to fire but his gun jammed. It happens all the time. What matters, in any case, is that he pulled a gun out of his bag and aimed it at the officers. Whether it was suicide or not, I think the officers were justified in opening fire, given the circumstances.
Pointedstick wrote: I think it's an embarrassment that engaging a stationary gunman at about 20 feet resulted in 9 other casualties.
Whoah there, buddy! Nine innocent bystanders were injured in the crossfire. None of them died.
MediumTex wrote: It didn't look like there were even any people around the suspect.

So 10 people were hit by police rounds, and only one of them was the suspect?

That's pretty poor shooting.
I see what you're saying, MT, but let's not forget that when bullets are fired from ground level, roughly parallel to the ground, what matters is not just who is standing immediately next to the target but also who is in front of and behind the target, along the path of the bullets. It's likely that some of the bullets fired at the suspect missed him by only a couple of inches and hit innocent bystanders who were behind him, perhaps even off-camera. For example, there were three people sitting on that bench who were roughly in the line of fire. It's likely at least a couple of them were among those who were hit.

Ultimately I concede that the cops may have done some piss-poor shooting in this case and could have handled the situation a lot better overall. I'm just saying it's much easier to be a Monday-morning quarterback than to imagine the situation from the point of view of the person who made an apparently "obvious" mistake. A gunfight in a crowded area is bound to end badly, even if the fight is between experienced shooters.
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 15336
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: searching for the lost Xanadu
Contact:

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by dualstow »

Tortoise wrote:
Pointedstick wrote: I think it's an embarrassment that engaging a stationary gunman at about 20 feet resulted in 9 other casualties.
Whoah there, buddy! Nine innocent bystanders were injured in the crossfire. None of them died.
A casualty can refer to a person with a non-fatal injury, too.
RIP TOM LEHRER
User avatar
MachineGhost
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 10054
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:31 am

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by MachineGhost »

Pointedstick wrote: TripleB, that was amazing. I'm copying that into my "interesting internet snippets" text file.
Where the !@#% is the political uproar over all these pigs with no real firewarms training?  Jeeze.
"All generous minds have a horror of what are commonly called 'Facts'. They are the brute beasts of the intellectual domain." -- Thomas Hobbes

Disclaimer: I am not a broker, dealer, investment advisor, physician, theologian or prophet.  I should not be considered as legally permitted to render such advice!
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 15336
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: searching for the lost Xanadu
Contact:

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by dualstow »

TripleB wrote: On the flip side, we go to a 180 degree inverse place like Phoenix AZ that is as oppose as NYC as possible and Sheriff Arpaio is up to similar piss-on-the-constitution-and-don't-apologize tactics. He'll do whatever he wants and not apologize. One of his deputies stole confidential attorney-client work product, from within a courthouse, by blatantly stealing it off the defendant's table when no one was looking. The officer photocopied the material and handed it over to investigators. The judge demanded the officer return the materials and apologize. Sheriff Arpaio ordered his officer to not comply with the judge. The judge said "oh ok, sorry to bother you." In another case, Sheriff Arpaio sent his SWAT team into a civilian auditor's office who was investigating him for fraudulent fundraising and embezzlement. The SWAT team seized the evidence against him and denied access to the auditors.
Arpaio is definitely controversial and he did misuse a SWAT team (in a different way), among other things. However, I can't find the two stories above. Do you have sources?
RIP TOM LEHRER
WiseOne
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2692
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2022 11:08 am

Re: Empire State Shooting

Post by WiseOne »

Here's a short report in Atlantic Monthly regarding who fired what:

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national ... day/56198/

The police fired a total of 16 shots - an awful lot given that the target was one man a few feet away.  The bullets hit nearby hard objects, of which there are many in midtown Manhattan, and fragmented.  Even though TripleB is right in that it's too easy to second guess after the fact, a crowded street is exactly the sort of situation that calls for restraint.  Surely that topic is covered by police training too?

I have seen a lot of police around especially in the subway, but the push for more police started with Giuliani, is not something most people object to given the perceived safety benefit, and isn't one of our biggest problems.  I'd say the unsustainable pensions promised by all city agencies and the bloated bureaucracy are far worse.  An MTA employee gets to retire around age 45 on nearly full pay, if they're smart enough to work a lot of overtime in their last year.
Post Reply