.png)
Shooting at Empire State Building
- Thread starter TXARGUY
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
From what I've been given to understand, it went down on the street/sidewalk.
The bad guy was on a list not to let in the building.
Yes it is. It's easy to play off hit by fragments, because we're used to them being splash back. It's a different story when you're in front of the bullet that fragmented.
One of my old friends was wounded in Afghanistan this year. He lucked out because the bullet hit the charging handle on his M4, which shattered it, but then the fragments hit his arm. It caused a wound that obliterated the skin on his forearm in a 2" circle, caused muscle, tendon and nerve damage that he may never recover fully from, but they won't know for a year. He had to have a skin graft and spend 3-4 months at Fort Sam because of that. The wound caused him to go into shock, and he got medevac'd. He was hit from a distance of 500-600 meters, which would put the energy left on that bullet down into or at least near handgun territory.
Don't downplay the danger of being hit by fragments. The odds of being killed are low, but it can still cause damage.
TheRealT-Dawg
Devil Dog 4Life
this
That's how I knew something was off about the people on the street who got shot. They started off being very sure to point out that none of their wounds were life-threatening, and pointing out that they were minor. That alone told me that the police were responsible for at least some of them.
Hell yeah, I would have. But I'd have damn well had a clear sight picture before I squeezed the trigger. What the police did was negligent and if a private citizen in Texas had done the same, he would have been criminally liable for all 9 of those people wounded (at least, that's what I was taught in my CHL class).
The bottom line is, no matter who you are you're responsible for every round that leaves the gun. NYPD has already shown that they're not terribly responsible. Why do you think they have to carry guns with a 12 pound trigger? Because they can't keep their fingers off the stupid things.
All nine people wounded during a dramatic confrontation between the NYPD and a gunman outside the Empire State Building were struck by bullets fired from the 2 Officers, Police said Saturday, citing ballistic evidence.
"It appears all nine of the victims were struck by fragments or bullets fired from the Officers" said Commisioner Raymond Kelly. "I believe that it was handled well" Kelly said.
Indeed, one wonders how it could have possibly been handled any worse, and as such it is not immediately apparent just what business the NYPD has carrying firearms at all.
"It appears all nine of the victims were struck by fragments or bullets fired from the Officers" said Commisioner Raymond Kelly. "I believe that it was handled well" Kelly said.
Indeed, one wonders how it could have possibly been handled any worse, and as such it is not immediately apparent just what business the NYPD has carrying firearms at all.
I'm not downplaying that fragmentation is not damaging. I'm well aware of the effects of shrapnel and fragmentation, From both a personal and EMS perspective. Simply saying I don't think it's right to say the cops shot 9 people. That's all
Not saying the should not be held accountable either.
Well, what would you call it, then? Because I'd say that a wound caused by a projectile that left the barrel of someone's gun that requires I get medial attention would constitute me being shot. At least, that's what I'd call it. It's also what my friend called it when Haji blew a hole in his arm.
Fragments. If I was working EMS and rolled up on that during triage we would determine who sustained a GSW and had taken fragments or shrapnel, and procede from there with severity.
M.Sage guess we are just going to have to argee to disagree.
You'd do the same with gun shot wounds.
Just the same, these people were shot. By NYPD. Fact. Live with it.
AcidFlashGordon
TGT Addict
An excuse that can be rectified by TRAINING. My .40 cal Sig Sauer P226 has a 10-pound trigger pull and I can consistently put my shots into center mass (9 ring) of a B24 target at 15 yards (45 feet)
Now, I realize that shooting at a non-threatening paper target isn't the same as shooting at a target that can possibly shoot back. They are two entirely different situations BUT once you've trained and practiced to shoot center mass of any target, that training kicks in when you're confronted with a "dangerous" situation. In the NYC case, yes the shooter had drawn his weapon but there were many NYPD officers already there and they fired before he had a chance to pull the trigger. This, according to some of the later stories that came out.
AFG - I agree with your sentiment that solid training would go a long way to remedying the issue. But, in addition to the adrenaline and loss of fine motor control that may happen, these types of instances usually result in and require rather fast shooting. Just curious if the above target was shot at a pace of 1 shot every 3 seconds or more like 2 shots per second. Just speeding up your shooting will throw your shots and I believe more so with a heavier trigger.
Not implying anything - just curious.
Not implying anything - just curious.
Oh man please don't say that. You know that if more incidents like this happen we really WILL turn into London and cops will only be able to carry a club, pepper spray, and a notepad. Don't get me wrong, I love the movie Hot Fuzz, but that's about where I draw the line for my liking of British Police
Here's something to ponder. I know that civies get wounded in crossfire all the time in war zones. But usually that tends to be during major gun battles, right? Let's say that a couple of soldiers were chasing a combatant through the streets and when they got close to him he turned around and pulled a gun. The soldiers then took aim and lit him up like a Christmas tree, killing him but wounding 9 civilians. 1 dead enemy, 9 hurt innocents. Holy crap you know the media would be making a frenzy out of those two soldiers for being careless, neglectful, cold blooded killers. Yet, except for a few headlines on Drudge for about a day, there wasn't really any talk on the police doing this. And the fact that officials said the police handled the situation "well" is nuts. Such double standards the MSM and government officials have. Funny how people can't hear the music unless it's playing a specific tune. If people are going to be retarded and be anti-gun, well it's their right as American citizens to speak out against it (though they have no right to actually take them away). However, if you are going to do that, at least stick stick to your convictions, even if it does mean making a mockery of your precious Bloomberg. At least I could find SOME level of respect for those people. But no, they don't do that, and so therefore I cannot find any ounce of respect for those pansies.
I have no problems with making cops live like the rest of us. They are civilians, too, after all. Maybe it would help the holier-than-thou ones get a reality check. If hard pressed about it, good ones out there would probably agree and say, "No problem. Unlicensed carry for all."
At any rate, that comment wasn't a joke. Those two cops should clearly never have been authorized to carry firearms. Seriously, it's pretty embarrassing when your boys in blue end up popping more people than a damned premeditated murderer.
The rest of your post would require liberals to be consistent and honest in their views and we both know that ain't gonna happen.
Oh man please don't say that. You know that if more incidents like this happen we really WILL turn into London and cops will only be able to carry a club, pepper spray, and a notepad. Don't get me wrong, I love the movie Hot Fuzz, but that's about where I draw the line for my liking of British Police
Here's something to ponder. I know that civies get wounded in crossfire all the time in war zones. But usually that tends to be during major gun battles, right? Let's say that a couple of soldiers were chasing a combatant through the streets and when they got close to him he turned around and pulled a gun. The soldiers then took aim and lit him up like a Christmas tree, killing him but wounding 9 civilians. 1 dead enemy, 9 hurt innocents. Holy crap you know the media would be making a frenzy out of those two soldiers for being careless, neglectful, cold blooded killers. Yet, except for a few headlines on Drudge for about a day, there wasn't really any talk on the police doing this. And the fact that officials said the police handled the situation "well" is nuts. Such double standards the MSM and government officials have. Funny how people can't hear the music unless it's playing a specific tune. If people are going to be retarded and be anti-gun, well it's their right as American citizens to speak out against it (though they have no right to actually take them away). However, if you are going to do that, at least stick stick to your convictions, even if it does mean making a mockery of your precious Bloomberg. At least I could find SOME level of respect for those people. But no, they don't do that, and so therefore I cannot find any ounce of respect for those pansies.
Yep, had this been troops in a war zone, the media would be exploding!
As far as your first point, are you aware of why the police in the UK weren't traditionally armed? Because back when Brits still had spines, if an officer needed that much force, he would summon armed citizens. The police weren't armed because of fears that they would become tools of oppression. True story.
Mexican_Hippie
TGT Addict
Too many movies for NYPD
