admittedly, the driver had just killed an officer earlier in the day.
http://miami.cbslocal.com/2014/05/06/police-shooting-frenzy-raises-concerns/
http://miami.cbslocal.com/2014/05/06/police-shooting-frenzy-raises-concerns/
23 cops fired 377 rounds at two unarmed men inside a vehicle.
- Thread starter eznutz
- Start date
"Bullets were sprayed everywhere. They hit the Volvo, other cars in the lot, fence posts and neighboring businesses. They blasted holes in a townhouse where a 12-year-old dove to the ground for cover and a four month old slept in his crib."
I was stopped at a road block with my brother on spring break in Florida. We had the unfortunate luck of driving the same make, model and year of the armed suspects they were looking for. We were surrounded by a shit load of cops with all there guns trained on us. I told my younger brother not to reach for anything - just keep hands up where they could see them. It seemed like eternity until they actually approached the car and talked to us but I swear - if a car backfired or someone farted in those initial seconds- we would have been toast.
I was stopped at a road block with my brother on spring break in Florida. We had the unfortunate luck of driving the same make, model and year of the armed suspects they were looking for. We were surrounded by a shit load of cops with all there guns trained on us. I told my younger brother not to reach for anything - just keep hands up where they could see them. It seemed like eternity until they actually approached the car and talked to us but I swear - if a car backfired or someone farted in those initial seconds- we would have been toast.
It has begun gentlemen. But isn't it interesting that these outragious situations happen in States that have no gun control.
It really isn't the number of rounds the police fired, the real question is what were the reasons why they opened fire at the car not just once but twice.
There are situations where each officer firing fifty rounds would be justified and others where each officer firing but a single round would be unjustified.
There are situations where each officer firing fifty rounds would be justified and others where each officer firing but a single round would be unjustified.
Getting back to my original post. Its because, they were worried the suspects were arrmed. and the the fact, that they had wounded or killed one of their own!!
You've got it all wrong.
If that 12 year old boy in the townhouse had a fully automatic weapon he could have defended himself and the baby.
I hear that the gun lobby is working on models for toddlers but until they get the weapons to work for kids that can't make a fist we'll just have to do with giving the 12 year olds automatic weapons.
Well after the first hundred rounds with no one firing back you think they may have stopped
Gun control (for the public) has nothing to do with it. Police in the US are not subject to public gun control, any more than they are in Canada. A cop can 'accidentally' shoot you and get away with it if he had reasonable cause to draw his weapon. Arresting you when he thinks you are armed and dangerous (because he is arresting the wrong person) is sufficient cause to draw his weapon; if he accidentally shoots you because he had it pointed at you and he pulls the trigger by mistake because he couldn't feel the trigger properly because he was wearing gloves: just too bad for you and he gets off no problem.
Police in the US are extremely dangerous when they are looking for a cop killer. When they think they found him, they will execute him under the pretext that he was resisting arrest and was armed and dangerous: hence the hail of bullets. A bunch of officers shooting a couple of hundred rounds at a cop killer suspect is not unprecedented. Too bad if they got the wrong person because the car looked the same. Happened to a couple of ladies early in the morning delivering newspapers in a pick-up truck; they survived, but the police dept refused to pay compensation, other than to buy them a new vehicle.
Automatic weapons are prohibited in most states. In a few states it requires a special permit that takes a minimum of 6 months to get.
More and more police departments now equip squad cars with a fully automatic AR-15 in the squad car.
Teaching a 12 year old how to use firearms promotes gun safety and responsibility.
Teaching a 12 year old how to use firearms promotes gun safety and responsibility.[/QUOTE]
- this? Ya ok Wilbur!
- this? Ya ok Wilbur!
But of course !
Then the 12 year old in question will only 'hit' the fellow classmates/teachers intended and it should lead to a reduced unintended death rate.
I cannot almost hear CNN now ... "There has been a mass shooting at another US school. ... 24 DEAD !"
Where it could have been ... "There has been a mass shooting at another US school. ... 54 DEAD !"
The level of gun violence in the US has nothing to do with gun control laws. Other nations with much laxer laws have less crime, and some with stricter laws have more.
Compare Sweden (private ownership of automatic weapons) to mexico (strict controls on gun ownership) and the real causes stand out like a sore thumb: mexico suffers from poverty and gang violence, Sweden does not.
The reason why the US has a crime rate more like mexico than Sweden has to do with demographics and economic factors. Unlike Sweden or a Canada, the US has almost no social safety net, a lot of poverty, and big problems with gang violence.
It is the income disparity, not the gun laws, that make the US so different.
Until about the seventies Canada had lax gun laws with private ownership of automatic firearms, etc, and we STILL had much less gun violence than the US.
Compare Sweden (private ownership of automatic weapons) to mexico (strict controls on gun ownership) and the real causes stand out like a sore thumb: mexico suffers from poverty and gang violence, Sweden does not.
The reason why the US has a crime rate more like mexico than Sweden has to do with demographics and economic factors. Unlike Sweden or a Canada, the US has almost no social safety net, a lot of poverty, and big problems with gang violence.
It is the income disparity, not the gun laws, that make the US so different.
Until about the seventies Canada had lax gun laws with private ownership of automatic firearms, etc, and we STILL had much less gun violence than the US.
^ Blame it on the Dutch.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/02/AR2006090201097.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/02/AR2006090201097.html
Teaching marksmanship and gun safety to youth doesn't mean you abandon parent responsibility, and doesn't mean you give them access to a firearm. It doesn't eliminate good parenting. It teaches responsibility, and that includes respect for other people. It also gives youth a reality check with respect to gun violence in movies and TV shows: it reduces stereotypes about guns because reality is far far different than what they see in the movies.
It is true that the rate of violence in the US is much higher than in most countries (but not all). Nothing to do with guns specifically, because they also lead using other tools to kill themselves. One other reason is that the US had democracy before they had the rule of law, so there is a tradition of settling their scores privately first, rather than go to the authorities. In Europe, they had the rule of law before democracy, so they defer to the state (call the cops). In other words, the US has a more violent society because of that, and other factors.
One big factor diferent than other countries is gang crime in the big cities. If you exclude gun violence related to gang crime in the US, middle America is not that different than Canada, on a per capita basis.
The problem in these "group of cops open fire" situations is that if:
(a) you hear gunfire, and
(b) your cop/buddy/partner is shooting,
then the temptation to open fire is overwhelming.
Also, once the firing starts, the temptation to keep firing is overwhelming. The volume of noise generated by gunfire is huge. The kinetic energy of the impacting bullets guarantees the suspect will move. It is often the scariest situation that the police officers involved have ever been in. Given the noise and activity and panic, everyone just keeps shooting.
Eventually the officers run out of ammo and calm down ...
(a) you hear gunfire, and
(b) your cop/buddy/partner is shooting,
then the temptation to open fire is overwhelming.
Also, once the firing starts, the temptation to keep firing is overwhelming. The volume of noise generated by gunfire is huge. The kinetic energy of the impacting bullets guarantees the suspect will move. It is often the scariest situation that the police officers involved have ever been in. Given the noise and activity and panic, everyone just keeps shooting.
Eventually the officers run out of ammo and calm down ...
Well..some cops got their ear drums ruptured and injured in cross fire. So they will be claiming PSTD/emotional damage/psychological damage and what not...and then they will have more time to think about how consenting adults should behave in their private lives behind closed doors. Pigs come to mind.!
