E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe bodies of three men have been found in a car parked near Columbia University. WNBC-TV's Katherine Creag reports.
Three men were found shot to death inside a parked vehicle a block away from the Columbia University campus in Morningside Heights Thursday evening, authorities say.
The three victims are in their 20s and 30s and were found inside a 2009 BMW parked near Claremont Avenue and W. 122nd Street, police said. They appear to have been killed inside the car, as no windows in the car were shattered.
They do not appear to be students at the university.
Read the full story on WNBC New York
Two of the victims were found in the front seats of the car, and were shot in the head or neck; the third was found in the rear passenger seat and was shot in the left temple, according to NYPD spokesman Paul Browne.
The BMW had a temporary registration and its license plates were reported stolen, Browne said. The vehicle had only been parked for an hour when it was discovered.
A passerby coming from Riverside Park noticed the bodies while walking past the car about 6:30 p.m., a police official said. The passerby was able to flag down a passing patrol car.
Detectives are checking to see if security cameras along the street recorded any activity leading up to the discovery of the car. Browne said there were no early reports of anyone hearing gunshots, and no one called 911 for help.
Columbia students were alerted to the incident in a campus-wide email and text alert.
A Morningside Heights resident said she wasn't shaken by the incident because it was out of character for the neighborhood.
"I definitely feel safe," said Jordan Steiner. "It just seems like a very random act in this area."
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:
- Cleared of rape: How hidden camera confession helped
- Singing vet gave 'America's Got Talent' a photo of another soldier
- California student takes the long way home to US after 'no-fly' designation
- Reputed white supremacist wins election to Pa. county GOP seat
- Crackdown on painkiller abuse fuels new wave of heroin addiction
- Video: After decades man cleared of family's death
Follow US News on msnbc.com on Twitter and Facebook
Leave a Comment:
To our National Leaders. This is a good time to pause and learn from our Nation's History.
Proclamation Appointing a National Fast Day
Washington, D.C.
March 30, 1863
Senator James Harlan of Iowa,
whose daughter later married President Lincoln's son Robert, introduced this
Resolution in the Senate on March 2, 1863. The Resolution asked President
Lincoln to proclaim a national day of prayer and fasting. The Resolution was
adopted on March 3, and signed by Lincoln on March 30, one month before the
fast day was observed.
By the President of the United
States of America.
A Proclamation.
Whereas, the Senate of the United
States, devoutly recognizing the Supreme Authority and just Government of
Almighty God, in all the affairs of men and of nations, has, by a resolution,
requested the President to designate and set apart a day for National prayer
and humiliation.
And whereas it is the duty of
nations as well as of men, to own their dependence upon the overruling power of
God, to confess their sins and transgressions, in humble sorrow, yet with
assured hope that genuine repentance will lead to mercy and pardon; and to
recognize the sublime truth, announced in the Holy Scriptures and proven by all
history, that those nations only are blessed whose God is the Lord.
And, insomuch as we know that, by
His divine law, nations like individuals are subjected to punishments and
chastisements in this world, may we not justly fear that the awful calamity of
civil war, which now desolates the land, may be but a punishment, inflicted
upon us, for our presumptuous sins, to the needful end of our national reformation
as a whole People? We have been the recipients of the choicest bounties of
Heaven. We have been preserved, these many years, in peace and prosperity. We
have grown in numbers, wealth and power, as no other nation has ever grown. But
we have forgotten God. We have forgotten the gracious hand which preserved us
in peace, and multiplied and enriched and strengthened us; and we have vainly
imagined, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that all these blessings were
produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own. Intoxicated with
unbroken success, we have become too self-sufficient to feel the necessity of
redeeming and preserving grace, too proud to pray to the God that made us!
It behooves us then, to humble
ourselves before the offended Power, to confess our national sins, and to pray
for clemency and forgiveness.
Now, therefore, in compliance with
the request, and fully concurring in the views of the Senate, I do, by this my
proclamation, designate and set apart Thursday, the 30th. day of April, 1863,
as a day of national humiliation, fasting and prayer. And I do hereby request
all the People to abstain, on that day, from their ordinary secular pursuits,
and to unite, at their several places of public worship and their respective
homes, in keeping the day holy to the Lord, and devoted to the humble discharge
of the religious duties proper to that solemn occasion.
All this being done, in sincerity
and truth, let us then rest humbly in the hope authorized by the Divine
teachings, that the united cry of the Nation will be heard on high, and
answered with blessings, no less than the pardon of our national sins, and the
restoration of our now divided and suffering Country, to its former happy
condition of unity and peace.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto
set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.
Done at the City of Washington, this
thirtieth day of March, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
sixty-three, and of the Independence of the United States the eighty seventh.
By the President: Abraham Lincoln
William H. Seward, Secretary of State.
RELEVANCE????
Davebny,
None.
Gotta love it when people just cut and paste something and believe they're done something meaningful. Anyway, I'm guessing John-1620041 is trying to say is if we just knee before his idea of god enough, things like the shooting won't happen in a christian nation. where John-1620041 thinks such a mythical place might be, is anyones guess.
Obviously it has to be some NRA nut, because with NYC being such a law abiding and safe city with all their antigun laws who else would have a gun?????
How much ya wanna bet there's at least one or more guns in that car also!!!!!!
Car full of NRA nuts?????????
@tony hellend-; you left out stolen BMW!!! HOW DARE YOU!! Now in NYC the aclubags want to stop the cops from their "stop and frisk" policy!! which to date removed many illeagel hand guns, guess they missed this shooter i mean creep sorry i ment scumbag!!
All the gun laws in NY sure made these guys safer.... of course I'm sure they were as pure as the driven snow.
Simple!! Drug and / or mob hit.
So shocking! With NYC's STRICT gun control laws, how could this have happened. I mean, it's pretty much illegal to posses a handgun in NYC or even look at one in a magazine. And then the never of these people to shoot them outside Obama's Alma Mater. Have they no sense of decency!
Perhaps it's better to be shot than die a slow death through obesity in Bloomberg's NYC, drinking 32 oz. Big Gulps. I wonder if they were smokers too.
When I left New York City, I had 13 guns. Nobody said a thing.
What kind of citizen would walk around in NYC with a handgun? Don't they know it's illegal in NYC? Don't they know the 2nd amendment doesn't apply, and that the constitution can be interpreted however Mayor Bloomberg and NY courts want?
Obviously too much cafeine from oversized drinks.
Ban the Big Gulp!
Do it for the children!
Do it now!
Just don't get caught with a BIG GULP.
Wagonmaster, you beat me to it but I was going to add the Mexican cartel.
John, do yourself a favor and get a life. It seems like with all your negativity that nothing will please you
Not illegal if you have a pistol license. Of course if you don't like it you could move. If you don't live there why would it bother you?
Funny gang, and so true. Poor old Bloomberg.
John suggests that it's illegal in NYCto look at a picture of a gun in a magazine. Gee, he wouldn't be another right-wing drama-queen LIAR, would be?
No, Frog, John is just a 2nd Amendment advocate with a finely tuned sense of irony.
Of course they didn't you had 13 freaking guns on you.
i heard it was a gay lovers that was abused by their scout master
@allen-static; Plexico!
Sad. The 3rd Ranger Battalion has really lowered its standards! Stop letting felons and lunatics in the U.S. Armed Forces.
how is this news? someone getting killed in nyc is like reporting that the sun came up.
lfergie812 - The chance of getting a NYC pistol permit is pretty close to zero. And New York State, Connecticut, and New Jersey permits are not honored with reciprocity.
I guess the shooter didn't get his 32 oz drink, went berzerk and shot the other fellows in the car.
Shooter: Hey lets stop at McDs for some to drink, it's getting hot in this BMW.
Rear passenger: Great idea, I could go for a Big Mac.
@ the order window.
Driver: 3 Big Macs and a double quarter pounder meal.
Cashier: Would you like to supersize that.
Driver: No, medium is ok, you know it's against the law now.
Cashier: Ok, that would be $$$$
@ Columbia U
Shooter: Dude, why didn't you get the meals supersized? I wanted a 32 oz drink, I don't care if it's against the law.
Front passenger: I don't want to get caught witha 32 oz drink dude.
Driver: Yeah, it's my butt that would get the fine.
Rear passenger: Hey, man, I agree with them, forgetaboutit.
Shooter: F*ck this!
3 shots later, police finds 3 dead body in a BMW.
Why did they mention the university? Was there a Walmart near by or a Starbux that they could have mentioned.
My point also! Was it necessary to use the university as a reference point?
There isn't much else in the neighborhood. You reference the largest KNOWN place.
No mention of the fact the car was parked in front of one of Chuck Schumer's many apartments.
And the cops were passing by, had to be flagged down.
In other words if the citizen had not looked in the window of the car, with stolen plates and 3 dead bodies, they might have sat there for days.....or until some enterprising individual stole the car.
I blame the Amish.
"I blame the Amish."
LMAO, best quote so far.
That passerby was probably casing the vehicle. It wouldn't be proper to steal a vehicle with dead bodies inside as they might get the wrong idea as to who actually killed them.
Here again they're damned if they do and damned if they don't. People want the cops to keep their nose out of their business but get upset when something that isn't obvious goes unnoticed. A parked car is not an offense until it's parked too long in a restricted place.
Hey, didn't Obama attend Columbia?
That seems strange.
I'm a Columbia grad who was a bit puzzled by this, too. If it was on 122nd and Claremont, it was directly in front of Riverside Church and at least 2 blocks from Barnard, further from Columbia's main campus. Indeed, the picture looks like it was in front of Riverside. Wonder why there was no mention of that?
Police reported a "short, stocky, slow-witted, bald man" came running outside when he heard a murder occurred in the car parked in front of him. To his relief, Jon Voight's lebaron was unharmed.
I bet it was John Kelly/Clark from Without Remorse
Uhmmm... Not much info, but I'll surmise one Thug whacking other Thugs. Doesn't appear to be too bad if that's the case.
Was the shooter at a funeral in Georgia the other day?
I think we are failing to see the real travesty of this..............the ruined leather inside that BMW..............what a waste.
gtouch.... that would depend entirely on what color the interior leather is stained. Or it might need to be restained... blood red comes to mind.
@ gtouch - Yeah they will never get the smell out of that car....
"A Morningside Heights resident said she wasn't shaken by the incident because it was out of character for the neighborhood?" Really MSNBC? She wasn't shaken because the incident was out of character. That makes no sense. I'd imagine your journalists forgot to read their story and just published it without any sort of review. Typical.
...the very next sentence QUOTES the resident as saying she still feels safe because it's a random act. How can you go wrong with a quote? Go troll somewhere else if you don't like the reporting...
Nothing shakes a New Yorker. She knows the incident involved people from out of the neighborhood, probably mob related, so she shrugs it off. Doesn't mean she doesn't think its terrible, it just doesn't affect anyone she knows so it's already yesterday's news. Gotta love that town.
If she said she wasn't shaken she was lying.
It doesn't make a bit of sense.
BMW,3 head shots from inside the car, it's a hit
No mention of caliber, but if there was no shattered glass, I'm guessing .22 hollow points. The professional assassin's round of choice;cheap (even if you spring for CCI), easy to obtain and virtually untraceable.
Agree, pop your "friend" beside you in the back seat, then the two in front when they looked at each other saying-What was that? Look around, get out and walk away like you have no care in the world. Get hooker and a bottle and wait for your turn to have a friend kill you. Sounds like a great job opportunity.
Bunny, what line of work are you in?
Just askin'.
Bunny, I picked up on that too. I would guess one shooter since three other seats were full. How did at least one of the three not get away?
A 22 would be nice and quiet too. Gotta love 3 cents a bullet.
It does sound like a professional hit though.
Damn seat belts.
Hate to disappoint you Mark, but I'm just a boring garden-variety accountant.
Ah yes, the perfect cover. ;-)
Freedumb is not free. Whackjobs like Ted Nuge can't bear any obstacles to there precious right, so many worng people keep and bear too. (Ted is whcko and should give up his right too). I'm sure all the guns nuts appreciate the sacrafice of the dead.
$hithead.
Are you really naive enough to believe gun control would stop this?
Grampa... you're so right. Lets do away with ALL those pesky rights in the Constitution. Let's start with the 1st Amendment, then sane people wouldn't need to hear the inane ramblings of people like you.
Gun control would not stop a professional hits but would stop kids killing kids in schools and many other gun deaths. You can thank the GOP for the deaths of kids because of the money that gun makers give to the GOP.
ron... blaming one party or the other for the illegal actions of an individual is disingenuous at best. Besides, NYC has some of the strictest gun control laws in the country, yet it doesn't stop the thugs from killing each other with illegal guns. What is it about CRIMINAL that you don't grasp? Those people earn the identifier of CRIMINAL due to the very simple fact that they do NOT obey the law.
apparently Grandpa would also like to do away with spell check.
Isn't possesing stolen license plates against the law?
Be willing to bet the car was parked illegally too.
If you outlaw guns only Obama and the New Black Panthers will have them. Feel safer?
ron,
How would it stop those things from going on? It would continue just like Alcohol did during prohibition! You need a brain exam... First, of all this is not Europe, you try to take away the guns of the American people and you will have the biggest, bloodiest, civil war ever known on your hands... Second, doctors kill more people every year then people with a gun, it's a fact, research it. So, let's ban doctors...
Let's be fair about crime in NYC - the guns come from states where criminals can buy guns due to loose regulations, then they are sold on the streets in NYC. Everyone just cops out when they say that criminals will still get guns. It's not like NYC manufactures guns and sells them there. Those guns are getting into the hands of criminals from somewhere however, and in many cases direct from manufacturers and retail outlets from out of state. Not trying to tell other states what to do with their laws, but let's at least be fair about the reality. Guns don't just materialize from nowhere. If criminals are getting them then somebody somewhere is @!$%#ing up royally.
Yes, NYC has strict laws - it has to. It is the densest place in the country. You can't have guns everywhere and you can't have every vigilante shooting at every perceived threat. Everybody knows NYers have a big mouth and like to spout off at each other. Can you imagine if they were all armed?! Jesus, there would be 100 shootings a day in Manhattan alone!
There are just as many guns in the hands of good guys as bad guys in NYC. The cops are pretty well stocked there. I don't think there is any imbalance of power in that regard. The fact that some criminals still get guns does not detract from the necessity of gun control or its supposed failure in the city. Hell, heroine, cocaine, pot, and the rest are all illegal, but still find their way into the streets of NYC - If they can't be prevented maybe we should just legalize everything and not even regulate them - just let it be a free for all? Obviously that would be a terrible idea. There needs to be at least some form of regulation for things like this, including guns. The laws are doing what they were meant to and nothing more. Violent crime is down - even during a bad economy!
radagast,
OK, say we ban all guns in the USA, and become like the UK, stats as of about 15 years ago, you do the research to get the new stats... The UK had more beating deaths, stabbings, strangulations, etc., then the USA did to include all firearm deaths both accidental and otherwise. So, still all the push for gun control are by people who really just don't like guns... I don't like Chrysler products, think I could get them banned, I know in the right hands they kill people?!?! The fact is if someone wants you dead, you are going to die....
@radagast
Yes, the guns are getting into the city, but they are getting there ILLEGALLY per NYC law... Which by the way is much stricter than NY State. (I always did find that interesting. I always believed a "city" was subservient to State law. But that's another topic.)
And if "criminals" are going to other states and "buying" guns, they are breaking other laws doing so. It's a crime, to the best of my knowledge in ALL states for felons to buy guns. So, where are they really coming from? How about the guns that are stolen from legitimate owners? For example, a firearms store in Leesburg, VA was broken into and a number of firearms stolen. I don't believe you can say that is a "legitimate" means of getting them can you? Oh, and some of those "young men" later killed a retired Marine Colonel and savagely assaulted his wife, leaving her for dead. She didn't die, but was so savagely attacked, she now has a colostomy bag, and obviously the loss of her husband. And she wasn't able to attend his funeral nor even aware of his death as she was herself in a coma for several months.
So, I ask you, WHAT control is going to work?
For me, Kennesaw, Georgia comes to mind. It is a small town in the suburbs of Atlanta. The crime there was going up and the perpetrators were not locals. The city passed an ordinance REQUIRING every home to have a firearm and ammunition. Guess what.... after the ordinance passed the crime dropped greatly, and Kennesaw is now probably one of the "safest" places in Georgia. Granted, the ordinance is not enforced, but if you were of a criminal mind, would YOU take the chance that the house you break into might have a 12ga shotgun pointed in your direction? Obviously, the criminals don't know who is armed and who is not, but they leave the area alone due to that.
I personally carry all the time. My firearms are much easier and lighter to carry than a cop. I hope I never need to draw my firearm again, but in the event I do, I will not hesitate. I value the lives of my family and myself much more than the life of a criminal meaning to do us harm.
You really need to get out and enjoy something other than your mothers basement. The person or persons that did this obviously don't care about any gun laws, and I would bet they didn't have a permit to own one in NYC, just like they don't care about murder being illegal. What a twit.
That's correct. The 2nd ammendment guarantees my right to own a firearm. Don't like it. Move to Canada.
CBurroughs, I didn't say anything about banning guns. I just asked that we be fair about the realities. How come whenever a person makes a case for even the slightest regulation all of the gun nuts come out and start screaming 2nd Amendment? The UK isn't the USA. They have a very different culture. Do you think for one minute that beatings, strangulations, and stabbings are offset in NYC because people have guns? There are less beatings and stabbings here because we aren't British hooligans.
Chryslers don't kill people when used properly. Neither do guns. Yet we have speed limits, we have licensing, we have rules and regulations for operating Chryslers. To make your argument about guns apply to cars would be like people getting in a huff every time a stop sign goes in and griping about "why don't you just ban cars!" We need regulations for guns, just like we need regulations for Chryslers. NYC is an island with a special need - a very large and dense population with historically high crime rates. Limiting the number of guns has been part of moving towards a better environment there. You can't point to every single criminal act and say that it pokes holes in the effectiveness of the law. That would be like saying every time you see a speeder that that means the laws against speeding should be revoked. Obviously the laws are effective in limiting speeding, but they can't eliminate it. It is the same with guns in NYC.
XDm9mm, No it doesn't necessarily mean that criminals buying guns in other states are breaking the laws there. Some states don't have ways of detecting these straw buyers - there's no law against it. other states don't effectively enforce the laws they have. Of course there is always the occasion of someone robbing a gun store, but that does not account for more than a small percentage of the guns in NYC. My point is that although Manhattan is technically an island, when it comes to criminal gun possession it is not. Guns don't just materialize, which makes the argument problematic that NYC's laws are somehow ineffective. They are ineffective only in that other states have ineffective laws.
When it comes to city vs. state laws there is no reason a city cannot make laws that only apply within the city. Cities get to make their own speed limits and they get to make their own minds up about any number of other municipal decisions - even dumb stuff like the size of sodas! Gun regulations fall under this category.
I'll say the same thing about Kennesaw that I said about the UK - NYC is not Kennesaw. NYC is not a small town where everyone is peaceful and knows their neighbor. NYC has citizens of every race, nationality, creed and political stripe. There are fractures among these groups and people are not always friendly to strangers. The people in Kennesaw defended themselves from outsiders. The criminals in NYC are citizens of NYC. If in Kennesaw it was neighbor vs neighbor, adding guns to the mix may not necessarily have worked out so well when those neighbors meet on the street at night.
leftsux: for the record there is no ban on shotguns in NYC - it's just handguns. So if a criminal breaks into your house he still is going to face a belly full of buckshot. You can still own a weapon in NYC and there are avenues to even obtain a handgun permit, your rights are fine. Drop the drama act.
Gun control will not stop criminals from havings gun ANYHWERE ANYTIME to think otherwise would make you a ffreaking idiot.
After reading the comments above, it makes me sorry that there is no DOWN arrow option on this site!
Just being real about the situations guys. I'm not against guns. Jesus, does a man have to make a statement about his love for the Constitution every time he has a frank discussion? Maybe if everybody dropped the knee-jerk reactions this wouldn't all be so damn emotional.
radagast.. It's not emotional. It's people who have a strong belief in their Constitutional right to bear arms. I do so because I know there are those in the population at large who are NOT law biding individuals, and feel that's what is mine should belong to them.
Also, why not just stringently enforce the existing laws? Invariably, "gun" offenses are not prosecuted. That has to do with a previous firearms case many years ago in NY. The judge agreed that for a felon to register his "firearms" was unconstitutional. Basically, it boiled down to a felon CANNOT legally own a firearm. To have the felon register his illegal firearm was unconstitutional as it violated his constitutional right to not self incriminate himself (5th amendment). Convoluted? You better believe it, but if you think about it a second, there is a degree of logic to it.
Why not this as a compromise? If you are a previously convicted felon and you are convicted of a crime while possessing a firearm, whether it is used in the crime or not, upon conviction you receive a MANDATORY 10, 15 or 20 year sentence to run CONSECUTIVELY to whatever the sentence is for the crime committed. NO PAROLE, NO Reduction in time served, YOU DO THE TIME. PERIOD. And again the sentence is CONSECUTIVE and NOT concurrent with any other time behind bars.
Oh, NYC is not an island. Manhattan is an island but is only one of the five boroughs that comprise NYC. Manhattan, Kings (Brooklyn), Queens, Bronx and Staten Island. But I know what you meant as the majority of people, even those from the other four boroughs say going to "the city" when they refer to Manhattan.
grampa your my friend are a idiot. what does ted nugent have to do with this whole thing. i am so sick of you worrying about my guns. mind your bussiness a hole.
If we ban guns the bad guys will have them for the next thousand years. Maybe the next ten thousand years.
Why go out of state when they can just buy them from the NYPD?
Any proof to back up your assertions? Any proof to back up what you say about stolen weapons being only a small percentage of what turns up on the streets of NYC.
Yoy can't legally buy a handgun in a state you do not reside in without having it transferred to an FFL holder in your state and the FFL holder has to run a NICS background check before transferring it to you. Below is from the ATF FAQ page:
As far as straw buyers go:
Page 192 of FEDERAL FIREARMS REGULATIONS REFERENCE GUIDE
Now how do "loose state regulations" come in to play when sales are regulated by Federal law.
Here's two reports issued from the Mayors Against Illegal Guns coalition illustrating how supposedly reputable gun dealers skirt laws to sell guns illegally and without background checks - against the law:
http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/downloads/pdf/maig_mimeo_revb.pdf
http://fixgunchecks.s3.amazonaws.com/191/6b/c/683/1/nyc_pointclickfire.pdf
And this report detailing the rates at which different states export crime guns that turn up in other states:
http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/downloads/pdf/trace_the_guns_report.pdf
Look, we all agree that there are laws, but can we at least be honest with the facts that those laws are not being enforced and that in many cases they are being openly flaunted? I mean there are speed limits on the highway so there can't possibly be any speeders out there right? Dragging me over the coals just because I bring up reality just makes some of you out there look foolish and like deniers. It doesn't make me against the Constitution.
Well then how about if we ENFORCE the laws that are already in place? Passing more laws to further restrict the rights of people who follow the law is not going to affect those that do not follow the law.
Would you agree, radagast?
Of course I would agree that we should enforce what is already in place. Unfortunately every time someone tries to have an adult conversation about enforcing the laws all they get in return is a bunch of hollering about the second amendment and a bunch of congressmen and activists ignoring the data that suggests the laws are not being enforced in the first place. The reports that I have linked above were met by outright denial by the leaders of the states involved or were otherwise considered a conspiracy to take away rights. Not exactly a grown up response.
If that is what passes for adult conversations regarding responsibilities then what choice do smaller municipalities and cities have but to to try to restrict guns coming in at all? They see what it does to their cities and they take drastic action - maybe not a perfect action, but they have to do something. NYC cannot enforce the laws in Kansas, only Kansas can do that. But they don't seem to be too interested in doing it. This conversation is decades old, but nothing is ever done to ensure the law is followed and that hurts responsible gun owners all over the country. Too many lobbyists and too many politicians waving flags - that's the real problem. This issue has become partisan when it really isn't. There are plenty of gun owners on both sides of this issue. If everyone just manned up and had the frank discussions and did the tough job of actually making sure gun sales were legal and the laws followed everyone would be happier and there wouldn't be a need for restrictions.
That really is my whole point.
Sounds like Tony Soprano had a long night. He's probably back in Newark now eating a prosciutto sandwich in his bathrobe, getting ready for bed.
Tony lived in North Caldwell.
Trust me, there are no nice neighborhoods in Newark
Drug deal gone bad or a mob hit! It is a shame that with the cost of energy and lighting public safety will be put in jeopardy. I hear where Detroit is having to turn the street lights off in a large portion of the town. Talk about a concrete jungle nightmare!
?????????????? What does Detroit have to do with NYC? Or better yet, what does the cost of energy have to do with some guys in a car getting whacked?
LOL NYC is one place that you can depend on good lighting unless it's a naturally dark. Street lights don't go out at night. They just happened to find a quiet place to do a hit. Detroit is just a jungle - lights or no lights. lol
No need to worry. This is all just propaganda. It couldn't have really happened. New York has some of the stricter gun control laws around. And we all know that criminals obey gun laws.
.... Oh, wait. Never mind. I keep forgetting that we live in a place called reality.
So if we should allow guns simply because black market weapons still find there way into the streets, by the same logic we should legalize cocaine and heroine because criminals and users still find a way to smuggle them in???
You could say that the 2nd Amendment would allow this for guns, but where in the Constitution does it say that drugs need to be regulated? The same argument applies to both. Obviously if you had a city like NYC to run you would be faced with some deeper realities than the simplistic argument you are making.
Less guns=less crime. NYC has seen a renaissance since guns have been banned.
@radagast...
Please show me in the Bill of Rights, or the Constitution the clause noting your RIGHT to possess drugs. It doesn't exist. Yet, as you noted, there IS a CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEE of the RIGHT to bear arms.
And NYC has seen better times regarding crime due to the efforts of Koch and then Giuliani and the Police Commissioners having the kid gloves being taken off them by overly politically correct politicians.
An armed society is a polite society. If the bad guys don't know who might be carrying a .45 cal "equalizer" in their pocket or purse, they're less likely to strike. Heck, even then they can get it wrong. Just google "Rex Applegate" for one of the funniest stories you'll ever read about an attempted hold-up gone wrong.
The Constitution doesn't ban narcotics. For much of our history drugs were not regulated, then suddenly they were in an effort to moralize our society. The reasons are murky and off topic here, but the point I am making is about the accuracy of the argument being made that states that the gun laws in NYC are ineffective because guns still show up. The follow up to that argument is that the gun ban should be done away with as a result. I believe I am correct in that analysis, right? Well then you can understand why I would use drug trafficking as a counter to that argument, since drugs are also regulated - even more heavily than guns, yet they still show up. Regardless of the constitutionality, the effectiveness of the law is the real question that is raised. If gun laws should be rolled back based solely on the fact that guns still show up, then the same should be true for narcotics, or for any other contraband. Obviously this exposes the flaw in the argument. That was my point.
Koch, Dinkins, Giulliani and the police commissioners all have stated that the tough gun control laws have contributed to reducing crime in NYC. Gun control was part of all of their platforms to fight crime. Giulliani favors NYC's gun laws.
No an armed society is a society where everyone is afraid to get out of line for fear of someone killing them. Being forced to be polite on pain of death is not the same thing as being polite for the sake of being polite. Let's face it some people with guns use them to settle disputes. They see themselves as acting in self defense and not as criminals. I'm not saying people shouldn't be able to defend themselves, but some people think that a preemptive strike is self defense. So it's not just criminals we have to watch out for in an armed society, but it's the guy who is just a little too frightened who might just shoot you for no reason.
Radagast, the 2nd Amendment gives every citizen the right to bear arms. Not the requirement, the right. One of the greatest things about this noble experiment in democracy that is called America is that we can each of us choose which of our constitutionally-granted rights we wish to exercise. This does not give us the right to tell others what choices to make regarding their constitutional rights. Part of being an American is that we allow others to make the choices that are correct for them.
This does not give anyone the right to ignore the law, or to pick and choose which portions of the law they will ignore or obey. Laws are different from rights. The first gives us the structure within which to exercise the second.
No. gun laws should not be rolled back "solely" on the fact that guns still show up.
Gun laws should be done away with because they are counter productive. They have zero deterrent effect on criminals. And they disarm those who should be able to defend themselves against criminals.
And comparing drugs to guns to sway me isn't going to help. I don't believe that the government should be responsible for keeping people from being stupid. Only for punishing them when their stupidity hurts others. I think that ALL drugs should be legal. They should have crack on the shelf at walmart.
Let idiots kill themselves off before they have a chance to breed. Population control, and getting weak genes out of the pool. win/win.
If you want to ban guns then you need to amend the Constitution.
That won't happen for awhile. Arm yourselves while you can.
No one is taking away your @!$%#ing rights! Talking to you guys is about as effective as banging my head against a wall. Someone brings up the word responsibility and all you guys hear is "There coming for my guns!!!"
There is pretty solid data on crime rates and handgun bans in NYC. Even the GOP darling Giuliani supported those gun controls and touted them as central to NYC's renaissance.
Columbia University....three sides are ghetto....
Morningside park is in no way safe. Riverside park....no way safe for a nice evening stroll..
Stop fooling yourselves...this is Harlem! Jog on over to Marcus Garvey and find out!
Jello heads!
Um, when was the last time you were in the area? Harlem today is a long way from the Harlem of the 70s and 80s. I dated a girl at Columbia for three years a little while back, and I can tell you, the area is a lot safer than it used to be. It's mostly populated by rich little Ivy League kids in nice apartments paid for by Mommy and Daddy. I'd drive into the city and park my car at 116th and Broadway, usually between a Lexus and a Bentley. Sure, you go a a dozen blocks north and you might want to lock your doors, but Morningside Heights is no more dangerous than SoHo or the upper West Side.
I've worked hard all my life and can not afford a BMW. Am I doing something wrong?
You answered your own question... You're WORKING, whether hard or not is irrelevant. You're working.
Look on the bright side. You don't have a bullet in the head sitting in your BMW.
You could be like these guys and just steal a BMW from one of your neighbors.
No, you're not doing anything wrong, other than being blinded by consumerism. If a big goal in your life is to own a BMW, and failing to do so makes you feel less adequate, then they've really managed to convince you that your value is defined by the things you own.
It's a car. It gets you from point A to point B. Who cares if you drive a brand spanking new Beamer or a 20 year old Toyota? If anyone judges you based on your material possessions, they're not someone you should really want around you.
Actually Her Peas
I drive a 1984 Ford F250 diesel at 24 miles to the gallon and a 2012 Ford Focus at 38 miles to a gallon. I am very pleased with both and would not own a BMW or Mercedes or any thing not made in USA. Yes I know, the Focus does have some forigen parts but it was built in the US by the company that DID NOT get a bail out.
I drive the 20-year-old Toyota I mentioned, lol. I really don't mind that it's foreign... it's reliable and it bought it paid outright in cash, and it cost me peanuts. Only got 100K miles on it, too. Most "foreign" cars are assembled right here in the US, anyway. Subaru, Honda, Hyundai, and Toyota all have multiple plants located in the Midwest and South.
I could afford something much flashier, but why waste the money? I don't understand the mindset that a lot of people have, where if they have a decent amount of cash saved, they MUST spend it on something... just to show off that they have that cash. I guarantee you, I have more in my savings accounts than most people driving around in their 2012 Audis.
I thought New York was supposed to be safer than other places because of strict gun laws.
Another fairy tale ruined.
They were in Harlem...not New York.
There is no gun control in Harlem......
NYC is ranked 5th safest large city in the US, right after Austin, TX.
Of course, if any crime is committed there at all amongst it's millions of people, then it must be a failure of the gun control laws.
They should actually teach logic in schools.
So if someone punches you in the face, flaunting laws against assault, then we should make assault legal because the law is flawed??
Well @!$%#, if just doing something illegal makes the law irrelevant I've got a long list of things I'm going out to do tonight!
completely agree with you flylow, lifelong nyer & just open the post or daily news and read the police blotter section and see how every single day stabbings, gunshots, home invasions, stick-ups are going on just like they always have here in the big apple. but don't drink that big gulp or put salt on those fries-bloomberg will hit the roof because those are the important issues going on here.
Hey Sloppy Joe, Harlem is part of New York.
Yes jt, crime still happens, but that crime is at all time record lows for NYC. If you look for it you can find crime in any city - even ones where everyone is armed! Totally agree about Big Gulps and fries btw!
Maybe they towed the car from somewhere else.
Better get that car to the detail shop quick so it can be cleaned and later sold for a good price. Blood stains can be difficult to remove if you let them sit too long.
Cold water and no detergent. They'll come right out every time!
Trump handy work to cover up Miss Universe scandal.
Why have we become so indifferent to this type of story? We forget these are human beings and somewhere there are people that care about them.We just assume "they got what they deserved". An "animal story" receives more compassion than three dead people.
Animal don't get a choice, people do. People care more about animals then they ever will care about other people. (not even sure if I'm sad about this being true, I just know it is true.)
I agree !
Moody123
Why have we become so indifferent to this type of story? We forget these are human beings and somewhere there are people that care about them.We just assume "they got what they deserved". An "animal story" receives more compassion than three dead people.
It had absolutely nothing to do with Columbia University. It was just FOUND near there, so the reporter had to add that to help sensationalize the headline. Remember that famous quote from Marion Berry (The DC mayor who 'accidentally' smoked crack in his office -- "Aside from the murders, Washington DC is one of the safest cities there is." Of course, nobody can carry a gun to defend themselves in DC, so only crackhead crooks have guns. Have a nice day!
Berry the moron.
Where's Detective Stabler when you need him?
Sounds like there was a fourth that was sitting in the back behind the driver! Maybe a drug deal gone wrong!
You can buy a rifle or shotgun in NYS by walking into a gun shop and showing a driver's license and filling out a form. You can then walk right out with it. In NYC you can legally possess a handgun for home or place of business. Go to 1 police plaza, fill out a form, wait the background check and the licensing fee is $300 every 3 years.
$300???? What a rip. In Kentucky it's $75 for a 4 year Concealed Deadly Weapon CARRY PERMIT...zero to actually purchase. Obviously these guys couldn't have their defense weapon with them. They should have had the attacker find them at home or their business where their guns are. geez.....
I guess my initial reaction is sooo what
more proof that gun laws dont keep guns out of the hands of criminals and that maybe people carrying guns to protect themselves is a good idea
I thought Zimmerman was locked up...
He is, he hasn't made bail yet. You can stop playing the race card now.
Can you say drug deal gone bad!!!