Empire State Building shootings

I know I shouldn't smirk, but I watched Mayor-for-Life Bloomberg and NYC Police Chief try to put a spin on the upcoming law suits.

Ya know the sharks were chasing those nine injured civilians!!!

...I don't think you mean to call the suspect a bystander, do you ?It was the suspect the cops killed. The 9 wounded were collateral damage . There is a video about that shows the confrontation and shooting. The cops were 10-20 feet away when one shot 9 times and one shot 7 times. Tactically, it's a mess with one cop shooting one handed and the other approaching the suspect without his gun in his hand after being told that the guy had just shot someone to death.

So we have loss of tactical control, undisciplined fire and multiple civilian casualties.

How much actual arms training do NYPD members receive? And, are there any refreshers? Or has the mayor's whole hoplophobe attitude corrupted the training process?

If so, this is a disservice to both civilians who may be in the line of fire, but also to the police who lack the training and discipline to function in this kind of situation.

Is it firmly established that Johnson did not fire any shots? That Bloomberg says that is "to be determined" suggest to me that Johnson probably didn't, but do we know this?

Please note that whether Johnson actually fired or not does not change the point being made here. It does not seem to be in dispute that the bystanders were hit by police fire (or the results thereof).

The video is interesting.

One cop stood stationary and aimed with both hands and was really close and he looked like he did a good job putting the guy down.

The second cop shot with one hand while he was practically doing gymnastics galloping backwards and to his left to get away from the guy, firing wildly in the process. I'd be willing to bet that the bystanders who were shot were shot by him.

It should be easy to tell, since the two officers were shooting from different angles such that stray bullets from officer number one would hit people on the same side of the street, and stray bullets from officer number two would have hit people on the other side of the street.

The gunman didn't take any shots even though it looked like he had plenty of opportunity. Looks like he committed suicide by cop. He basically drew and stood there waiting to be put down.

From my FB posting:

Unacceptable marksmanship. I have never been in a gunfight. But I find it interesting that when police are involved in a shooting like this no mention is made of how “highly trained” police officers shoot so poorly. ( I mention this because I hear so often from the anti’s that that is the reason cops should have firearms and civilian carry should be banned.) I realize that when bad guys are shooting at you accuracy can certainly go down, but had this been a “civilian” trying to stop an active shooter there would have been a hue and cry from the MSM about how unacceptable it is for this kind of shooting outcome even though the “civilian” shooter may have also stopped the bad guy. Actually neither is acceptable. I just hope that the anti’s understand that whenever there is a shooting and anyone other than the bad guy is hurt—it is a bad outcome-- but it happens. So let’s not call for more gun control, other than hitting your target, when it happens.

The police (at least some agencies) are taught during their "shoot..don't shoot" session that if they are confronted by a perp pointing a weapon at them they don't have to commit suicide by NOT firing if there are numerous people in the area and there is no cover. The policehombre with the two handed stance probably did more to reduce collateral damage than did the other

Granted, marksmanship goes down the tube when you're looking down the other guy's barrel, but if a CCW holder had responded with this outcome, it would forever be cited as proof that civilians acting in self-defense are more danger than they are worth.

What I wonder is, what is the likelihood that a CCW holder would have escaped prosecution - let alone civil suits until the end of time - for said outcome?

....I do NOT agree that marksmanship goes " down the tube " when looking down the barrel of a gun. Practiced marksmanship in a simulated combat condition is the one thing that will get hits. Police have been training for anticipated combat conditions and not shooting 'Camp Perry ' style for decades; and practicing fire discipline too. Well traind cops and soldiers do very well in hitting the bad guys and not hitting the innocent.
...Poorly trained and disciplined folks do poorly.

I thought the officers each responded pretty well. The officer closest to the perp moved behind cover and fired aimed shots. The officer caught in the open fired from a crouch while moving, but showed full extension and at least the rudiments of aimed fire.

As for the NYPD's infamous poor marksmanship, let's remember the culture they are selected from. Gun ownership is discouraged, youth shooting is practically banned, there is limited access to practice within city limits and as a result there is no pride in the gun culture.

These same reasons are why the NRA was formed to promote marksmanship after the Civil War when it was discovered the Northern city boys couldn't shoot a lick, but the country raised Southerners were crack shots.

It's easy for us in fly over country to laugh about the poor shooting of them city fellas, but it points out exactly where the front lines of the civil rights battle is and how it needs to be fought. Bloomberg is an elitist, obstructionist bigot who wants to rule over the disenfranchised. The result is a police force that isn't motivated to practice, improve and learn marksmanship under stress.

The NRA needs to attack the New York attitude and promote the 2nd Amendment as a fundamental civil right. Take it to them, shout as loud as they do, and don't back down.

...Shooting 9 folks in error is not remotely " the officers each responded pretty well ". Especially since they were not being shot at.

For a city as crowded as NYC, the obvious lack of marksmanship and/or firearm control training in this case on the part of the NYPD is nothing short of appalling. I figure it's only a matter of time before the lawsuits against the NYPD start piling up.

Dave D.: Let's agree they each responded as they should have by either seeking cover or moving. Why would it have been reasonable to not shoot at someone pointing a gun at you? Do you think there was time to maneuver to position the perp against a "safe" background? Or do you think the officer caught in the open should have just run until he was either shot by the perp or reached safety?

I think the officer who shot on the move responded in a textbook way. We can all cluck our tongues at his marksmanship, but I doubt any of us could have done better.

Any thoughts on the 12 lb "New York" trigger and how that may have contributed to the poor marksmanship?

I am pretty sure that the officer who shot on the move will never live down initially using the other officer for cover!