GREAT ARTICLE: No, the Cops Didn't Murder Sean Bell

[SW3793]

Good read for the seasoned members of the media and the budding journalist that are struggling with the facts.

************************************************** *********************


No, the Cops Didn't Murder Sean Bell

By Heather Mac Donald
4 December 2006

www.city-journal.org/html...-04hm.html


New York's anti-cop forces have roared back to life, thanks to a fatal police shooting of an unarmed man a week ago. The press is once again fawning over Al Sharpton, Herbert Daughtry, Charles Barron, and sundry other hate-mongers in and out of city government as they accuse the police of widespread mistreatment of blacks and issue barely veiled threats of riots if they do not get "justice."

The allegation that last weekend's shooting was racially motivated is preposterous. A group of undercover officers working in a gun- and drug-plagued strip joint in Queens had good reason to believe that a party leaving the club was armed and about to shoot an adversary. When one of the undercovers identified himself as an officer, the car holding the party twice tried to run him down. The officer started firing while yelling to the car's occupants: "Let me see your hands." His colleagues, believing they were under attack, fired as well, eventually shooting off 50 rounds and killing the driver, Sean Bell. No gun was found in the car, but witnesses and video footage confirm that a fourth man in the party fled the scene once the altercation began. Bell and the other men with him all had been arrested for illegal possession of guns in the past; one of Bell's companions that night, Joseph Guzman, had spent considerable time in prison, including for an armed robbery in which he shot at his victim.

Nothing in these facts suggests that racial animus lay behind the incident. (Though this detail should be irrelevant, the undercover team was racially mixed, and the officer who fired the first shot was black.) But even more preposterous than the assertion of such animus is the claim by New York's self-appointed minority advocates that the well-being of the minority community is what motivates them. If it were, here are seven things that you would have heard them say years ago:

1. "Stop the killing!" Since 1993, 11,353 people have been murdered in New York City. The large majority of victims and perpetrators have been black. Not a single one of those black-on-black killings has prompted protest or demonstrations from the city's black advocates. Sharpton, Barron, et al. are happy to let thousands of black victims get mowed down by thugs without so much as a whispered call for "peace" or "justice"; it's only when a police officer, trying to protect the public, makes a good faith mistake in a moment of intense pressure that they rise as vindicators of black life. (As for caring about slain police officers, forget about it. Sixteen cops--including several black policemen--have been killed since 1999, not one of whom elicited a public demonstration of condolence from the race hustlers.)

If the city's black advocates paid even a tiny fraction of the attention they pay to shootings by criminals as they pay to shootings by police, they could change the face of the city. If demonstrators gathered outside the jail cell of every rapist and teen stick-up thug, cameras in tow, to shame them for their attacks on law-abiding minority residents, they could deglamorize the gangsta life. Think you'll find Sharpton or Barron patrolling with the police in dark housing project stairways, trying to protect residents from predators? Not a chance. Among the crimes committed in minority communities since last week's police shooting of Sean Bell there has been a 26-year-old man fatally shot in the Bronx; another man hit by stray bullets; a sandwich shop in Brownsville robbed by thugs who fired a gun; and three elderly men robbed at knifepoint by a parolee in Queens. Those minority victims who survived will have to rely on the police and the courts, not the race "advocates," ! for vindication.

2. "Police killings of innocent civilians--each one of them a horror--are nonetheless rare." The instances of an officer shooting an innocent, unarmed victim are so unusual that they can be counted on one's fingers. Last year, of the nine suspects fatally shot by the police, two had just fired at a police officer, three were getting ready to fire, two had tried to stab an officer, and two were physically attacking an officer. Far more frequent are the times when the NYPD refrains from using force though clearly authorized to do so. So far this year, officers have been fired upon four times, without returning fire. In 2005, there were five such incidents. And the NYPD apprehended 3,428 armed felons this year, 15 percent more than last year. Each arrest of a gun-toting thug involves the potential for the use of deadly force, yet is almost always carried out peacefully.

The Department has dramatically driven down the rate of all police shootings--justified and not--over the decades (in 1973, there were 1.82 fatal police shootings per 1,000 officers; in 2005, there were 0.25 such shootings per 1,000 officers, bringing the absolute number of police shootings down from 54 in 1973 to nine in 2005). The NYPD's per capita rate of shootings is lower than many big city departments.

Yet New York Times columnist Bob Herbert charges the police with an unbroken pattern of "blowing away innocent individuals with impunity." The "community," he wrote on November 30, "which is sick of these killings, is simmering," What are "these killings," about which the "community" is simmering? Herbert reaches back over three decades and adduces five prior to the recent shooting of Sean Bell. Each was a disaster that provoked the NYPD to scrutinize its tactics. But the number of innocent bystanders killed by criminal thugs in New York dwarfs the number of innocents killed by the police. Sharpton recently said that the minority community has to fear police officers as much as robbers. This is a groundless charge. What is true is that stoking the myth that the police are a threat to blacks harms the minority community by inflaming anti-cop sentiment and retarding community cooperation in the fight against crime in inner-city neighborhoods.

3. "The police work every day to save lives." If New York City murders had remained at their early 1990s highs, instead of dropping from 1,927 killings in 1993 to 540 in 2005, 13,698 more people--most of them black and Hispanic--would have been dead by last year. They are alive today thanks to the relentless efforts of the NYPD to bring the same level of safety to poor minority neighborhoods as to Greenwich Village and the Upper East Side.

The undercover officers who killed Sean Bell over the weekend were working the strip club in Queens where the incident occurred at 4 AM because of its record of illegal guns and drug sales. Their intentions that night were to protect the residents of Jamaica and the occupants of the club from violence; that they ended up killing an unarmed man is undoubtedly a nightmare for them almost as horrific as it is for the victim's family.

It may turn out that the officers failed to follow departmental procedures during the incident (though the NYPD's rule against firing at cars that are trying to run an officer over seems highly unrealistic). If so, the city will hold them accountable. The criminal justice system may even find them criminally liable. But there is absolutely no evidence that racial hatred lay behind either the officers' presence at the club or their behavior once there--contrary to the outrageous slander of New York City Councilman Al Vann, who called the shooting of Bell and other police shootings the product of "a discriminatory mind, a prejudiced mind," adding, "We have to admit [that] the problem is . . . institutional racism."

A New York Times reporter, Cara Buckley, coyly echoed this inflammatory charge on Wednesday. In referring to the undercover officer who fired the first shots at the car, she says: "The officer's fear, if that was what motivated him, was unfounded" (emphasis added). We will leave aside the spurious judgment that just because no gun was ultimately found on the car's occupants, the officer's fear of a gun was "unfounded." The officer, after all, had heard Sean Bell say, "Let's @#%$ him up," and Bell's friend, Joseph Guzman, respond, "Yo, get my gun." That officer was then the target of an oncoming vehicle driven by Bell. The most offensive part of Buckley's statement, though, is her suggestion that the officer might have been motivated by something other than fear--and what else could that be but racism or some kind of violent animus?

The New York Times, Al Vann, and other City Council hotheads such as Helen Foster notwithstanding, someone who believes that black lives are worth less than white lives is not going to put his own life at risk working in dangerous environments trying to get guns away from criminals.

4. "If you witnessed a crime, help the authorities solve it." The police could probably lock away just about every dangerous thug roaming the streets if they got more cooperation from witnesses and people with knowledge of the crime. Instead, they often encounter a wall of hostile silence in minority communities. Bystanders sometimes deliberately block officers chasing a criminal. The stigma against helping the police--referred to derogatorily as "snitching"--is pervasive. "If you're a snitch, people want to kill you," a teen robber in a Brooklyn crime rehabilitation program that I observed this spring explained. Helping the police is seen as helping the enemy, defined in racial terms. Even black officers are part of the hated white establishment. "Black cops, I disrespect them. They sucking the white man," asserted another juvenile delinquent in the Crown Heights rehab program.

Many law-abiding residents of crime-ridden neighborhoods buck this self-defeating social norm. They attend police-community council meetings in their local precinct month after month, learning about police initiatives, and they report anonymously on drug deals and vice hot spots. They are the eyes and ears of the department, and without their help, the NYPD might not have achieved the unmatched crime drop of the last decade. It would be astounding if any of the anti-police activists leading protests about the Sean Bell shooting had ever attended a precinct community meeting or offered to help the police solve crimes. Presumably, they have more important things to do than work to improve the quality of life in minority neighborhoods. Let the police take care of that. But even if the anti-cop activists can't be bothered to give a few hours a month to fight crime, they could at least use their bully pulpit to call on others to share what they know about criminals and to help! get violent offenders off the street before they injure more people and property. Instead, their opportunistic cop-bashing only increases the hatred of the police and the stigma against cooperating with them. As a result, more lives will be taken by cop-eluding barbarians.

5. "The NYPD and the criminal justice system investigate every police shooting with profound seriousness; they will not rest until the facts are uncovered and justice done." The premise of the current grandstanding by "minority advocates" is that the authorities would shrug off the recent shooting without heat from the street. One thinks of the rooster in the fable, who believes that his crowing raises the sun. "Business will not go on as usual until we get justice for Sean Bell," Sharpton said on Wednesday. It is not Sharpton and his cronies who are getting justice for Bell, however. The street agitators could all go home (sometimes, as in the case of Sharpton, to suburbia) and wait quietly for a resolution, and the system would proceed just as diligently to assign fault if fault was present and to hold any wrongdoers accountable.

Other publicity-hungry politicians are just as desperate to add their voices to the post-shooting hue and cry. New York Senators Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton issued a joint statement on Wednesday: "It is of the utmost importance that the investigating authorities, led by the Queens district attorney, conduct an aggressive, impartial investigation to ferret out the facts." What do they think would have happened without this self-righteous piece of boilerplate? That the "investigating authorities" would have conducted a biased, half-hearted investigation?

Every time the anti-police lobby issues superfluous demands for a "full investigation" and threats of violence if "justice" is not done, they send the destructive message that the police are indifferent to the loss of life. Or worse: "I'm not asking my people to do anything passive anymore," said City Councilman Charles Barron. "Don't ask us to ask our people to be peaceful while they are being murdered. We're not the only ones that can bleed."

6. "Police officers make mistakes; tragically, those mistakes are sometimes deadly." Perhaps Al Sharpton, Charles Barron, and Jesse Jackson have never made an error of judgment, except for Tawana Brawley and such like. Perhaps, too--though this is truly unlikely--they have had to confront the possibility that they are facing someone about to shoot them and in a split-second to decide whether to shoot first. Perhaps in such circumstances, they would never ever make the wrong decision. If so, perhaps they are justified in strutting around like beings of superhuman prescience and infallibility.

But most police officers are like other human beings: they do make mistakes. And because they are carrying lethal weapons, in order to counter the illegal firepower packed by lowlifes, very occasionally those mistakes take an innocent life. The Police Department works incessantly to make sure that its officers never make a fatal error. It tries to drill into officers reflexes that will guard against wrong split-second judgments. It constantly reviews its training and official procedures to improve those reflexes. But out in the field, even the best training can prove inadequate to the pressure and confusion of a possibly deadly encounter.


SEE NEXT POST FOR PART 2

[SW3793]

This is not to say that the public and elected officials should automatically excuse every police shooting—which they are obviously far from doing. But to presume that every mistaken shooting represents a system-wide failure is inaccurate and unrealistic. The New York Times darkly commands: “[T]he Police Department must . . . confront the fact that a disaster that everyone swore to prevent seven years ago has repeated itself in Queens.” But because cops are humans and therefore fallible, it is impossible to prevent every wrongful shooting—without emasculating the police entirely. The New York Times has itself made a few mistakes over the last seven years; perhaps it, too, needs to confront its persistent fallibility.

7. “The police concentrate their efforts in minority communities because that is where the crime is.” Race hustlers accuse the police of “racially profiling” and targeting minorities for unjustified police action. After showing up in New York for his time in the Sean Bell spotlight, Jesse Jackson announced: “Our criminal-justice system has broken down for black Americans and young black males. We’ve marched and marched, bled too profusely, and died too young. We must draw a line in the sand and fight back.”

Memo to Jackson: The police have a disproportionate number of interactions with blacks because blacks are committing a disproportionate number of crimes. That fact comes from the testimony of the victims of those crimes, themselves largely black, not from the police. In New York City, blacks committed 62 percent of all murders, rapes, robberies, and assaults from 1998 to 2000, according to victim and witness identification, even though they make up only 25 percent of the city’s population. Whites committed 8 percent of those crimes over that period, though they are 28 percent of New York residents. These proportions have been stable for years and remain so today. It’s not the “criminal-justice system” that has broken down for young black males; it’s families and other sources of cultural support. Changing the subject and blaming the police just perpetuates the problem.

The furor over the Sean Bell shooting shows no sign of abating; if anything, the specious racial rhetoric is becoming more ugly and dangerous. To the extent that the exploitation of this tragic event makes the police think twice about engaging with possible criminals or turn a blind eye to crime in the ghetto (as was once the case), the most direct victims will be the hundreds of thousands of innocent, upstanding minority New Yorkers.

[banastretarlton]

Mate, I appreciate your support of these officers, but what they did is nothing short of a complete and utter f**k up, which ever way you slice it.

For seasoned cops to shoot an unarmed man....Jeez, they deserve to be made an example of.

[equinox137]

Mate, I appreciate your support of these officers, but what they did is nothing short of a complete and utter f**k up, which ever way you slice it.

For seasoned cops to shoot an unarmed man....Jeez, they deserve to be made an example of.

Oh, and the vehicle they used to run over ram their van, run over one officer, and attempt to run over other officers doesn't count as a weapon???

Please....

[scratch13]

Mate, I appreciate your support of these officers, but what they did is nothing short of a complete and utter f**k up, which ever way you slice it.

For seasoned cops to shoot an unarmed man....Jeez, they deserve to be made an example of.

More people (cops too) die every year from that item you fail to see as a weapon ..... the car than every other "weapon" combined on our streets. :rolleyes:

[Aross326]

How can you say it was a F**k up? If someone was trying to run you over with something thats 3,000 pounds what would you do? People keep saying that they shouldn't have fired the 50 or so shots, but apparently it took that much to stop the agressive action. I hope those cops don't have to see the other side of the CJ system

[jrhodes]

Mate, I appreciate your support of these officers, but what they did is nothing short of a complete and utter f**k up, which ever way you slice it.

For seasoned cops to shoot an unarmed man....Jeez, they deserve to be made an example of.
Let me put you in front of a moving vehicle trying to run you over, see what you do. I doubt you pepper spray it.

[Mitchell_in_CT]

Mate, I appreciate your support of these officers, but what they did is nothing short of a complete and utter f**k up, which ever way you slice it.

For seasoned cops to shoot an unarmed man....Jeez, they deserve to be made an example of.

Next time, the NYPD aught to call in an airstrike from a AC-130.

Forget using 9mm, use a 105mm off an airborne platform.

[VACOP1]

Originally Posted by banastretarlton
Mate, I appreciate your support of these officers, but what they did is nothing short of a complete and utter f**k up, which ever way you slice it.

For seasoned cops to shoot an unarmed man....Jeez, they deserve to be made an example of.

First he starts on a MOH recepitent Marine from IRAQ, now he starts on the NYPD. For a "COP" (i use that loosely as I do not think you are one). You a willing to jump on the hate bandwagon before the investigation is over.

[JohnGalt]

Next time, the NYPD aught to call in an airstrike from a AC-130.

Forget using 9mm, use a 105mm off an airborne platform.

No more car...

[Mitchell_in_CT]

No more car...

Problem being?

[centralTMC]

this guy, Banastratomon or whatever, idk, theres some other thread where hes being attacked for doing nothing but stirring the pot and trying to start trouble. just look where hes from? those brits still mad about the war. :) anyways, him and MyGatSayBang should go have a cup of tea and crumpets.

[Bushum]

Just ignore him. He's obviously not a cop. If he gets his jollies pretending to be someone he is not and stirring the pot just let him. He wants you to argue with him.

[scratch13]

Does this guy have the same MO as Metrocopuk, or what? :rolleyes:

[Jayc6018]

All you guys are doing is saying this guy rammed a unmarked police vehicle. Should he have known the vehicle was NYPD? I mean come on guys really, had an person in regular cloths come up to you with their guns draw what would you do and identified himself as a police officer? Given the fact that you have tons of police impersonators out there doing b.s and making the problem worst for cops.

The officer who shot 31 times said he followed behind the men when before they left the club there was a mention of a gun, he followed them back to their car and he said he then put 1 foot on the hood of the car and identified himself as police.

Quite a few undercover officers of the NYPD admitted this guy broke departmental rules for undercovers and the officer who fired 31 shots admitting in the press without even knowing he did.

"They said that as an undercover when your going to confront a threat the FIRST thing you should do is take cover, whether it be behind car, pole, building etc so the officers can assess the situation on whether to take further action in the event their are shots being fired at them."

And of course shooting at a moving vehicle.

I'm not calling these cop murders which they are not but are they MAJOR f**k ups in this situation? You bet and its unfortunate that these guys are going to lose their jobs.


What I'm getting from this situation is a case of mistaken identity.

A sad situation on both sides

[equinox137]

Let me put you in front of a moving vehicle trying to run you over, see what you do. I doubt you pepper spray it.

Maybe he'd hit it with his Met-issued baton :D

[equinox137]

Does this guy have the same MO as Metrocopuk, or what? :rolleyes:

yeah, he's the same guy

[xraodcop]

A non-practicing lawyer, Ms. Mac Donald has clerked for the Honorable Stephen Reinhardt, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, has been an attorney-advisor in the Office of the General Counsel of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and a volunteer with the Natural Resource Defense Fund in New York City. She has testified before the Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights of the Committee of the Judiciary of the U.S. House of Representatives; the United States House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims; the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence; and the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. In 1998, she was appointed to Mayor Rudolph Giuliani's task force on the City University of New York, thanks in large part to her City Journal essays on education. The New Jersey State Law Enforcement Officers Association conferred its Civilian Valor Award on her in 2004. She is also a frequent guest on Fox News, CNN, and other television and radio programs.

[xraodcop]

GREAT POST--thanks for putting it up.

[Nonsequitur]

Does this guy have the same MO as Metrocopuk, or what? :rolleyes:
Still upset we kicked his riff-raff out of our great country 200+ years ago... :D

[SW3793]

All you guys are doing is saying this guy rammed a unmarked police vehicle. Should he have known the vehicle was NYPD? I mean come on guys really, had an person in regular cloths come up to you with their guns draw what would you do and identified himself as a police officer? Given the fact that you have tons of police impersonators out there doing b.s and making the problem worst for cops.

The officer who shot 31 times said he followed behind the men when before they left the club there was a mention of a gun, he followed them back to their car and he said he then put 1 foot on the hood of the car and identified himself as police.

Quite a few undercover officers of the NYPD admitted this guy broke departmental rules for undercover and the officer who fired 31 shots admitting in the press without even knowing he did.

"They said that as an undercover when your going to confront a threat the FIRST thing you should do is take cover, whether it be behind car, pole, building etc so the officers can assess the situation on whether to take further action in the event their are shots being fired at them."

And of course shooting at a moving vehicle.

I'm not calling these cop murders which they are not but are they MAJOR f**k ups in this situation? You bet and its unfortunate that these guys are going to lose their jobs.


What I'm getting from this situation is a case of mistaken identity.

A sad situation on both sides

In the NYS penal law, IT IS NOT RELEVANT if the cops every identified themselves or if the driver even knew they were cops.

All that matters is if the officers who fired had a reasonable fear of Serious Physical Injury or death to themselves or another. That's it. The motivations of Mr. Bell are not relevant. If he thought he was being carjacked, then this is an unfortunate tragedy. If he was trying to run over the cops, the f--k him.

Also, important to remember, these are 5 cops with an impeccable records.

The guys in the car?

New York Daily News Reported the following yesterday:

"Meanwhile, sources said Guzman, Benefield and Bell already were on the police radar before the Nov. 25 shooting. A confidential police informant bought four bags of crack on Aug. 16 and again two days later at a Sutphin Blvd. pad, the sources said. The seller was Sean Bell, the law enforcement sources said.

Bell was not arrested then because police were trying to track down his alleged suppliers. He had been arrested twice in the past eight months on drug charges and he was busted in 2000 as a juvenile for possession of a firearm and three air pistols, the sources said.

Guzman's record includes nine arrests for drugs. And Benefield was busted with pot in November 2004 and as a teen in 2002 for armed robbery, sources said."

[phoenixrose]

GREAT article.

We need more people with the balls to write and present the OTHER side of the story. I'm sick to death of criminals being martyred in the media, because they got what they asked for.

Heather Mac Donald...you GO girl!

[Dinosaur32]

Jayc.....I've posted this before but I will repeat.....these three mutts knew the who the officers were. They've all had extensive dealings with the PD. Another factor, maybe you will consider this a racist statement, but I cannot remember coming across a mixed race group of thugs.

[Jayc6018]

Jayc.....I've posted this before but I will repeat.....these three mutts knew the who the officers were. They've all had extensive dealings with the PD. Another factor, maybe you will consider this a racist statement, but I cannot remember coming across a mixed race group of thugs.


How do you possible know these 3 mutts knew who the officers were? where you there? do you know them? just because they had extensive dealings with PD doesn't take away from the fact of the circumstances from what happened. Like I said I'm not pointing fingers all I'm saying is even if those officers had reasonable suspicion you know how political the NYPD is they are going to make example of these cops just to curry favor with the black community.

[Jayc6018]

In the NYS penal law, IT IS NOT RELEVANT if the cops every identified themselves or if the driver even knew they were cops.

All that matters is if the officers who fired had a reasonable fear of Serious Physical Injury or death to themselves or another. That's it. The motivations of Mr. Bell are not relevant. If he thought he was being carjacked, then this is an unfortunate tragedy. If he was trying to run over the cops, the f--k him.

Also, important to remember, these are 5 cops with an impeccable records.

The guys in the car?

New York Daily News Reported the following yesterday:

"Meanwhile, sources said Guzman, Benefield and Bell already were on the police radar before the Nov. 25 shooting. A confidential police informant bought four bags of crack on Aug. 16 and again two days later at a Sutphin Blvd. pad, the sources said. The seller was Sean Bell, the law enforcement sources said.

Bell was not arrested then because police were trying to track down his alleged suppliers. He had been arrested twice in the past eight months on drug charges and he was busted in 2000 as a juvenile for possession of a firearm and three air pistols, the sources said.

Guzman's record includes nine arrests for drugs. And Benefield was busted with pot in November 2004 and as a teen in 2002 for armed robbery, sources said."

Juvenile records are suppose to be sealed and shut but thats neither hear no there.

I'm giving both sides the benefit of the doubt as I stated this is just a big mess on both sides simple as that and although those officers got excellent records the NYPD is too political and 9x's out of 10 they do not stand behind their officers thats for sure and once those officers go up before their NYPD departmental trial their as good as done

[mavriktu]

First he starts on a MOH recepitent Marine from IRAQ, now he starts on the NYPD. For a "COP" (i use that loosely as I do not think you are one). You a willing to jump on the hate bandwagon before the investigation is over.
If you check the Katrina forum he states that N.O. was a useles city to begin with.Not only does he appear to be anti-leo but anti-American as well. :mad:

[banastretarlton]

Dear Yanks,

You really ought to learn how to take constructive criticism and make it work for you. I'm trying to teach you something here.

Your guys panicked, pure and simple. Tell me, were they uniformed or plain-clothed cops?

I think they were plain-clothed. Are we absolutely sure that they identified themselves clearly as police officers? It was mentioned that the dead guy had previous convictions for firearms offences. How is this relevant to him being shot while unarmed?

What intelligence was there to support the officers' extreme actions? Did they have firm intelligence that he had a gun at that particular time, or was that a guess, based on his antecedence?

Lastly, if you or I walked out of a club a short while before we were to be married, got into a car and then were suddenly faced with a guy in plain clothes pointing a gun at us, who may or MAY NOT have identified himself as a copper, how would we react? I would be seriously tempted to floor it, as well.

Regards

Tarleton

[banastretarlton]

If you check the Katrina forum he states that N.O. was a useles city to begin with.Not only does he appear to be anti-leo but anti-American as well. :mad:


There are many Americans who feel that New Orleans is useless. Judging by the lack of governmental support, George W Bush is one of them.

[scratch13]

How do you possible know these 3 mutts knew who the officers were? where you there? do you know them? just because they had extensive dealings with PD doesn't take away from the fact of the circumstances from what happened. Like I said I'm not pointing fingers all I'm saying is even if those officers had reasonable suspicion you know how political the NYPD is they are going to make example of these cops just to curry favor with the black community.

So what you are saying is that we should not have undercover cops, right? I mean they can't do anything. You are defending the idiots that tried to run over the cops ...... they were not the most upstanding citizens. And before you react, they were not shot because of this. It was their actions.

[scratch13]

Dear Yanks,

You really ought to learn how to take constructive criticism and make it work for you. I'm trying to teach you something here.

Your guys panicked, pure and simple. Tell me, were they uniformed or plain-clothed cops?

I think they were plain-clothed. Are we absolutely sure that they identified themselves clearly as police officers? It was mentioned that the dead guy had previous convictions for firearms offences. How is this relevant to him being shot while unarmed?
What intelligence was there to support the officers' extreme actions? Did they have firm intelligence that he had a gun at that particular time, or was that a guess, based on his antecedence?

Lastly, if you or I walked out of a club a short while before we were to be married, got into a car and then were suddenly faced with a guy in plain clothes pointing a gun at us, who may or MAY NOT have identified himself as a copper, how would we react? I would be seriously tempted to floor it, as well.

Regards

Tarleton

He was armed with a car, or do you wrestle with suspects in cars over there? :rolleyes:

Lastly, if you were in a club with your gangster buddies and were talking smack and trying to start something and said "go get my gun" among other stuff AND some plain clothes cops who identified themselves showed up, you would try to run them over too, based on your training and experience as a thug. :rolleyes:

[scratch13]

There are many Americans who feel that New Orleans is useless. Judging by the lack of governmental support, George W Bush is one of them.

metcopuk...........

[banastretarlton]

He was armed with a car, or do you wrestle with suspects in cars over there? :rolleyes:

You don't understand. It is a question of perception. I suggested that if Mr. Bell did not know that the plain-clothed man standing in front of his car pointing a gun directly at him was a cop, his genuinely held belief was that he was in immediate, life-threatening danger.

As much as it no doubt galls you, Mr. Bell, under those circumstances, was entitled to use his car as a weapon to defend himself.

[banastretarlton]

metcopuk...........

Once again, thanks for the compliment. :D

[Dinosaur32]

Jayc....Not all juvenile records are sealed.....Family Court proceedings are...but you can be varrested as a juvenile for a felony and have the case handled in a Criminal Court.....unless you are determined to be a Youthful Offender that case will not be sealed.

[Chief Wiggum]

Dear Yanks,

You really ought to learn how to take constructive criticism and make it work for you. I'm trying to teach you something here.

No offense but there is nothing that you can teach us about law enforcement in the U.S. just as there is probably nothing I could teach you about L.E. in the U.K.

Your guys panicked, pure and simple. Tell me, were they uniformed or plain-clothed cops?

You mean you don't know? You state with great confidence that they panicked as if you were there yet you don't know if they were uniformed or plainclothed. How can you be so sure of one but unsure of the other? :confused:

I think they were plain-clothed. Are we absolutely sure that they identified themselves clearly as police officers?

Are you sure they didn't identify themselves? Again, the way you don't hesitate to say they panicked or f*cked up I would think you knew and you were there. At least you seem to have made a decision on what clothes they were wearing.

It was mentioned that the dead guy had previous convictions for firearms offenses. How is this relevant to him being shot while unarmed?

Doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the legal aspect but the media and Al Sharpton want to paint these guys as some kind of pillars of society when in reality they are convicted felons that have demonstrated that they care nothing of law and will do as they please. Certianly not hard to believe that an individual of this calibre would try to run down a cop.

What intelligence was there to support the officers' extreme actions? Did they have firm intelligence that he had a gun at that particular time, or was that a guess, based on his antecedence?

A wise man once told me that there is only one good response to questions like these in regards to an event that you were not involved in...."I don't know, I wasn't there." I haven't spoken to these officers nor do I have copies of their reports or witness statement. But I doubt you do either. Yet you don't hesitate to say:

...what they did is nothing short of a complete and utter f**k up, which ever way you slice it.

without having all the facts. I highly doubt you are a cop but if you are I hope your not a detective.

Lastly, if you or I walked out of a club a short while before we were to be married, got into a car and then were suddenly faced with a guy in plain clothes pointing a gun at us, who may or MAY NOT have identified himself as a copper, how would we react? I would be seriously tempted to floor it, as well.

You say it your self, may or may not. You weren't there.

If you were a cop and you just identified your self to a suspect that you believed was armed and he tried running you or your partner down how would you react? I bet you'd be tempted to unload your gun on the guy trying to kill you.

I'm not saying there is no chance that these cops screwed up all I am saying is this:

I don't know, I wasn't there.

If you had a half a brain in your head it's what you'd be saying too. But your not hear for any real discussion. Your here to pretend to be a cop and stir the pot. Mission accomplished I guess. :rolleyes:

[djack16]

Some parts of that article are inaccurate but I believe it generally had touched down on the dumbass uproar over this incident. I have listened to my co-workers gab away about this incident and had to correct them at every turn. They accused the officers of being racist, using excessive force (50 shots), and not doing enough to prevent the incident by advertising that they were police officers.

The officers were mixed ethnicity...that just sorta blows the racism BS out the window, especially considering the first shot was fired by a BLACK MAN. The officers shot 50 rounds at the car ONLY TWO STOPPED THE DRIVER. I told them it shows you how much it takes to stop a violent criminal in a vehicle. Bullets don't always just travel straight through a windshield either. Also, the officers identify themselves.

They flat out tried to BS me one day by telling me the police had the wrong house when they shot that very old woman; that they had no reason to enter. Good god some people are just straight up ignorant. That is how I knew right away that they didn't care about the facts; they just hated the police for whatever reason.

[Jayc6018]

So what you are saying is that we should not have undercover cops, right? I mean they can't do anything. You are defending the idiots that tried to run over the cops ...... they were not the most upstanding citizens. And before you react, they were not shot because of this. It was their actions.

Dude what in the flying hell are you talking about? really? thats your dumb *** assessment not mines. I NEVER said their shouldn't be any undercover cops I mean what the hell?

What I'm saying is...... the climate in NYC is very tense when it comes to dealings with the black community and the NYPD. If you lived here you would know that instead of making dumb *** assumptions as to what I'm saying. Just ask "hey Jayc I don't understand what your saying can u please clarify?"

Everyone knows the NYPD is 95% political 5% police work. NYPD officers will tell you that and its unfortunate that they have to walk a tight rope in order to do their jobs because they know the next big incident the NYPD will NOT stand behind them.

I can go on all day about whether the 3 individuals actions were wrong or right and the 5 cops actions were wrong or right it doesn't matter. My opinon, yours and everybody elses on here doesn't matter. When the D.A concludes their investigation and the OFFICAL story as to what happen comes out I will reserve the right to comment any further on this cause all you guys are doing is making broad assumptions on a case you are not even involved in.

[So Fla Cop]

the NYPD will NOT stand behind them.


You got that right !


When the D.A concludes their investigation and the OFFICAL story as to what happen comes out I will reserve the right to comment any further on this cause all you guys are doing is making broad assumptions on a case you are not even involved in.


Do you really believe the DA will make a decision based on FACTS, not political extortion?

The benefit of the doubt goes to the cops EVERY TIME.

[Dinosaur32]

An example of how political this issue will be in the DA's office: In the early '80s, a so-called grafiti artist named Michael Stewart died while in the custody of te New York City Transit Police. Gabe Pressman of the local NBC station led an effort fueled by a radical element to charge the police with murder. Of course there was no evidence and the Grand Jury returned a finding of "no true bill". The radicals were wild and to assuage their anger the DA sent the case back to a different Grand Jury with a new theory of law that is extremely dangerous for all LEOs. The theory was that these officers failed to do enought to keep Stewart alive. The GJ returned an indictment for criminally negligent homicide. After a 6 month trial all the officers were found not guilty.

I have no doubt that the same thing could happen in this case.

[Jayc6018]

You got that right !



Do you really believe the DA will make a decision based on FACTS, not political extortion?

The benefit of the doubt goes to the cops EVERY TIME.

Of course the benefit of the doubt goes to the cops however in this instance there are a lot of witnesses so that brings a whole new dynamic, I'm siding with the officers but right now its not looking to good for them.

[amblnc38]

Good article, but I'm sure since Ms. Mac Donald is a WASP it will be completely ignored and taken as another attempt by us evvils whites to dwarf the racial problems... *sighs*


(That was sarcasm...the last part anyhow.)

As for something else....the officers over reacted? What?!? Oiy. You have to be joking.

[scratch13]

You don't understand. It is a question of perception. I suggested that if Mr. Bell did not know that the plain-clothed man standing in front of his car pointing a gun directly at him was a cop, his genuinely held belief was that he was in immediate, life-threatening danger.

As much as it no doubt galls you, Mr. Bell, under those circumstances, was entitled to use his car as a weapon to defend himself.

Then you admit it. Now stop saying that he was "unarmed." And therefore, since he was armed (and actively defending himself), then the police shot in reaction to his actions. End of story is good shoot.

[scratch13]

Good article, but I'm sure since Ms. Mac Donald is a WASP it will be completely ignored and taken as another attempt by us evvils whites to dwarf the racial problems... *sighs*


(That was sarcasm...the last part anyhow.)

As for something else....the officers over reacted? What?!? Oiy. You have to be joking.

It does not matter that she is a WASP. Read a book titled "The End of Racism." It is written by a Pakastani or Indian, I forget which. He was ignored and vilified anyway.

[amblnc38]

It does not matter that she is a WASP. Read a book titled "The Ed of Racism." It is written by a Pakastani or Indian, I forget which. He was ignored and vilified anyway.That's what makes me cry in this world...apparnetly the notion is that black people are the only ones who are victims of racism. :\ Ugh...humanity.

[Rogerthump]

I would be interested in seeing what Sharpton would have to say about a statistical analysis such as this. I bet it would be "no comment".

Any chance on getting that potential piece of social history in an accredited newspaper? NOT BLOODY LIKELY! I think that even the residents of California know about the reputation of the New York Times.

Damn shame. Great article.

[TX Heat]

I wasn't there, but if Al Sharpton says they were wrong then I'm certain they were RIGHT!

[Jayc6018]

Yeah they are right.............. right off, where's the mysterious 4th man? Hummm funny they shoot and hit all 3 men in the car but the 4th just vanishes into thin air? No pursuit of the suspect or anything.

As I stated before its not looking good for the NYPD right now.

Seems to me those officers need go to the range and practice more especially since their bullets hit near by homes and even shattered a window on the elevated airtrain service that goes to JFK airport.

[banastretarlton]

Then you admit it. Now stop saying that he was "unarmed." And therefore, since he was armed (and actively defending himself), then the police shot in reaction to his actions. End of story is good shoot.

Don't be ignorant, Scratch. The car would not be an offensive weapon in such circumstances. It would be a defensive weapon. Over here, it's called instant arming.

For example, a car is not made specifically for harming a person, although it's more than capable of so doing if used in a certain way. A gun, on the other hand, is specifically designed to harm a person.

A guy behind the wheel of a car sees a guy standing in front of him, poiting a gun. He instantly arms himself with a defensive weapin, namely the car, and genuinely believing that his life is in immediate danger, stops the perceived threat with the only weapon at hand.

I take it that citizens in the US are allowed to defend themselves?

[Dinosaur32]

Sorry Banas but as soon as the officers identified themselves, in any way, the occupants lost any claim to self defense.......I don't know about your side of the pond, but over here you are obligated to surrender to the police. There is no claim of self-defense against the actions of the police.

[banastretarlton]

Sorry Banas but as soon as the officers identified themselves, in any way, the occupants lost any claim to self defense.......I don't know about your side of the pond, but over here you are obligated to surrender to the police. There is no claim of self-defense against the actions of the police.

I read/heard that the cops opened fire and identified themselves at the same time. If that is the case, they had their guns drawn BEFORE they identified themselves, which fits my scenario.

[Jayc6018]

Don't be ignorant, Scratch. The car would not be an offensive weapon in such circumstances. It would be a defensive weapon. Over here, it's called instant arming.

For example, a car is not made specifically for harming a person, although it's more than capable of so doing if used in a certain way. A gun, on the other hand, is specifically designed to harm a person.

A guy behind the wheel of a car sees a guy standing in front of him, poiting a gun. He instantly arms himself with a defensive weapin, namely the car, and genuinely believing that his life is in immediate danger, stops the perceived threat with the only weapon at hand.

I take it that citizens in the US are allowed to defend themselves?

Yeah its called the RIGHT to bear arms. I believe the 2nd amendment in the bill of rights.

[banastretarlton]

Yeah its called the RIGHT to bear arms. I believe the 2nd amendment in the bill of rights.

Yes, I know. I was being sarcastic. Guess I'd better be careful with that. Oops, there I go again, being sarcastic.... :rolleyes:

[banastretarlton]

If you check the Katrina forum he states that N.O. was a useles city to begin with.Not only does he appear to be anti-leo but anti-American as well. :mad:

You may notice but the lack of folks rushing to the defence of New Orlean's honour, that my view is shared by a lot of your countrymen, that NO is not that important, as US cities go.

[Dinosaur32]

1) There is no obligation to keep your weapon holstered until you identify yourself.

2) There is no obligation to identify yourself before firing.

The officer's safety is paramount.....if the circumstances permit, it would be ideal to ID and then fire.....but not if the officer's life is in danger.

[banastretarlton]

1) There is no obligation to keep your weapon holstered until you identify yourself.

2) There is no obligation to identify yourself before firing.

The officer's safety is paramount.....if the circumstances permit, it would be ideal to ID and then fire.....but not if the officer's life is in danger.

That's great. Also, everyone else's safety is paramount to them. Once again, if an individual sees an armed man who he does not know and who has not identified himself as a police officer, the individual is entitled to consider himself in immediate danger and is entitled under the law to defend himself.

[firemanjb]

All you guys are doing is saying this guy rammed a unmarked police vehicle. Should he have known the vehicle was NYPD? I mean come on guys really, had an person in regular cloths come up to you with their guns draw what would you do and identified himself as a police officer? Given the fact that you have tons of police impersonators out there doing b.s and making the problem worst for cops.

The officer who shot 31 times said he followed behind the men when before they left the club there was a mention of a gun, he followed them back to their car and he said he then put 1 foot on the hood of the car and identified himself as police.

Quite a few undercover officers of the NYPD admitted this guy broke departmental rules for undercovers and the officer who fired 31 shots admitting in the press without even knowing he did.

"They said that as an undercover when your going to confront a threat the FIRST thing you should do is take cover, whether it be behind car, pole, building etc so the officers can assess the situation on whether to take further action in the event their are shots being fired at them."

And of course shooting at a moving vehicle.

I'm not calling these cop murders which they are not but are they MAJOR f**k ups in this situation? You bet and its unfortunate that these guys are going to lose their jobs.


What I'm getting from this situation is a case of mistaken identity.

A sad situation on both sides

Shame on you...excusing the thug's behavior, which was the proximate cause for him being shot. The police officers reacted to the VERY BAD choices made by the driver.

You ask the question...you answer it: you are out of town, leaving a club and 5 guys in plain clothes walk up to you and identify themselves as police. Do you:
a) Say "F-YOU" and attempt to drive into them with your vehicle
b) Say "prove it" and draw your sidearm just in case they are not cops
or
c) Say "yes sir, how may I help you" and remain polite, calm and when it is appropriate, identify yourself as a police officer from out of town?

By defending the thugs, you are suggesting that A is a completely rational and appropriate response. If you truly believe it is, you have no right being the police.

[firemanjb]

Yeah they are right.............. right off, where's the mysterious 4th man? Hummm funny they shoot and hit all 3 men in the car but the 4th just vanishes into thin air? No pursuit of the suspect or anything.

As I stated before its not looking good for the NYPD right now.

Seems to me those officers need go to the range and practice more especially since their bullets hit near by homes and even shattered a window on the elevated airtrain service that goes to JFK airport.

All of the news articles indicate that the 4th guy, who was seen on video, left prior to the altercation with the other 3. You're starting to sound like Al Sharpton...just spout stuff off to make sure it sounds like those incompetent white police (even though 60% of the officers at the scene weren't white, but why let statistics interfere with a good racial profiling story, huh?) just shot another black man out of boredom.

I guess you've never tossed a round at the range...must be nice to shoot 100% every time you qualify.

[Jayc6018]

Shame on you...excusing the thug's behavior, which was the proximate cause for him being shot. The police officers reacted to the VERY BAD choices made by the driver.

You ask the question...you answer it: you are out of town, leaving a club and 5 guys in plain clothes walk up to you and identify themselves as police. Do you:
a) Say "F-YOU" and attempt to drive into them with your vehicle
b) Say "prove it" and draw your sidearm just in case they are not cops
or
c) Say "yes sir, how may I help you" and remain polite, calm and when it is appropriate, identify yourself as a police officer from out of town?

By defending the thugs, you are suggesting that A is a completely rational and appropriate response. If you truly believe it is, you have no right being the police.

I'm not excusing anything. If you live in NYC you would know officers really have to walk a thin line when doing their jobs because they are under a very close microscope literally. NYPD officers can tell you this.

[Jayc6018]

All of the news articles indicate that the 4th guy, who was seen on video, left prior to the altercation with the other 3. You're starting to sound like Al Sharpton...just spout stuff off to make sure it sounds like those incompetent white police (even though 60% of the officers at the scene weren't white, but why let statistics interfere with a good racial profiling story, huh?) just shot another black man out of boredom.

I guess you've never tossed a round at the range...must be nice to shoot 100% every time you qualify.

White police? what are you talking about? I'm talking about the shot of those officers INVOVLED this doesn't have **** to do with black and white. I'm familiar with that area is its a very enclosed area, there's no reason bullets should be shattering windows on the airtrain thats about 4 blocks away on an elevated line.

Don't assume what I do stick to what we are discussing.

[Dinosaur32]

Banas....Get over this thing you have about the officers identifying themselves. 1) Every LEO in NYC identifies him/herself before taking action, without fail. And 2) These experienced veteran criminals knew very well that a mixed group of 5 males were the police.

[Jayc6018]

In all the frantic police radio calls made in the first few hours after Sean Bell was killed, one thing was noticeably missing: There was not a single report of a fourth man fleeing the scene.

No warning that someone might be armed, dangerous and on the loose.

No dragnet for the elusive "fourth man."

"There was no 'escaped perp' alert radioed by the cops involved and no Level 1 mobilization by NYPD afterward to find a man with a gun," a law enforcement source who reviewed the radio transmissions told the Daily News.

The source's statement directly contradicts initial reports that police conducted a search in the neighborhood for a fourth man after the shooting.

"I'm not going to speculate about what was in radio transmissions," said Deputy Police Commissioner Paul Browne when asked specifically about that night's radio dispatches. "We're handing over everything from witnesses to the DA's [Queens district attorney's] office."

The law enforcement source who talked to The News also disclosed several new details of the Nov. 25 shooting on Liverpool St.:

# Videotapes obtained by cops from two surveillance cameras at the Port Authority's Jamaica Ave. AirTrain station a half block away from the shooting site reveal that one of the bullets fired by the five cops narrowly missed striking a civilian and two Port Authority patrolmen who were standing on the station's elevated platform.

# None of the members of the surveillance team that was backing up the undercover cops in the Kalua Cabaret that night was wearing an NYPD raid jacket, and none of the three cars used by the nine-member team was equipped with a portable police light that could alert civilians they were police.

# Because of a communication foulup, a female detective and a female investigator who were part of the backup team and parked on 95th Ave. - a block from the shooting - had no idea the other members of the team had moved in to make an arrest. After the shots erupted, the two female cops received a cell phone call from another team member that the shots involved their team.

The female team members radioed a "10-13" [assist officer] call on their police radio, but they could not tell dispatchers their exact street location. They then raced to Liverpool St. by such a roundabout route that Internal Affairs investigators have dubbed theirs the "useless" car.

The firing of so many shots at Bell and his companions - all of them unarmed - immediately sparked a firestorm of questions. Black and Latino leaders were enraged by the dragnet that has swept southeast Queens ever since police investigators focused on an alleged fourth man.

Top NYPD officials have repeatedly said such a mystery man was seen getting into or out of Bell's car near the Kalua Cabaret and may have been armed. They say witnesses saw the man run from the scene after the shooting started.

In the week after the tragic incident, Queens cops conducted raids and arrests of several of Bell's friends, all on unrelated charges. They also detained for questioning several men who attended the bachelor party for Bell that night at the club. In each case, police grilled the men about Bell and the alleged fourth man.

If there was a fourth man with a gun, it would certainly bolster the claims of the five cops that they were justified in firing so many shots.

Trent Benefield and Joseph Guzman, the wounded friends of Bell that survived, told investigators from the district attorney's office last week that there was no fourth man in or near their car.

Charlie King, an attorney for five civilian witnesses to the shooting, two of whom were picked up by police, called the police dragnet an attempt to intimidate his witnesses, all of whom had already agreed to talk to prosecutors.

One piece of interesting evidence - while not critical to the probe - is the video made at the AirTrain station.

On one tape, a copy of which The News has reviewed, a glass window explodes and the bullet's trail can be seen whizzing past the head of a man as he walks along the platform dragging a suitcase. The startled passenger drops his luggage and runs down the platform in terror.

Another tape shows the two PA cops, who were standing near the passenger, dash for cover as soon as the glass shatters. One cop suddenly slips and falls hard to the ground. Meanwhile another uniformed man on the platform wearing a TSA (Transportation Security Administration) jacket is standing cool as a cucumber, trying to figure out where the shot came from.

Originally published on December 11, 2006


http://www.nydailynews.com/news/col/story/479392p-403182c.html

[Sabre]

On one tape, a copy of which The News has reviewed, a glass window explodes and the bullet's trail can be seen (emphasis mine)

Ya, I'm calling BS on that one.

[firemanjb]

I'm not excusing anything. If you live in NYC you would know officers really have to walk a thin line when doing their jobs because they are under a very close microscope literally. NYPD officers can tell you this.

Do you read what you write? Yes, you DID excuse the thug:
I mean come on guys really, had an person in regular cloths come up to you with their guns draw what would you do and identified himself as a police officer? Given the fact that you have tons of police impersonators out there doing b.s and making the problem worst for cops.
...
Quite a few undercover officers of the NYPD admitted this guy broke departmental rules for undercovers and the officer who fired 31 shots admitting in the press without even knowing he did.

"They said that as an undercover when your going to confront a threat the FIRST thing you should do is take cover, whether it be behind car, pole, building etc so the officers can assess the situation on whether to take further action in the event their are shots being fired at them."

And of course shooting at a moving vehicle.

I'm not calling these cop murders which they are not but are they MAJOR f**k ups in this situation? You bet and its unfortunate that these guys are going to lose their jobs.
"C'mon guys, really?" "They are MAJOR f**k ups?" Those are your words, not mine. You justify the thug assaulting the officers and blame the officers. Shame on you.

[firemanjb]

White police? what are you talking about? I'm talking about the shot of those officers INVOVLED this doesn't have **** to do with black and white. I'm familiar with that area is its a very enclosed area, there's no reason bullets should be shattering windows on the airtrain thats about 4 blocks away on an elevated line.

Don't assume what I do stick to what we are discussing.

Nice to see you state this isn't a racial issue. Too bad Al doesn't see it the same way.

Obviously, there is a straight line from somewhere on Liverpool to the rail line. "No reason" bullets should miss their targets? Enjoying the ride on your horse?

[Jayc6018]

Do you read what you write? Yes, you DID excuse the thug:

"C'mon guys, really?" "They are MAJOR f**k ups?" Those are your words, not mine. You justify the thug assaulting the officers and blame the officers. Shame on you.

When I said they are major **** ups yes they didn't follow department proceedure. NYPD guidelines clearly state you can't fire at a moving vehicle no matter if its being used as a weapon because they don't want liability if bullets hit an innocent bystander. The NYPD is going to use that to fire those officers you can bet that. So as I stated I didn't excuse any thugs I think you need to learn reading comprehension, I certainly didn't imply that I excused them either. Nice try!!!!

You really don't know the NYPD do you? they will hang your *** out to dry in a NY minute

[firemanjb]

When I said they are major **** ups yes they didn't follow department proceedure. NYPD guidelines clearly state you can't fire at a moving vehicle no matter if its being used as a weapon because they don't want liability if bullets hit an innocent bystander. The NYPD is going to use that to fire those officers you can bet that. So as I stated I didn't excuse any thugs I think you need to learn reading comprehension, I certainly didn't imply that I excused them either. Nice try!!!!

You really don't know the NYPD do you? they will hang your *** out to dry in a NY minute

So, if you weren't excusing the thug, then why come up with the excuse that the officers were in plain clothes and sometimes there are imposters out there?

Our general order, too, bans shooting at a vehicle. It states that the preferred response to a vehicular assault is to move out of the way. However, if that is not an option, then a man must do what a man must do.

And, duh...no, I don't know NYPD. I don't work there, haven't claimed to work there, don't want to work there, and don't know anyone who works there. My loss? Maybe...but I am sure the brothers there appreciate you slamming those guys.

[Jayc6018]

So, if you weren't excusing the thug, then why come up with the excuse that the officers were in plain clothes and sometimes there are imposters out there?

Our general order, too, bans shooting at a vehicle. It states that the preferred response to a vehicular assault is to move out of the way. However, if that is not an option, then a man must do what a man must do.

And, duh...no, I don't know NYPD. I don't work there, haven't claimed to work there, don't want to work there, and don't know anyone who works there. My loss? Maybe...but I am sure the brothers there appreciate you slamming those guys.


NYC has a big problem with police impersonators especially those wack jobs who buy retired police vehicles to drive around in pulling people over and robbing them.

And I'm not slamming those guys, ask yourself why is it with most agencies you can lateral into another but you can't lateral into the NYPD nor will another agency allow u to lateral into their agency coming from the NYPD.

But whatever this is a mute issue.

[firemanjb]

NYC has a big problem with police impersonators especially those wack jobs who buy retired police vehicles to drive around in pulling people over and robbing them.

And I'm not slamming those guys, ask yourself why is it with most agencies you can lateral into another but you can't lateral into the NYPD nor will another agency allow u to lateral into their agency coming from the NYPD.

But whatever this is a mute issue.
1. It happens everywhere...it's not an excuse to disregard the real police, though.
2. I didn't know NYPD doesn't allow laterals, but I don't know if that's rare. My agency doesn't allow laterals and neither do the state police (although they occasionally will run an "abbreviated academy" of 11 weeks for prior police).

[Chief Wiggum]

I read/heard that the cops opened fire and identified themselves at the same time. If that is the case, they had their guns drawn BEFORE they identified themselves, which fits my scenario.

Please post where you read/heard this. I'd love to read/hear it myself. In other words I'm calling bull$h!t.

[FarnoNYPD914]

YOUR A TEACHER BUDDY YOU DONT KNOW WHAT KINDA CRAP THESE BRAVE COPS HAVE TO PUT UP WITH ALL DAY!!! I AM NOT A COP AND I SUPPORT THESE POLICE OFFICERS WITH ALL I HAVE > THEY DID NOTHING WRONG!! THE REAL CRIMINALS ARE ALL THOSE GUYS IN THE CAR INCLUDING SEAN BELL. THIS WAS A JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDE. ALL THOSE CROOKS IN THE CAR HAD PRIORS INCLUDING ARMED ROBBERY/ DRUG CHARGES. THESE ARE NOT YOUR REGUALR LAW ABIDING CITIZENS! THESE GUYS IN THE CAR INCLUDING SEAN BELL ARE NOT INNOCENT OF ANYTHING AND GOT WHAT THEY DESERVED! A FEW LESS CROOKS OFF THE STREETS IS THE WAY I SEE IT!

[Dinosaur32]

Jay.....Where did you get your info on the big problem of police impersonators in NYC? What are the stats? I think if you research this alleged problem, you will find it is nothing more than a smoke screen set off by the anti-cop press and the Sharpton crowd.

In New York State, the larger Police and Peace Officer Departments have their own training programa approved by the State. These programs do not always adhere to the exact standards set forth by the State but they are approved. These departments maintain the standards necessary to perform law enforcement duties in their jurisdictions and demand that you complete their academy before being allowed to work.

[Jayc6018]

YOUR A TEACHER BUDDY YOU DONT KNOW WHAT KINDA CRAP THESE BRAVE COPS HAVE TO PUT UP WITH ALL DAY!!! I AM NOT A COP AND I SUPPORT THESE POLICE OFFICERS WITH ALL I HAVE > THEY DID NOTHING WRONG!! THE REAL CRIMINALS ARE ALL THOSE GUYS IN THE CAR INCLUDING SEAN BELL. THIS WAS A JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDE. ALL THOSE CROOKS IN THE CAR HAD PRIORS INCLUDING ARMED ROBBERY/ DRUG CHARGES. THESE ARE NOT YOUR REGUALR LAW ABIDING CITIZENS! THESE GUYS IN THE CAR INCLUDING SEAN BELL ARE NOT INNOCENT OF ANYTHING AND GOT WHAT THEY DESERVED! A FEW LESS CROOKS OFF THE STREETS IS THE WAY I SEE IT!


hahahah and your irrevelant, but glad to know you quote my profile as if it means something. You don't know whether im a teacher or a cop hell I could be both but I'll let you keep beating yourself in the head to figure it out. Now go kick rocks and read books to better your lack of knowledge.

[Jayc6018]

Jay.....Where did you get your info on the big problem of police impersonators in NYC? What are the stats? I think if you research this alleged problem, you will find it is nothing more than a smoke screen set off by the anti-cop press and the Sharpton crowd.

In New York State, the larger Police and Peace Officer Departments have their own training programa approved by the State. These programs do not always adhere to the exact standards set forth by the State but they are approved. These departments maintain the standards necessary to perform law enforcement duties in their jurisdictions and demand that you complete their academy before being allowed to work.

Dino not all police impersonations are reported to media. LI, Westcher county for sure has it but for the most part its just nut jobs driving around in retired cruisers and sometimes with aftermarket strob lights. You'd be suprised.

[scratch13]

hahahah and your irrevelant, but glad to know you quote my profile as if it means something. You don't know whether im a teacher or a cop hell I could be both but I'll let you keep beating yourself in the head to figure it out. Now go kick rocks and read books to better your lack of knowledge.

If your word isn't good by YOUR OWN ACCOUNT, then who should listen to you at all???????????? :rolleyes:

[Jayc6018]

If your word isn't good by YOUR OWN ACCOUNT, then who should listen to you at all???????????? :rolleyes:

Hey numbskull this is a message board 1st, 2nd personal info need not be revealed, 3rd Opinions are like *******s everybody has one. So your point is mute

You don't have you listen to me I could careless but it seems to be a elementary type pattern with some of the people on here when they get their feelings hurt to resort to looking in your profile to see what you do for a living :D some of you guys are way to predictable and way to sensitive, a bunch of girlie men if you ask me.

[FarnoNYPD914]

Hey numbskull this is a message board 1st, 2nd personal info need not be revealed, 3rd Opinions are like *******s everybody has one. So your point is mute

You don't have you listen to me I could careless but it seems to be a elementary type pattern with some of the people on here when they get their feelings hurt to resort to looking in your profile to see what you do for a living :D some of you guys are way to predictable and way to sensitive, a bunch of girlie men if you ask me.



WOW sounds like someone is mad! dont cry we all know your NOT a cop and your a worthless 2nd grade teacher lol

[Dinosaur32]

Farno.....You need to relax a bit.....Yes, Jay is not a cop.....so what? Most of his posts are decently written and thought out. I do not always agree with his positions but he is free to hold them. There are many non-LEO posters on this site who add to the discussions. Personal affronts are not necessary. State your answer or position and move on.

[FarnoNYPD914]

Farno.....You need to relax a bit.....Yes, Jay is not a cop.....so what? Most of posts are decently written and tought out. I do not always agree with his positions but he is free to hold them. There are many non-LEO posters on this site who add to the discussions. Personal affronts are not necessary. State your answer or position and move on.



Hey Dinosaur32 its good to see this guy brought his lawyer how much does pay u??lol thats exactly what i do i state my position and move on.Just like he is "free to hold his positions" so am i. Lets not get hypocritical and go over what we have typed before we post ok?GREAT! Your doing exactly what your tryin to tell me NOT to do. I think you should follow your own advice and MOVE ON.. TOODLES

[scratch13]

Hey numbskull this is a message board 1st, 2nd personal info need not be revealed, 3rd Opinions are like *******s everybody has one. So your point is mute

You don't have you listen to me I could careless but it seems to be a elementary type pattern with some of the people on here when they get their feelings hurt to resort to looking in your profile to see what you do for a living :D some of you guys are way to predictable and way to sensitive, a bunch of girlie men if you ask me.

Great thoughts, JazyJAY! :rolleyes: Add to the discussion, why don't ya?!?!?

[scratch13]

Farno.....You need to relax a bit.....Yes, Jay is not a cop.....so what? Most of posts are decently written and tought out. I do not always agree with his positions but he is free to hold them. There are many non-LEO posters on this site who add to the discussions. Personal affronts are not necessary. State your answer or position and move on.

I do have a problem with someone LYING about who they are or what they do. If he didn't want to let anyone know what he did for a living, he should have kept it general or not listed anything.

Oh, and the bolded part?!?!?!? Did you READ his (or "hers" - I don't want to assume anything) last post? Well thought out? Sure ..... :rolleyes:

[Dinosaur32]

Scratch.....As I wrote, MOST of Jay's posts are thought through. I also wrote that I disagree with a number of his positions in this and other threads. For example, I strongly disagree with Jay's statement about police impersonators in NYC. But there is no need for 25 year old non-LEO to go off like Farno did on another non-LEO. They both have access to about the same type and amount of info as the other.

Heated discussions are good for intellectual growth, but let's keep them heated, not insulting.

[Jayc6018]

Scratch.....As I wrote, MOST of Jay's posts are thought through. I also wrote that I disagree with a number of his positions in this and other threads. For example, I strongly disagree with Jay's statement about police impersonators in NYC. But there is no need for 25 year old non-LEO to go off like Farno did on another non-LEO. They both have access to about the same type and amount of info as the other.

Heated discussions are good for intellectual growth, but let's keep them heated, not insulting.

He already proved what he really is, he's lookin for attention. Like I said he's trying to gain some sort of brownie points from whom I have no idea but let him keep looking like the *** he is, he will eventually hang himself.

[Jayc6018]

I do have a problem with someone LYING about who they are or what they do. If he didn't want to let anyone know what he did for a living, he should have kept it general or not listed anything.

Oh, and the bolded part?!?!?!? Did you READ his (or "hers" - I don't want to assume anything) last post? Well thought out? Sure ..... :rolleyes:

So I'm lying now itch? I could have put I'm a weed wacker in my profile, it doesn't have shyt to do with what we discuss.

Like I said you punks are a bunch of whinning babies and almost ALWAYS result to insults of another. It goes on here all the time and you are no different.

[firemanjb]

Dino not all police impersonations are reported to media. LI, Westcher county for sure has it but for the most part its just nut jobs driving around in retired cruisers and sometimes with aftermarket strob lights. You'd be suprised.

Umm, weren't you the one who was arguing on a different board that we needed FACTS, not stories, to have a rational discussion? So...where are the FACTS. How many police cruisers have been converted into wacker-job look alikes? How many people in NYC have been pulled over by fake cops?

You can't have it both ways...demand facts when you don't like the answer and spout stories when you don't like the result.

[firemanjb]

Hey numbskull this is a message board 1st, 2nd personal info need not be revealed, 3rd Opinions are like *******s everybody has one. So your point is mute

You don't have you listen to me I could careless but it seems to be a elementary type pattern with some of the people on here when they get their feelings hurt to resort to looking in your profile to see what you do for a living :D some of you guys are way to predictable and way to sensitive, a bunch of girlie men if you ask me.

First, since you have done it several times, I can no longer write it off as a typo: "mute" means "silent"; "moot" means "irrelevant."

Second, you're the one who dodges and is way too predicatable. You claim to be a teacher, but deny you may be, unless it's possible you could be. :rolleyes: Of course, if anyone asks about it, their feelings must be hurt. I ask if you ever toss a round at the range, since you were so eager to attack the shooting accuracy of the officers in NYC, yet you just say "don't assume what I do." Why not admit you haven't been to the range to do a qualification?

You're the one who is predicatable.

[scratch13]

So I'm lying now itch? I could have put I'm a weed wacker in my profile, it doesn't have shyt to do with what we discuss.

Like I said you punks are a bunch of whinning babies and almost ALWAYS result to insults of another. It goes on here all the time and you are no different.

It has EVERYTHING to do with it. :rolleyes: We are talking about deadly force issues which MOST civilians have no idea about. No idea of the rules of engagement. None, most of them.

As a "teacher" :rolleyes: , you would have problems with a garbageman telling you the best way to teach math.

And yes, if you state that you are a teacher in your profile and you are not a teacher, then that is a LIE. A "student" in your "classroom" would know that little fact. :rolleyes:

[Jayc6018]

It has EVERYTHING to do with it. :rolleyes: We are talking about deadly force issues which MOST civilians have no idea about. No idea of the rules of engagement. None, most of them.

As a "teacher" :rolleyes: , you would have problems with a garbageman telling you the best way to teach math.

And yes, if you state that you are a teacher in your profile and you are not a teacher, then that is a LIE. A "student" in your "classroom" would know that little fact. :rolleyes:

This is the internet and this is a message board get over it dumb ***

[FarnoNYPD914]

This is the internet and this is a message board get over it dumb ***




I THINK THAT YOU NEED TO GET OVER IT YOU MORON!! SCRATCH KNOWS WHAT HES TALKIN ABOUT IT

[scratch13]

This is the internet and this is a message board get over it dumb ***

This is the internet and this is a message board ....... add to it in a constructive way or go somewhere else.

[irishcop364]

I don't know about NYC, but we've had a couple of police impersonations on Long Island. Generally the persons responsible for the commission of this crime were people who had similar criminal records to that of Mr. Bell. I wouldn't classify these impersonations as epidemic, like the media would have you believe...not by a longshot! My suggestion for any non-LEO who comes into contact with an undercover cop, whether or not he reasonably believes him to in fact be a cop is simple. COMPLY with his commands. If he has a gun and he turns out to be a cop, you'll both have a much easier time in dealing with the situation. If he is not in fact a cop, he still has a gun and you more than likely do not, so you're probably getting robbed. BUT, even if you are robbed, you'll more than likely live to tell about it. It's not worth resisting an armed person.