E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSOfficials in New York City defend police officers use of deadly force, as seen on graphic video, to stop gunman Jeffrey Johnson outside the Empire State Building. Nine bystanders were injured. NBC's Lester Holt reports.
All nine people wounded during a dramatic confrontation between police and a gunman outside the Empire State Building were struck by bullets fired by the two officers, police said Saturday, citing ballistics evidence.
The veteran patrolmen who opened fire on the suit-wearing gunman, Jeffrey Johnson, had only an instant to react when he whirled and pointed a .45-caliber pistol as they approached him from behind on a busy sidewalk.
Officer Craig Matthews shot seven times. Officer Robert Sinishtaj fired nine times, police said. Neither had ever fired their weapons before on a patrol.
The volley of gunfire felled Johnson in just a few seconds and left nine other people bleeding on the sidewalk.
In the initial chaos Friday, it wasn't clear whether Johnson or the officers were responsible for the trail of wounded, but based on ballistic and other evidence, "it appears that all nine of the victims were struck either by fragments or by bullets fired by police," Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly told reporters on Saturday at a community event in Harlem.
Surveillance video shows what transpired Friday when gunman Jeffrey Johnson drew his weapon and opened fire on police on a street packed with pedestrians in midtown Manhattan. Who was Johnson and what possibly caused him to become violent?
He reiterated that the officers appeared to have no choice but to shoot Johnson, whose body had 10 bullet wounds in the chest, arms and legs.
"I believe it was handled well," Kelly said.
The officers confronted Johnson as he walked, casually, down the street after gunning down a former co-worker on the sidewalk outside the office they once shared. The shooting happened at 9 a.m., as the neighborhood bustled with people arriving for work.
'Look of death': Co-workers tell of office feud
The gunman and his victim, Steve Ercolino, had a history of workplace squabbles before Johnson was laid off from their company, Hazan Import Corp., a year ago. At one point, the two men had grappled physically in an elevator.
John Koch, the property manager at the office building where the men worked, said security camera footage showed the two pushing and shoving. The tussle ended when Ercolino, a much larger man, pinned Johnson against the wall of the elevator by the throat, Koch said. Ercolino let him go after a few moments, and the two men went their separate ways.
"They didn't like each other," Koch said.
On Friday, Johnson shot Ercolino five times in the head and face, a medical examiner's spokeswoman said. After the shooting, Johnson, an eccentric T-shirt designer and avid bird-watcher who wore a suit every day, even when photographing hawks in Central Park, walked away as if nothing had happened.
Watch US News crime videos on NBCNews.com
Alerted by a construction worker, Officers Matthews and Sinishtaj gave chase as Johnson rounded a corner and walked along Fifth Avenue, in front of the landmark skyscraper.
A security videotape from the scene shows several civilians — including three sitting on a bench only a few feet away — scattering as the officers opened fire.
Police have determined that three people were struck by whole bullets — two of which were removed from victims at the hospital — and the rest were grazed "by fragments of some sort," Kelly said.
Three people remained hospitalized, all in stable condition, police said.
Both Matthews, 39, and Sinishtaj, 40, joined the nation's largest police department 15 years ago.
Matthews had drawn attention earlier this year by filing a lawsuit against the New York Police Department that accused his superiors of unfairly punishing him for not meeting arrest quotas. A judge threw out the complaint.
There was no immediate response to a message left with the union representing the two officers.
Stay informed with the latest headlines; sign up for our newsletter
The shooting didn't deter tourists from flocking to the Empire State Building as usual on Saturday.
Patricia Flynn, 57, a retired schoolteacher, visited the building's peak with her elderly mother, who once worked in the skyscraper as a secretary.
"But I didn't tell her what happened," said Flynn, adding that her mother was unaware of Friday's shooting. "And she really enjoyed the view."
A group of 31 tourists from all over France held a meeting Friday night at their nearby hotel to decide whether to cancel their planned Empire State Building visit.
"We were scared, and we thought it was a risk," said Catherine Krukar, 38, a teacher.
But in the end, they went ahead with the visit, she said after descending from the observation tower,
"We know it can happen anywhere, and we wanted to see the Empire State Building," Krukar said. "It was beautiful!
WNBC's Jonathan Dienst contributed to this report.
More content from NBCNews.com:
- Astronaut Neil Armstrong, first man to walk on moon, dies at age 82
- Grizzly mauls hiker to death at Denali National Park
- Election observers True the Vote accused of intimidating minority voters
- Dallas Sunday school teacher had taken insomnia drug before killing self
- Video: Gulf Coast braces for Tropical Storm Isaac
Leave a Comment:
If only they had guns, those bystanders could've used their guns too...and shot even more bystanders.
NYPD needs to do a better job training its officers on the range - that was just plain sloppy shooting. Nobody's questioning the necessity of the shooting, but the inaccuracy and ineptitude of the officers discharging their weapons? And these were 15 year veterans?
It's only sheer luck that the cops didn't end up killing 9 innocent bystanders. WTF? :D
Exactly. The "concealed carry" proponents have these movie-inspired fantasies about blowing away the bad guys. The reality of a firefight in the streets is a bit different. Even trained law enforcement people have trouble controlling the situation.
After the Aurora theater shootings, a number of law enforcement people, and some people with actual combat experience, checked in, and remarked that having other theater-goers whipping out their handguns and starting to shoot would have resulted in a lot more deaths. Just for openers, the "bad guys" aren't always wearing neon signs - some random person, not wearing any sort of uniform, who starts shooting could easily be mistaken for another bad guy, and could easily get himself gunned down by the police.
The liberal politicians in NYC have had the duty weapons of the NYPD modified, as a terribly misguided "feel-good" measure, resulting in their weapons being LESS accurate.
The modification involves the replacement of the normal trigger mechanism with one called the "New York" trigger.
Blame the liberal politicians, not the individual officers.
Wrong!
Law enforcement often isn't "trained" nearly well enough.
Maybe not in NYC, but in many parts of the country, civilians practice their markmanship often and can therefore shoot as well or better than the cops who carry weapons all the time but rarely practice.
It's not necessarily the officers' fault either. Budget cuts, governmental agencies often don't allow the Police Departments to spend what's necessary on ammunition, range time for the officers. If they did, it would end up in the news as "gun-happy cops waste time at at the range instead of being on patrol protecting citizens".
It's all a bunch of crap. Bottom line, you are stupid to trust anyone else to protect you and your family.
All I can say is "All you trigger happy Protect and to Serve Police Officers report to the firing range this weekend for remedial training".
Can you say early retirement for all the shooting victims of random police violence? They are so going to own NYC with the lawsuits
It is really, really hard to hit the center of a stationary target from 12'. If the target is a moving human who happens to be shooting back there are going to be some stray shots, especially with the adrenaline pumping. I feel bad for the officers and the injured, and thankfully no one but the perp was killed. Believe me, the last thing these officers wanted was to harm an innocent bystander, but they were also in a gun fight for their lives. It ain't easy folks.
And based upon all the available evidence, even stupider to trust yourself to do it. For every instance of someone defending himself against an intruder with a gun, there are a lot more instances of that gun shooting another family member, instead.
Some of us aren't too scared to walk around without a gun. Must be tough to be on the verge of soiling yourself all the time because you're so afraid.
NYPD/New York City better get ready to write some big checks. I can guarantee that every one of those injured bystanders will be suing the city, and rightfully so. Apparently marksmanship is not a priority for the NYPD, nor is exercising good judgement. Two supposedly experience officers fired a combined 16 rounds at one single suspect at relatively close range. Not only was the number of rounds they fired excessive, they completely missed their target with at least six of the sixteen rounds (37.5%) if you believe the police about the ten bullet wounds in the shooter. I seriously question how nine bystanders were injured if only six bullets missed their mark!!! I suspect there were even more shots that missed their mark. In any case, missing your target entirely at relative close range with almost 40% of your shots is completely unacceptable. At least one, if not both of these officers need to spend some remedial time at the gun range before they are allowed back out on the street. To have this many civilians hit by police gunfire is not acceptable, even if some of them were ricochets or fragments of bullets that shattered. NYPD should be thoroughly embarrassed by the performance of it's officer in this situation, particularly since these were both officers with 15 years experience on the force. They will be paying considerable settlements to the civilians who were injured, particularly to the three who were hit directly by police bullets.
Shooting at least 16 rounds with little apparent concern for bystanders is an irresponsible act, no matter who is doing it.
While I don't begrudge the officers' the right to defend themselves it's hard to believe that this could have ended any worse if people with concealed weapons would have been present.
It's because those with conceal carry permits are trained not to shoot into a crowd that we don't have them causing these kinds of incidents.
Trying to claim that this shooting would have ended any differently under different circumstances is just pure conjecture based on whatever you believe since you can't "replay" the incident and try to guess what someone carrying a concealed weapon might have done.
However, there were armed civilians at the Arizona shooting and when they were interviewed at least one of them said he didn't try to take down the gunman because of the crowd. That probably would have been the most likely outcome in this situation had anyone been carrying a concealed weapon. There's a natural reluctance to involve yourself unless your life is being threatened.
However, if a permit holder did intervene and shoot a gunman the anti-gun crowd would just downplay it as being a lucky shot anyway.
I made a comment on here a few weeks ago when the NYC Police killed the Times Square guy who came after them with a knife. Just a week ago, the cops fired 12 shots and hit the target 4 times! I got BLASTED by the community for pointing out that these NYC Cops need better training firing their weapons on a crowded street for missing the target 66%!! Any 1st year Law graduate could win this case v the NY Police Dept for incompetent shooting, comparing the similarity just 11 days later to the same squadron of Mid-Town NY Cops whom once again hit more pedestrians that the actual target!
Well, if that don't cut the mustard, more people shot by the police than by the shooter...Hell, we gotta carry guns just to protect ourselves from the finest....Haven't heard any wisdom from that Bloomberg idiot, about how safe you all are in nyc with the gun ban and all...ha, whatta joke...they better spend some money on shooting lessons....1st rule in using a gun, know your target and whats beyond it...
I said that in my first posting to many donuts not enough training. But with the gun I have I would have shot through 3 people
If the police did not have guns they could have caught the guy later. It was not safe to be shooting (spraying bullets) in a crowded NYC environment.
Cop screwup! Quick, blame Obama! Subpoena Holder! Get dickwad Issa on the case!
Now the idiot right-wing gun psychos will be reaching in all directions for something to blame, other than the super obvious fact -- proven a hundred thousand times in civilian live and a hundred million times in war -- that when fear, excitement and adrenaline are running high, shooters usually miss their targets.
Hello folks, makes you feel comfortable that Barney Fife and his twin brother are on the job. If you hear gun shots look out for uniformed men shooting randomly. NYPD's finest aye! I guess you get more bang for the buck with these poorly trained idiots! They are about as accurate as the remote controlled Drone operators.
This kinda of shooting from police is by far the norm, not the exception. While the trend is dress like SWAT,
SWAT they are not. A single shot shotgun or a 38 s&w is a far better choice for 90% of police.
Commitment to high cap semi autos has NOT proven a smart choice.
Oh man! If only the NYPD didn't have guns! We need gun control laws for them too!! xD
I'm joking. But you knew this was coming ^ lmao
I am a licensed to carry a concealed weapon, and I frequently do. With this responsibility, I visit the range on a regular basis to ensure I am proficient in the use of that firearm. I hit what I aim at, and I am responsible for every bullet I send "Down Range". At times I am in the range with local law enforcement. For the most part they are adequate at best when it comes to comfort and accuracy with their weapons. All to frequently I see the result of officers that do not practice, and what I see at the range would scare the crap out of the citizens in their care. It doesn't surprise me that every injured bystander was the due to NYC Police incompetency. Officers do not believe they are a danger to the public. They believe that they are competent with their weapons, without practicing, due to the fact that they are the "Police", and St Micheal will steady their hand should that gun ever have to slide out of the holster. In my opinion, the entire chain of command should be held accountable for those bullets. If they fail to ensure their subordinates are safe, then they should be fired. I have seen the result of officers not caring about being proficient, and this is one reason I will not entirely depend on them to protect me and my family. Those officers used the all-to-common "Spray-and-Pray" when they clearly panicked, with absolutely no regard for public safety. Shame on you, NYC, for allowing those cowards to fester. Shame on you, NYPD, for allowing the concept of "It wil never happen" eliminating the need for frequent range qualifying (probably so you don't have to fire the lazy ones)
mike, don't laugh at your own jokes. It's a sign of infantile narcissism.
I can see how mayor herr bloomberg's rabid stance on gun control has helped here.
2 VETRAN patrolmen simply opened fire willy nilly into a crowd. Whatever happened to
know your target------perhaps they should take lessons from
the Aurora Theater shooter-----he only required 1 shot per victim.
Eat me alive for this one folks---It is tastless sarcasm and truly my heart does go out to those men, women, and kiddos but give it some thought.
See this is a game-changer for me. This was simply a case of one person shooting another. And people may be disabled for life. Forget about the gun debate. There are issues here that need to be addressed in training. So unfortunate, I see their point on wanting to put this crazy man down quickly.
@JS in SD and others who are so quick to condemn the Police. When was the last time you were confronted with some nut shooting at you? Yes, Police are trained to Serve and Protect however remember they are only human thus there is always a margin for error. IMO, it is a classic case of 'damn if they did, and damn if they didn't'. Think about that!
David are you kidding? One or two people are two too many but 9! This is flat out incompetence and its the sheeple that allow this type of behavior to persist by not demanding we have competent people who have a license to kill!
These non shooting officers are the protectors, and shot 9 people! Thank God there weren't more police on the scene. This was reckless shooting and these and those responsible for their training, should be held responsible, put behind a desk, and sued by each of the people on the streets.
This is not even in ANY way understandable...NEVER be allowed to carry a gun again!!!
Thank GOD, no one innocent died from their actions!!!
There is no justification for this, if there is, then we are all in trouble...
This was like a high speed chase by a state trooper that runs over someone walking down the street. Surely, but surely these police officers with guns can do better than to shoot innocent citizens.
My how the worm has turned. Before it was the deranged guy that did all the shooting and was taken down with a single well placed shot by police. Riiiiigghhttt. Now that has come out it was the NYPD dropping all the bystanders in the crowd you same people are making excuses for the cops. Give me a freaking break. If these officers can't control their weapons better than this, they need to lose them until they can. 9 bystanders shot by police?!? Oh and to the guy yapping about protecting you, according to the Supreme court of these United States, "Police officers are not obliged to protect the individuals life or property. It is their job to investigate crime and bring the criminal to justice". So, they are neither obliged to protect or serve you, the motto is a falsehood. They are simply government lackeys with no sense of purpose aside from shooting the bad guy, and anyone else who gets in the way evidently.
Spare me the "firefight and fighting for their lives" nonsense. If they were indeed engaged in any of this, they would want to be the best shot they could be, to bring any such exchange to an end quickly and efficiently. Take the L.A. PD fiasco some years ago involving a pair of bank robbers. They fired 5800 rounds and hit the criminals 4 times each, sure they were wearing body armor, but 4 hits out of 5800 rounds? Seriously,,,,, Where do you suppose all those missed rounds ended up? A well placed bean bag would have brought this guy down without a single casualty. To quick to pull the Glock and too slow to think. But, I guess NYC has no shooting ranges anymore since the average citizen can't own a hand gun. So did a cop lend this guy his or what? Where did this hand gun come from? We all know the most restrictive gun laws makes everyone safer, right? Like in NYC, D.C., Detroit, Chicago, L.A. California and the rest of the Nanny states who strangely enough also have the highest violent crime rates.
Hey. Those cops are GREAT SHOTS. They hit ten with only sixteen bullets. Nine bystanders and one gunman. Good shooting NYPD.
Of course they were only FIVE FEET from the guy with the gun. And why the hell did they have to shoot 16 times?
And the crazy gunners actually have excuses for this? The New York authorities have forced law enforcement weapons to be LESS efficient? Well, you have to understand that civilians are better trained than the cops because they spend time at a shooting range.
Well of course that's true. Why, I myself have been in hundreds of shootouts. I have dropped a bad guy at better than 800 yards with a single shot to his left eye. I am immune to an adrenaline rush. I ALWAYS know who the bad guy is or the bad guys are. I never miss.
My weapon of choice? Fantasy.
all law enforcement today carrys, mostly 40 cal, klock, sig, sw, 14 shot magazines; rapid fire such as this spay a large area, bad traiinng
I love how the NYPD "Defends" the use of deadly force by two of their officers that resulted in 9 citizens being shot by the officers not the "criminal". I find myself wondering which of them was the bigger criminal, they guy that shot one person with whom he had a grudge or these protectors of the public who just draw and blast away with no regard for where the bullets go?
These two "hero's" should lose their job, face at least criminal negligence charges, should any of those bystander die as a result, upgrade to criminally negligent homicide and lose their ass to the law suits. Just goes to show what Nanny state regulations do for public safety. With the Badge goes an oath and a duty and they SHOULD be held to a higher standard. Not a spin session and blue wall of protection. This ain't the movies officers, the bystanders don't getup and walk away after the director yells "cut" or you fill them with holes from your NYPD issued Glock. Morons.
But, as we all know they will be excused as following police procedure and "saving" countless lives,,,,,,, Yeah and I'll buy that bridge they have for sale too.
But at least the city has outlawed 'super sized' soft drinks... so the government is doing some good!
Hummmmmmmmmmm ... Shoot or not shoot? ... Is that really even a question in a crowded situation?
And what if everybody was packing? Hindsight is always 20/20 ... you have a perspective of what was happening sitting in your chair after it is all over, that you couldn't have in the instant of the shooting but in the heat of the moment ..how do you know who's the bad guy? ... just because a has a gun (like you) and is shooting at someone in New York, doesn't mean he's the perp ..
If twenty people had been armed and pulled their weapon and fired .... you could have had a hundred injured .. & probably a number of those would have been those that involved themselves in a situation they knew nothing about ... and pulled their guns and started shooting ... at each other
I believe in weapons in the hands of private citizens & even conceal carry permits ... BUT most people are ill equipped with a gun at their disposal in a situation like this ... they have to many decisions to make to quickly ..just like the cops did ... they had to play Wyatt Earp ... and in the process shoot a number of innocent people.
What should the Officers of the law have done? .... not fire one shot ... until the perpetrator was well away from the people in the street ... and then do the deed...
Where was he going to go? ... except to hell!
He was a dead man (and he probably knew it) after he took the first shot .. This was suicide by police ... and piss poor handling by New York s Best!
It's called you need to spend more time at the range.
Is nobody else disturbed by the fact that the cops are given arrest quotas?
So... if they do a great job, and crime goes down, do we start arresting innocents for the purpose of keeping up the quotas?
David Walker;
Clearly.
Mother f*cker said he was a sharp shooter! This is how all shooting rampages should end -no innocent bystanders getting hit, just the intended victim and the shooter. This guy went after who he thought was the cause of his problems; why shoot innocent people if you're gonna lose it? Shoot the guy who's causing problems in your life morons! Go down to wall street or to the bank that foreclosed on your house and shoot the 'decision maker' or of the coal company that gave your kid cancer...of course I'm only half serious here but you get the picture.
Armed citizens always make things worse. NOT!! Just like here.
http://www.guns.com/texas-gun-owner-shoot-out-10236.html
"those bystanders could've used their guns too...and shot even more bystanders"
Wow, so let me get this straight. Your argument is that "at least all of the innocent people were accidentally shot by the police instead of a "civilian"". Isn't it always the argument of the anti-gun crowd that "regular people" can't be trusted to discharge their firearms safely and that it should be left to "the professionals" to prevent innocent casualties? This incident seems to blow that argument out of the water. If a non-police officer had done something like this they would have been arrested on the spot, charged, and likely convicted of serious crimes. As it was police officers in this case however I wouldn't be surprised if they get simple reprimands/transfers, or at worst forced retirement with pay. How does that factor with your sense of justice?
At that distance, two officers unloading their clips is overkill. I'm certain Johnson was critically, if not fatally wounded after being hit by the 3rd or 4th bullet. Those cops freaked out and innocent bystanders got hurt.
I call for more gun training.
The guy only shot one guy, he had put his gun away and was walking off, had the cops done good police work they would have followed him at a safe distance until he was somewhere that didn't have a crowd of people. They should have thought about the bystanders prior to approaching him with guns drawn on a crowded street. This isn't a dirty harry movie, you don't have gun battles on busy streets in the middle of rush hour. There were hundreds of witnesses, cameras every where, even if the guy would have gave them the slip they could have found him at home later. I don't think cops should be allowed to watch cop movies or tv shows that show them doing things that are unrealistic in real life, it goes to their heads, they all think they are dirty harry. I think the world will be better off once we take the human element out of our criminal justice system and give it to more logical robots we aren't controlled by ego.
Like Common Sense VA, I am a concealed carry permit holder. I have been so for years. When I left military service I thought I was done with guns, it wasn't to be. In the course of my employment two attempts were made to kill me. I didn't quite "soil myself" as Early Out puts it, but it was close the last time. One of the investigating deputies took me aside and (this is a quote) "Get a permit, get proficient; we can't protect you, we'll be at the scene in minutes when seconds count." I took the advice. I spend range time at least once a week. I'm careful about where I go and when I go there. I am not paranoid, the folks who took a run at me are still out there. There is no moral superiority in being an unarmed dead man. As far as this story goes, I wasn't there and am not qualified to hold an opinion. I can only be responsible for my own use of deadly force; pray God it never becomes necessary.
when I'm on the street I'm not wearing armour, so if you guys mind , aim then fire.. then wait .. then aim again then fire.. if you can't do that , don't shoot.
Hell I get more Combat shooting in one weekend that the County Sheriffs and local cops do in 5 years on the force. Looks like the NYPD needs to revamp their Qualifing standards. They need to REQUIRE at least 1 weekend a month on the Combat range. If they don't have a Combat range GET ONE!!
couple of rookies going off with out much care for those around them. Seem like the Mr Johnson shot what he was aiming at. Cops just sprayed and prayed. More like punk gang banger then professional law enforcement.
Sorry but that is how i see it. Make the first shot count or don't take it.
Like the song says..."What the world needs now is guns, more guns"... oh wait, that was love...my mistake. Which is a hell of a less painful than what the two cops did... The article never said, but did any of their bullets hit the gunman they were aiming for?
I have never been shot but I have to wonder does it hurt more or less if it is a legally purchased firearm? Are people killed by by illegal handguns any more/less dead than ones killed by illegally obtained ones? I know guns don't kill people but the guns used by people sure as heck do.
It seems everyday we hear of people being shot and yet our answer is to purchase more guns? Smarten up, folks.....
Just out of curiosity, how many of you that have posted here are Police Officers and more to the point, how many of you have ever been shot at or had to shoot your weapon?
Yes, only the police should have guns, for they take only minutes to respond.
"Just out of curiosity,..."
After a plane crash, the defenders trot out the overall safety numbers and tell us to accept tragedy as it is such a sliver of the big picture - exactly what you are trying to do.
A violent confrontation between two people ended with one death. A separate confrontation, initiated by police, ended with nine innocents shot.
Dramatics as always. Had just seconds,lol. I hope these nine people sue the hell out of them.
LorraineH
I am a Combat Vet with live fire experience. Normally, I don't side with the police. They are far too out of control anymore, but I can say that it takes a tremendous amount of training and experience to develop the muscle memory necessary to accurately hit a target in a situation such as that. If they had assault rifles, even something as simple as an AR-15, they'd never have hit so many bystanders. With a pistol, the adrenaline alone will send half of their shots off target and on a crowded sidewalk that means friendly fire.
Just my opinion - this is understandable. Pistols are made for close contact or indoors, not at a distance and they would need an incredible amount of tactical training to ever be able to deal effectively with a situation like that. Police, despite their demeanor as of late (and this includes SWAT), are about as ineffective as a unit can be when it comes to actual combat. They just beat up defenseless people most of the time or use massive numbers. How many times have you ever seen a police force go up against a trained, well armed, fighting force? Never - because they would get slaughtered in about three seconds. That's why they go after peaceful protestors, drunks and the like.
Cheetah
First of all....I simply asked a question, why are you taking a confrontational attitude with me by saying "exactly what you are tying to do". I am not trying to do anything but ask how many posters are police officers and how many of them have ever been confronted by a suspect who is shooting or pointing a gun at them and did they ever fire their weapon. I can't quite understand what's up with your hostile attitude.
And you are very wrong in your assumption that Mr. Johnson shooting a victim 5 times, once in the face was a separate confrontation. He was walking down the street with a loaded gun and as police approached him, he initiated the aggressive action by raising his weapon and fired at police. They returned fire. Watch the surveillance video. And the violent confrontation between two people ended with one death, that's what you call what happened. The victim was entering his workplace and was shot point blank in the face and head by the assailant who then walked out of the building into a crowded street with the loaded gun and turned and fired on the two police officers, who in return, returned fire. The Glock model 19 NYPD carry holds 17 rounds, 1 in the chamber and 16 in the magazine and it takes only 2 seconds to discharge 10-11 rounds. I say this to you because it was not like an extended gun shoot out, the entire incident took less than 4 seconds.
NYPD is going to have some serious need for review of policy and thank God none of the innocent bystanders where killed. 3 had gun shot wounds and 6 had shrapnal wounds. Thank God Johnson did not walk further down 5th avenue and continue to point blank shoot innocent people in the face and head fatally wounding them, thank God he never got the chance. For you to state this was a separate confrontation initiated by police is the most ridiculous statement made on this post so far. It was a horrible situation for those innocent people and under the circumstances, it's a miracle no one else was shot or died. I am not defending NYPD's policy in this event....I don't know what their policy is, but their actions were not provoked and they appeared to take appropriate action under the circumstances.
And as for my question: Just out of curiosity, how many of you that have posted here are police officers?
I would guess you are not....I'm not a defender trotting out overall safety numbers telling you to acccept tragedy and don't appreciate you saying that was what I was trying to do. What are your motives with your hostility toward someone who posts a simple question?
Really? I find that interesting, because I have a pistol, and carry it every day (yes, I do have a CCW permit/license), and I can very easily hit the center of a stationary target at 45 feet (that's 15 yards, or just a few feet more than the distance from the edge of that elevated roadway to the outside wall of Grand Central Terminal on the E 42nd Street side) -- and I train about as often as the average New York City police officer apparently does.
whoknow
Thank you. I asked the question initially because a little over a year ago while visiting friends in the Portland area while sitting in a restaurant, there was a police vs. armed suspect shooting right outside the restaurant we were eating at. It happened so fast, and the amount of bullets shot where unbelievable. I could never imagine before that incident that guns police carry could shoot so many rounds so quickly. I remember there being over 50 yellow markers all over the street and sidewalk and it only seemed like it lasted a few seconds. That is why I asked the question. Your explanation regarding their training vs. perhaps the arms training military personnel gets makes sense for accuracy. Thanks for the response. I did not ask the question to take sides with NYPD, as i stated to Cheetah, I don't know what NYPD's policy is for a situation like this, but it seems to take Johnson down was the best thing to do under the circumstances. And your explanation of the accuracy issue was what I was wondering about...thanks.
This just highlights the need to find an alternative to lethal weapons.
nobody hit the dirt..... the citizens need to be trained what to do in an event like this. everyone must complete a the course before they are allowed to walk around in public.
More target practice for the cops needed.
The liberal politicians in NYC have had the duty weapons of the NYPD modified, as a terribly misguided "feel-good" measure, resulting in their weapons being LESS accurate.
The modification involves the replacement of the normal trigger mechanism with one called the "New York" trigger.
Blame the liberal politicians, not the individual officers.
Another disturbing trend is for Law Enforcement agencies to put very heavy trigger on their issue service pistol for liability reasons. The most famous example is the Glock New York trigger that weighs approx 8 lbs and even worse is the New York plus that has a trigger pull weight of 12 lbs. Remember if your pistol weighs 2 lbs loaded and you have an 8 pound trigger pull it will take 4 times the loaded weight of the the handgun to make it fire. This means for the typical shooter it is virtually impossible to shoot the weapon accurately under stress. This leads to misses and an unintentional spray and pray approach when in a gunfight. The danger to innocent bystanders is increased dramatically and the very thing that was meant to make the pistol safer.
Vern, your comment is repetitive and irrelevant. I've read it over and over! Many people like a heaver trigger pull, so what? I blame poor and insufficient training. A police officer fires his weapon, he gets paid time off. This incident was not the best display of a NYPD response. Shooting into a crowd is always poor judgement. Now you can go back to being an expert and grumbling about liberals, conservatives and other miscellaneous stuff.
hey vern, you are a simple minded quack who runs at the mouth. And conclusive proof of:
Now the idiot right-wing gun psychos will be reaching in all directions for something to blame, other than the super obvious fact -- proven a hundred thousand times in civilian live and a hundred million times in war -- that when fear, excitement and adrenaline are running high, shooters usually miss their targets.
Well, Police Officers probably do need more practice, but not just target practice - more realistic combat type practice. These two may (or may not) have been Marksmen at the target range, but it would be a whole different ball game when there's a gun-fight going on. So, if Police Officers need more training, it would also need to include simulations under stressful, combat like situations.
I don't think we should be to quick to call these officers "Keystone Cops" though - if any of us were being shot at, our #1 priority would be to try to stay alive and get home to our families. The average cop is not John McLane, and the average cop hasn't had a life/death situation present itself in their entire career. These guys may have been scared, panicing, screaming and doing their best not-to-die.
Either way, this is a horrible situation for everyone - and it's fortunate that it ended with as little death as it did.
Jim, I don't know what you've been shooting at, but maybe you should calm down. People with a little experience learn to keep their head during the shooting, and then "panic" afterward. A meltdown after the fact is preferable to shooting up the bystanders.
These guys can go to the range as much as they want, but until the targets start shooting back they won't know what their "in the field" shooting will be like. When the man pointed his gun at the officers, they had absolutely no choice but to fire. A couple of rounds each might have been preferable. But...ask the wounded bystanders how they feel about it first. I'm betting they are grateful that the police got there so early, and managed to drop this moron before he did his own crowd control.
For those of you arguing against civilian concealed carry you are idiots. Me carrying a firearm isn't about being a hero .... it's to make sure I can defend myself and my family if the need ever arises.
And for those talking about the "New York trigger" yes there is a trigger spring replacement for the Glock pistols NYPD uses that increases the trigger resistance. However it isn't due to regulation but simply that it emulates the trigger pull of a double action revolver. These were used to assist the old timers in transitioning from their revolvers over to the striker-fired Glock pistol. If any NYPD officer is still using a NY trigger spring in their firearm that never carried a duty revolver then that is asinine.
In the end though despite the crap circumstances these officers were put in they own each of those bullets that didn't hit their intented targets. At least here in MA during police firearm qualifications 1 single shot off the target fails you.
Excuses, excuses, excuses. FACT, the cops dropped 9, THAT'S 9 civilians while firing 16 rounds each at one man. FACT, one would have been too many. FACT, at the distance they began cranking out rounds, looks like about 12 feet, how can you miss that often? FACT; the mag dump philosophy of cops needs to be replaced by accuracy. One well placed shot will bring down ANY human, period. And do spare me the PCP freak, Crack head, Meth head crap, One shot to the head and he drops like you turned off a switch, period. FACT; they just got their inner RAMBO on and dusted a bunch of civilians, it a wonder there weren't more. FACT; They SHOULD be held to a higher standard.
But it will be spin, spin excuses, excuses, followed police procedure, back on the street in a few days.
Steve the Dog Man;
You're joking right? You can't be that naive. I'm sure I'd be just tickled to freaking death about some cop shooting me, what a honor. Why, I'd be just ecstatic about the possibility of a permanent disability due to the poor judgement of one of those flat footed civil servants. I'm sure they will show their enthusiasm in the law suits they file. STOP making excuses and demand police officers are trained to handle situations like this. OR, they should seek other employment. Make the Minnesota multiphase psychological exam MANDATORY for ALL police officers to weed out the RAMBO's and Norris's, just like the state police and Federal law enforcement uses to evaluate candidates.
You don't how you will shot under pressure? Really? Don't shoot much do you. Training and more training can eliminate the guess work, it's been proven. You don't see the Feds opening up on crowds, do you? At least not yet.
Did the cops hold their guns sideways, like those gangsta cowboys you see on TV?
Nicodemus 1946 - I believe you're talking about muscle memory when you advance the theory that practice will solve the problem of guess work. Repetition does help but there is a down side as well. With a learned response like muscle memory the thinking part of the brain takes a back seat. You identify a threat, you draw and muscle memory takes over and you fire. Circumstances change in hundredths of a second. Sometimes it is no longer appropriate to pull the trigger. Probably wise not to mention Feds opening up on civilians after Waco and Ruby Ridge.
Average citizens don't walk around wearing body armour, aim then fire, .. wait then aim and fire..
My life and my children's Lives are worth more than 1 second of your fear
@Nicodemus, and others who are commenting like him:
You are COMPLETELY clueless and out of touch with real life.
With all your ranting a bashing of the police, I'm curious... how EXACTLY would you have responded if a man suddenly pulled a gun on you and started firing from 5 feet away?
Please... EXACTLY what would you do in the scenario that was presented to these two officers? Please share step by step. Remember, you have all the time in the world to think this through, unlike those two heros that had about 3 tenths of a second to react.
I'm wating.
I am wondering how many of the bullets actually found the target. The article says that all the people were hit by bullet fragments. This would imply that the bullets the police used called self defense rounds actually traveled through the murderer (target) on their way to wounding bystanders in the background. The bullets fragmented while they went through. I hope the guy didn't have any blood borne diseases.
In conceiled carry class you are taught exactly what happens when you take out your wepon. You have to know what is behind your (I hate to call it this because he/she/it is a human being) target because the bullet can travel through and hurt some innocent behind them. All the people I know that have a CW practice so they only hit targets. If you shoot (defend yourself), it will change your life forever, and not for the better.
Yeah, yeah, guns, guns, guns, CCW, practice range. Bullets fly every day in this shoot-'em-up country.
There's no point in discussing it, nothing will change.
What could be changed is the tiny little statement that "I was being punished because I didn't meet the arrest quota." WTF!
From the horse's mouth, the last thing police departments want is for crime to go down.
There you have it kids, the cops aren't there to serve and protect, they're there to arrest. Lovely world we've allowed to be created, isn't it?
Please don't waste our time talking about little events. See the big picture.
Stevethedogman...
It is my understanding from news reports is that he was armed with a .45 ACP. The mag holds seven (in stock single stack) He put five into his co-worker. He had two rounds remaining, (three if he follows my occasional practice of refilling the magazine after loading one into the chamber. What I am adamant about is that a police officer should NEVER fire at a bad guy while the bad guy is in a crowd of innocent people! Period, no question mark, just DO NOT fire into a crowd! I'd like to see the total legal costs for the city of NY over the coming years. Oh yeah, the guy never fired his pistol again.
So they should just stand there and let him shoot?
I'd prefer to use first-posting trolls to contain the situation.
Me and my children don't run around wearing body armour, aim , then shoot, 1 second of your fear is not worth my child's life or my wife's..
Bloomberg always talks about how there are too many guns in NY. What he should be worried about is the firearm training of his police. Gun Control is being able to hit your target.
The liberal politicians in NYC have had the duty weapons of the NYPD modified, as a terribly misguided "feel-good" measure, resulting in their weapons being LESS accurate.
The modification involves the replacement of the normal trigger mechanism with one called the "New York" trigger.
Blame the liberal politicians, not the individual officers.
Yooper Jim
Gun Control is being able to hit your target.
.....That's absolutely ridiculous, you're confusing marksmanship with gun control, but nice try anyway. Actually, in this case, a better example of gun control would be to not fire it (that's the "control" part) unless you are sure you can hit the correct target.
I own 3 rifles and support gun ownership, within reason. However, I wonder about the macho types that say everyone to should carry a loaded weapon with them. People, think about all the jerks you see driving on the expressways, freeways and tollways, speeding, weaving in and out and tailgating like out of control idiots, then imagine these very same people carrying loaded weapons, is that what you really want, I sure as hell don't.
Roadhouse, I must disagree with you, but Gun control is being able to hit the target. The problem here is that the comment was made that neither officer had EVER discharged their waepons on the job.
I was trained in many military disciplines and the purpose of training is so that when your adreneline rises your ability think goes down. That is the reason training is so important. A person will react with their training instead of needing to think as a the heart races and ther mind goes blank.
I once read a story of a police officer in Green Bay that surprised a drag queen in the process of robbing a convenient store with a bb pistol. The officer was so rattled that he fired 5-7 shots, beginning about two feet in front of his own feet as the shots became ever closer to the fashionably dressed queen.
The last shot hit the would be robber and killed him. The shooting was ruled justified even thought the queen carried a toy gun. But since his adreneline was going through the roof of his brain, the officer was unable to think about the situation or his marksmanship.
I feel that real life trainging should be required for police officers including the use of paintballs.
Any historian will tell you that a "Green" Army will run at the first threat to battle, ant that is why armies around the world keep busy in a battle somewhere. A combat veteran's badge that a veteran wears is the highest honor a soldier can wear and that accounts for the position it is worn on the soldiers uniform.
People who are untrained need to leave the guns at home, and police officers should be able to hit a target in a tense situation. Common Sense Gun control.
Lazarus
You are a moron. You watch too many movies and have no idea how a gun or a firefight works. Yeah, it sucks that bystanders got shot. Police are trained to be responsible for each round they fire. but, the video shows police put in a no win situation. guns were fired and people will be hurt when that happens. The sh!t head murderer caused this. The police answered not only protecting their lives but the lives of others. You have the luxury of judging after the fact. What I want to know is why the head line doesn't say "hero cop saves lives and ends deadly rampage".
The police could have taken a moment to assess the situation and determined that the shooter was no longer acting in a threatening manner and waited until they had more backup or were in a better position to apprehend him. That is how the military does it. Chose your place of battle. There wasn't a rampage. The shooter was done. His gun was in a bag.
I carry. and have been trained. One of the four cardinal rules of gun safety is: "Be sure of your target and what's behind it." It APPEARS (I wasn't there) that that rule was not followed here. The shooter was not on a "deadly rampage" as previously posted. He had accomplished his task. I would never fire into a crowd unless my life was in danger, or if I was SURE I had a clear shot at the perpetrator. After the Tucson shooting, all the keyboard Rambos were posting about what they would have done. Know what I would have done if I had been there with my .45? Most likely nothing. The best way to survive a gunfight is not to get into it in the first place.
My comment about gun control is that one, be trained to use your weapon. Don't think that shooting it once or twice a year is going to make you proficient - and not just standing straight in front of a paper target. Second is to be able to assess a stressful situation and know when to fire and when to diffuse the situation. I am a gun owner and train with them, but I am far from a professional. I thank my lucky stars that there are men and women willing to put on the uniform of both law enforcement and the military to protect me and my family. Most will never fire a lethal round in their career, but they should be trained to be able to do it.
Vern,
I believe you are wrong about the reasoning for the "New York" trigger. The original design concept by Glock was to emulate the double action pull of the standard revolver. This trigger which can have a pull almost twice as heavy as the standard trigger was a "stop gap" measure to transition from revolvers to semi-autos. The smart way to transition would have been to spend plenty of time practicing with the new guns. If you have some "proof" that the NY trigger was pushed by "liberal politicians", please provide some documentation.
I believe the NYPD has 3 possible duty semi-autos, all in 9mm and all with the heavy trigger pull. Last I heard their standard ammo I believe is the Speer 124 grain Gold Dot Hollow point. These are about a buck apiece so practice can get expensive if they are using duty ammo. Personally, I've never been a big fan of the Glock which is probably the most common weapon they carry. These are very reliable guns, but even with the standard trigger they aren't noted for being particularly accurate. Double the trigger pull and it's going to be really tough to keep it on target in a pressure situation.
Although, the info is limited, it sounds like many of the rounds were fired low and the bullets likely fragmented off the ground or went right through the subject's lower extremities. To me, this is indicative of firing too rapidly with a heavy trigger pull. (The tendency to over compensate for muzzle rise and shooting subsequent rounds low.) It is entirely possible that the first couple rounds got the job done and the follow ups were mostly sprayed.
I would debate that the NY trigger does anything for safety. The double action semi autos we're talking about here already have pretty long, stiff triggers. These are not guns likely to be unintentionally fired because the trigger is too light. It's not like just touching it will set it off. Even the standard trigger takes a very deliberate, fairly long trigger pull.
In all likelihood, the officers started firing as rapidly as they could and didn't stop until they saw the guy go down. That would seem reasonable when trying to quickly subdue someone, but isn't going to be the best way to assure effective hits. It isn't fair to second guess these guys, but I do believe that with frequent intensive practice, the subject could have been stopped with less rounds fired and less misses.
But when you do the math, you can see why there probably isn't a big push for a lot of practice. If you train with service ammo and weekly every uniformed office fires 100 rounds, that's $100 times 35,000 officers every week. That's about $3.5 million in ammo costs alone, every week. As you cut down on the training, proficiency will also drop. And using cheaper hardball ammo would cut down the cost but would also give slightly different firing characteristics. Bullet weight and cartridge pressure should be as close as possible to service ammo, in order to build the right muscle memory. You just won't be a crack shot without frequent practice.
So practically speaking, these officers got the job done and luckily no bystanders were killed. It could have been worse. It is nice to think that all police are going to be skilled marksmen, but in reality, many private gun enthusiasts practice more and are likely better shots.
Wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait.
Wait.
"Arrest quotas?"
There are actual..."arrest quotas??"
Huh. Well, that explains why there are between 2.5 and 3 million people behind bars here in the so-called "land of the free" (lol).
inb4 "Hurr durr love it or leave it u pinko commie punk!"
I would enter in a lengthy response, but your ignorance demands far less of an answer: YOU'RE AN IDIOT.
Aiming .. the lost art.. that and not endangering innocent lives
Nothing even remotely intelligent to say so out comes the name-calling. Typical.
You shoot one bad guy and NINE good guys get in the crossfire and you call that handled well? That's what we call the fox guarding the hen house!
The liberal politicians in NYC have had the duty weapons of the NYPD modified, as a terribly misguided "feel-good" measure, resulting in their weapons being LESS accurate.
The modification involves the replacement of the normal trigger mechanism with one called the "New York" trigger.
Blame the liberal politicians, not the individual officers.
Oh Vern! Put a sock in it!
But,,,, But.... The liberals!!!
Putting my children's lives in danger any my wife's is not responsible ,... aiming.. waiting , firing.. then aiming again .. i know it takes a second.. but that second is Worth my Family's life..
My kids not wearing body armour, and my kids don't have some one standing next to them to fire a second shoot, wtf is the point of there being 2 officers there.. train .. then train some more...
buy them bullets and targets you losers
So much for the argument from the gun creeps that everyone needs to be armed. Can you imagine the carnage if there had been 20 of those mouth breathers standing around with their 9 mms with extended clips?
The liberal politicians in NYC have had the duty weapons of the NYPD modified, as a terribly misguided "feel-good" measure, resulting in their weapons being LESS accurate.
The modification involves the replacement of the normal trigger mechanism with one called the "New York" trigger.
Blame the liberal politicians, not the individual officers.
Idiot. The last weapon to have a "clip" was the M1 Garand that was used in the Korean war.
Dear poor you for not being happy - if people call it a clip it's a clip. How do you think words acquire meaning? By being defined by pea-brained gun psychos?
Uh...no. Clip is not the correct term. Most modern firearms use magazines. Look it up in Webster's.
Yup the liberals can't have a discussion without calling names and dragging everything down to the level that they are comfortable with, which is the gutter. I am one of those "gun creeps". I am a law abiding citizen with no criminal record. I am a husband, father, grandfather, and pretty much all around upstanding American citizen. I carry a concealed sidearm every day. I am not going to pull it out unless there is a real threat against me and mine. I don't want to shoot anybody. I hope I never have to use the sidearm. You wouldn't believe the huge number (millions) of people who carry daily. You never hear about them because they are honest and responsible citizens and they are your coworkers, neighbors, relatives, and above all else, your fellow CITIZENS. I have taken several courses and paid for training to learn to recognise "shoot - don't shoot" situations. I have paid for all of it myself. Unfortunately most police officers think that all of their training and cost of ammunition should be paid for by somebody else. They only have the training it takes to maintain minimum certification. I sincerely hope I never have to shoot a criminal to stop them from killing someone who will turn around and say I shouldn't have a gun. I can protect my family from robbers, carjackers, and anybody else determined to commit mayhem against them. You can throw your keyboard the them and whine about how long it took for the wonderful police to get there.
Sonothappy; That old Garrand with it's "clip" was a damn fine rifle! Today, on SS and a small pension, I can hardly afford one. I vividly remember " INSPECTION ARMS!" Ouch-ouch!
Wtf does reloading have to do with anything.. aim on the first shoot it does wonders.. Aim then Fire.. or all the bullets won't do a dam thing in the world.. safest person there is the target
Oh boy, how many lawsuits do you suppose will be filed against the police and the city?
I'd guess 9.
Don't be so quick Scubasteve, someone who witnessed the incident might try to get in on the lawsuit under an "emotional stress" claim. This is the USA we're talking about.
While this is certainly "wow" material, and those officers, and frankly all of the NYPD, should be retrained, just remember this: For the vehement attacks against the NYPD, how many of you would like to be stuck in a bad part of NYC, with somebody hell bent on robbing you, running towards you with a gun, and have nothing to do about it? You COULD call the cops, but hey, you already made them out to be villains.
Before everybody jumps on the anti-police bandwagon, just remember it's really easy to hate until you yourself need them.
The liberal politicians in NYC have had the duty weapons of the NYPD modified, as a terribly misguided "feel-good" measure, resulting in their weapons being LESS accurate.
The modification involves the replacement of the normal trigger mechanism with one called the "New York" trigger.
Blame the liberal politicians, not the individual officers.
If I was in a bad part of town (new york) I would stand a better chance of defending myself if it wasn't against the law for an ordinary citizen to carry a weapon for self defense.
But, really now, if someone was runnning at you with a gun, hell bent on robbing you, "You could call the cops" and expect them to cutoff the robber right then and there before he gets to you. Get freaking real here.
Given the marksmanship skills of some cops, who knows if when they show up an hour later, the won't shoot the innocent person as well. Cops never response quick enough to be of any help and when they do as in this case they pose more of a danger than the perp.
Vern, for God's sake, once was enough. However, having read this ad nauseam, can you provide references to show that in fact they are now less accurate, because if true, I agree, this should be changed.
There wasn't any wild pistol firing until the police went after the guy. Maybe they should have followed him to a safe place before they started shooting up the street.
Instead of the City of NY making the cops guns harder to fire and control due to their stupid "NY trigger" that requires 8 lbs of force to fire they should be issuing semi-automatic rifles with short barrels that are by their design more accurate than handguns. Laser sights and a rail system that can fire nonlethal projectiles can be added and the police would be far more effective in a shooting situation. Oh yes they are expensive but for what the city is going to pay out to the citizens who were collateral damage they could equip every cop in the city with high tech urban defense weapons.
Leave Vern alone. He thinks he's only posted this once. It's a short term memory thing and it's unkind to take him to task for it.
If you can defend yourself , in the seconds you have to save your life............ well then its a good thing the police are only minutes away..
"I believe it was handled well," Kelly said.
Well everyone is free to an opinion but I'm curious how the Chief came to this conclusion, two offices fire a combined 16 shots at a suspect and hit 9 other people, that is simply astoundingly bad marksmanship.
The liberal politicians in NYC have had the duty weapons of the NYPD modified, as a terribly misguided "feel-good" measure, resulting in their weapons being LESS accurate.
The modification involves the replacement of the normal trigger mechanism with one called the "New York" trigger.
Blame the liberal politicians, not the individual officers.
You expect me to believe that these cops shot 9 people other than their intended targets because of liberal politicians and not because they are extraordinarily bad shots?
Have you ever shot an 11-pound New York trigger?
Vern...If thats the excuse your going to use, then Bloomberg better get his checkbook out....yes, an 11 lb trigger is stiff, but IF they practice with it at all they should be more proficient than hitting 9 bystanders...
Vern,
You are trying to use common sense with people that have never fired a weapon in their life and are not able to understand what trigger pull is all about.
If some of these had ever gone to a range and practiced they might understand.
Lazarus
larry you are being foolish:
1. I'm a veteran of the Marines, own a 30-.06 rilfe and Remington 12 guage shotgun.
I've shot plenty of weapons and you can become proficient on any of them heavy trigger or not.
larry and vern (remember vern from tv?) are the kind of guys who think they are intelligent because they know they should say "magazine" when talking about what other people call clips.
Unfortunately, when they post they show no signs of anything beyond a dull normal IQ - such signs as, for example, the ability to provide examples for their brilliant opinions.
NYPD needs to be issued MP5's strait and simple.. small 9mm, semi auto rifles.. they cost about 2k to 3k more but then , i would pay that to know my life and my family's life is not being put in danger.
My 4 year old girl and 7 year old boy have better shooting skills than this, seriously.
Your kids couldn't even pull the 11-pound New York trigger.
A New York minute is quick, a New York dollar won't buy a hotdog and you my friiend, have a New York IQ (Less than your height in inches)
Tim, that's because no one is shooting back at your little darlings... 95% of the gun nuts in this country would soil their underpants when the first bullet cracks past their ear. They talk about all this and that, when all they've ever done is put rounds downrange at the local gun club. Talk to some ex front-line military and they will tell you what happens to the big talkers when the first enemy rounds start coming in. Most of the injured were hit by fragments which is quite common in a urban environment with concrete and steel all around. The police hit the bad guy 10 times with 16 shots. I'd say that is quite good given the sudden nature of his attack and the fact that he fired at them first. Good job, NYPD.
You think two officers firing a combined 16 shots and hitting 9 people other than their target is a good job? Seriously? That's awful shooting, they were about five feet from the suspect too making this even more unbelievable.
You don't think that may be an excessive response?.....considering the wounded innocent bystanders, I think yes!
bahsir...you must be from a land far far away, I would bet 75% of the "gun nuts" i know wouldn't have had to take 16 shots to hit the guy, and they would have used a lot better judgement in a crowded situation, how many rounds did the perp get off? and how many people did he hit?...send these rookies back to the shooting line and have a competent NRA instructor teach them...A good Job! I'd hate to see what a bad job would have looked like....
Hey, STUPID! What the heck is a gun nut? My guns have screws and other types of fasteners but very few of them have any nuts as fasteners. Why is someone who believes something different from you a "NUT"? Oh that's right, liberals can't have a debate without calling names and getting over emotional like little schoolgirls. Now get out of the sandbox, the cats will bury you.
Most people that fire a weapon under stress don't even realize how many rounds they've fired. Adrenaline has your trigger finger going until the magazine is empty. It takes lots of training and self control to know when to fire, put the sights on the target - especially a human body and then actually pull the trigger. These officers probably never imagined that one day they would be using deadly force on an armed suspect in the middle of a crowded sidewalk. They did the best they could, and thankfully the bystanders weren't seriously injured. Now its time to assess the shooting and improve on training and response.
concealed handgun training teaches you to know what is behind your target, also to hit your target
Last but not least, if you miss and hit an Innocent bystander you are legally liable , I.E. hit your target or don't shoot.
Glock Fever
its rampant among law enforcement.
Police save their Tasers for little old ladies and school children.
Sounds like the cops in these situations are just scared out of their minds and unloading their clips. The guy was most likely dead after the second shot. The cops were actually the more dangerous threat in this situation. If somebody else had a gun they would be justified in shooting both of them to stop their shooting spree.
Gunning down the police, eh? Is that what you call a "Second Amendment remedy?"
If they are shooting you absolutely you have a right to defend yourself, badge or not.
They were better off letting the shooter go and apprehend him later before shooting 9 bystanders.
That'S what I thought, the guy was walking away, not a treat to anyone. Couldn't they have tailed him instead? That part of downtown is crawling with people, not a good place to do a shootout.
If the cops only fired a couple of times they would have been fine,they were at close range.They had to take him down before he shot anyone else but 16 times is overkill,like they would tell a pedestrian with a gun defending themselves.I just wish i would have been one of the wounded,i could use the money.
The liberal politicians in NYC have had the duty weapons of the NYPD modified, as a terribly misguided "feel-good" measure, resulting in their weapons being LESS accurate.
The modification involves the replacement of the normal trigger mechanism with one called the "New York" trigger.
Blame the liberal politicians, not the individual officers.
Thanks for explaining that. Seems like it might even be a "12-lb trigger". If they can't be trained to deal with it as well as they did prior to these policies being implemented, it's not exactly a good idea, is it?
vickerstactical(dotcom)/tactical-tips/trigger-pull-weight/
Moron liberals are the last person to be in any position to change anything to do with guns..
how about giving the cops extra rounds and targets to practice with
The NYPD goon squads walk around Wall Street with AR15s. Good thing they didn't use rifles. Fascist idiots.
civilians usually have better accuracy in shootouts according to all statistics . most hunters that have any experience will not shoot without a clear target . these guys did take down the threat , just too much collateral damage . glad that they are alive and he is not , that saves the state a lot of money . now however there are a number of victims of the gunfire that will get paid .
The liberal politicians in NYC have had the duty weapons of the NYPD modified, as a terribly misguided "feel-good" measure, resulting in their weapons being LESS accurate.
The modification involves the replacement of the normal trigger mechanism with one called the "New York" trigger.
Blame the liberal politicians, not the individual officers.
Vern....We all heard you the first time...
The first 10 times.
After the first 10 times you think 10 months ago some one woulda said .. hay ,.. missing the target.. really ? is that even real
1 round 1 kill , its easy , its called aiming.
He must be talking about glocks. I hate them. They are far less safe than other hand guns to begin with because they have no safety and the first pull ain't all that heavy. I haven't figured out why people like them given the number of accidents they are involved in. That's why the triggers were modified in the first place. Oh wait .... don't tell me.... it's the shooters' fault. Maybe, but the gun is far less forgiving.
Let's face it police used to use revolvers which have a heavier pull than than the "New York" trigger, yet I bet if you look back you won't find a lot of cases where nine bystanders were shot by police. These guys were just bad shots. Go to a quick draw competition and you can find guys that will pump out 5 shots in a second or two and hit their target every time with a single action revolver no less.
I`m wondering why they waited to draw their weapons...
You`re chasing a guy that has been described to you as someone who just murdered a man and you don`t have your pistol out while pursuing him?
They`re awfully bad shots as well, the one cop had to be less than 10 feet way...lucky no one else was killed.
The liberal politicians in NYC have had the duty weapons of the NYPD modified, as a terribly misguided "feel-good" measure, resulting in their weapons being LESS accurate.
The modification involves the replacement of the normal trigger mechanism with one called the "New York" trigger.
Blame the liberal politicians, not the individual officers.
poor vern , who keeps collapsing those comments.. lol,
tbh, aiming does wonders
These two cops are Barney Five's School of Shooting top graduates. They were more concerned about themselves at all costs, including the lives of innocent bystanders.
The liberal politicians in NYC have had the duty weapons of the NYPD modified, as a terribly misguided "feel-good" measure, resulting in their weapons being LESS accurate.
The modification involves the replacement of the normal trigger mechanism with one called the "New York" trigger.
Blame the liberal politicians, not the individual officers.
Give it a break dude.. NYPD sucks at making a clean shot. I throw rocks better.
Anybod remember Amadou Diallo?
Not shooting if you can't hit your target is a harder decision, scary but then hay that's called making a judgment call and placing yourself in harms way to not hurt innocent bystanders
7 times + 9 times = 16 times or 16 bullets <wink wink>
9 nine victims + 10 wounds on perp (shooter) = 19 possible bullets. Or upto 3 bystander dodged and haphazardly grazed by a passing bullet.
while the 9mm is accurate, it suffers from over penetrating power, I.E. if the officer uses poor judgment in firing he/she will hit the person behind them.. they teach you that in concealed handgun training, but then only civilians go to jail for manslaughter or murder for hitting bystanders.
side note. if you use the right bullets that doesn't happen
Honestly these cops could've used hand grenades to take this guy out and probably caused less carnage.
The liberal politicians in NYC have had the duty weapons of the NYPD modified, as a terribly misguided "feel-good" measure, resulting in their weapons being LESS accurate.
The modification involves the replacement of the normal trigger mechanism with one called the "New York" trigger.
Blame the liberal politicians, not the individual officers.
you silly...lol. good one.
Hey Vern,
We get it already.
New York trigger. New York trigger. New York trigger.
Give it a rest pal.
is that New York trigger even real, if so .. stupid people making stupid decisions based on stupid ideas,
don't risk my children's lives
Give the meter maids guns, they probably would have done better.
I bet they just closed their eys and blasted till their clips were empty.
There were no "clips" present.
they forgot to keep one eye open while aiming down the sights.
aiming the lost art
Memorial Day, twelve killed, forty eight wounded, last night another nineteen shot. In New York? No, in Chicago. Guess NBC doesn't have any reporters in Chicago.
Chicago had the same thing the previous weekend.
I wonder what the chicago gang bangers trigger pull poundage is?...maybe they could teach the nypd something...
5 pound trigger ... but then i just protect my family.. you losers are on your own ..
I would give my left nut to settle the argument. In fact I would give the whole democratic party. More gun laws are just more solutions in search of a problem. Placing the blame on guns is just a cowards way of steering the focus away from themselves.
I own guns, shoot them on target ranges once a month. I borrow guns that's only shot on foreign soil. Guns are not the problem in America, it's the people behind them.
Vern is showing us what "cut and paste spam" is. Report his posts.
Vern must a be a one of them NYPD marksman.