Here’s the quote from the cop, from the article in Cheesesteak’s post:
IOW, he’d actually emptied his clip, but thought at the time that he’d fired only 2-3 rounds, and that he thought that his weapon had jammed (when in reality it was now empty). So he inserted another clip in, and proceeded to empty that one as well.
Is anyone reading this differently than I?
In any case, changing clips isn’t a prescription for a jam.
It’s all very tragic, but I agree that the fact that the poor guy was getting married later that day is really poignant, but, in the end, neither here nor there. Nobody outside the car knew that. I go with 3rd shooting vic Trent Benefield’s theory:
Unfortunately, googling “club shooting” gives you plenty of examples worldwide; nightclubs are a risky place to have a fight in, it seems; there were killings in Kentucky, Macon, and Indiana just this month, as well the lower-crime areas of the UK and Canada (three guys were killed in Edmonton on Sunday morning! And one was Sudanese–where’s the marchers?) In September and October we had two cases right in NYC where aggressive morons who were tossed out or got into fights stalked out, threatening to get their guns and come back for revenge–and they did.
Therefore, while not defending the cops, I can understand why if one hears a guy stomping out after a fight in a sleazy club say he’s going to get a gun, that cop has reason to take it damn seriously.
In fact, the guy alleged to have said that, Joseph Guzman, seems to me to be the key to the whole thing in many ways. Of course, his family is busy polishing his halo, but the guy has a violent past and has used guns before. The nightclub cop found his statement compelling enough to follow him to see what was going on, and I think the cop who was hit by the van thought he saw Guzman reaching for a gun (although he wasn’t, of course).
Now, the cop apparently did break procedure by leaving the club and maybe he/she totally hallucinated what Guzman said, but I don’t know. Somebody with Guzman’s past can easily assume the mean bastard pose and make other people believe it, even if he has no intention of carrying out a threat. The pose is all he needs. Unfortunately, this time it seems to have gotten an innocent man killed.
As for Sharpton, he’s a complex guy but he’s spending too much time blowing on embers for me. You can argue that the passion he stirs are harmless, but I don’t think the poor Aussie Yankel Rosenbaum would agree.
My reading of it makes me think he thought it was jammed, then realized it was just empty, then reloaded.
He as much as admits that he realized he emptied the first clip after the fact, if he was really trying to cover his ass I think he would have said something else.
Nice article, it really pointed out how Sharpton started the Riot. In fact I love the way it specifically mentions everything Al Sharpton did leading up to the Riot.
:rolleyes: Oh wait, it did not make a single mention of Al Sharpton.
Nice Cite!
Jim
No, he wasn’t in on this one, but do you really think his common practice of “run to the cameras and yell” didn’t influence that guy Charles Price?
Influenced, Yes. Caused, No.
Fair enough. Sorry for the bad analogy.
Guzman apparently has a fiercely protective sister who is not allowing detectives to question him. I can’t totally blame her, but if he doesn’t speak up his role will be defined before he has a chance to tell the truth.
The things that ring loudly in this case are;
Wildly firing at a car on a crowded street is damned stupid.
The NYPD policy of not firing at a car that is trying to run you over is also damned stupid.
It is possible that Officer Oliver thought he only fired a couple rounds before the click came, and then reloaded. It takes no time at all, especially with muscle memory, to drop a clip, reload, and continue firing. (ExTank my WAG on this deal is that he thought he had a misfeed, dealt with it the fastest way he could, by dropping the presumably full mag after the tap/rack/bang attempt and slapping another one in)
All of the officers on that particular scene COMPLETELY lost situational awareness. If you’re on the street, in an undercover position, presumably you’ve been through specialized training (in most cases that’s true, but not in all) to help you re-gain that awareness if ever you lose it.
Yep. Agreed.
Oh, Farrakhan’s an asshole, to be sure. The reason I think he garners support from some segments of black America, though, is that, for one thing, they feel that he speaks the truth with regard to white supremacy. As much as it pains me to agree with anything he says, I *sometimes * think he’s right in this regard, depending on what the issue is. Obviously–well, maybe not obviously, since you don’t know me–I’m opposed to his anti-Jewish bias, his homophobia, and his sexism. I had to crack up when he claimed a few years ago that black gay men become gay while in prison! Believe it or not, though, there are people who *actually * believe this! Dumbasses.
The other thing about him is that, because he’s so roundly decried by whites, he can “instruct” blacks on matters of morality without being tainted by the accusation that he’s trying to curry favor with white America. And though I’m socially liberal, I actually agree with some of what he says in this regard: don’t have children (especially multiple children) out of wedlock (or, for me, if you’re not able to raise and educate them in a stable environment), stop dealing drugs, stop robbing and murdering each other, etc. Basically, stop engaging in behaviors that destroy your own communities. Y’know–common sense kind of shit that should never be categorized as either liberal or conservative to begin with.
But, yeah…I seriously don’t dig the dude. I will say, though, that some of those Nation of Islam guys are hot! (And to think, *I’ve * never even been to prison.) 
I strongly suspect that 1 and 2 are connected. I should think that there are not too many uncrowded streets in New York. Less than 50% of the shots hit the car, let alone the “suspect”, displaying perfectly why 2 is not as stupid as you might think.
How much outrage at alleged police brutality can I sustain in a given news period?
I was leaning towards the side of the cops until I heard the 50 bullets thing. I mean, damn.
And I find it pretty fucking alarming that a cop, who is supposed to be trusted with firearms while the average citizen in NY would be hard pressed to get a pistol permit, can’t hit a car that is close enough to him that he’s afraid of being run over with more than 50% accuracy.
It’s not like he was trying to hit a walnut 100 yards away with a pistol.
As I mentioned upthread, there is a problem. Here is a thread with a bunch of people arguing whether firing 50 shots at an unarmed man was justified. Just like it was deemed ‘justified’ when cops shot 26 bullets at a fucking dog and in the process shot each other!!!.
How about looking into why in the hell within the last 10 years the police of New York City have shoved a broom up a man’s ass, choked a man to death for no reason, shot a guy because he wasn’t a drug dealer, shot a another guy 47 times for reaching for his wallet – plenty more that I remember but cannot find on on-line cite for?
Looking to see if the cops were justified in shooting at the car is, to me, besides the point. There needs to be review all up and down the line. In recruiting-- it’s no secret that those who tend to the sadistic are drawn to police work. We need to see why these types are not being weeded out. Training-- surely you can teach these men to not shoot like crazy motherfuckers whenever they feeled threatened. You are a police man and you are going to be in many, many threatening situations-- you are supposed to be fucking professionals. Continuing Education-- Re-train, teach new techniques, continue to weed out the chokers and the anal rapers.
I’ve noticed I’ve spent a lot of time being outraged in the Pit lately, but-- Holy Fuck people! Reason doesn’t seem to penetrate, it’s only frothing outrage that gets any attention.
I’m with you on most of your rant, but this statement demands a Cite Please?
That is quite a claim if you cannot back it up.
I need a quote that says sadists like to be in position of power? Um, OK, I’ll look.
Please understand, I DO NOT mean that people who want to be policemen tend to be sadists, I’m saying that sadists tend to want to be policemen.
Ok, the second part I will buy without a cite. I read it the other way around. I am sorry.
Jim
Whew! I thought I was gonna have to start googling .edu sites. Man, are those boring!
It was only 41 shots at Amadou Diallo[
] You forgot shot at each other on the E train at the Lexington Ave station (while the armed perp escaped) and served as hit men for the mob.
I have no contention about anything you’ve said so far in this thread, and I have no contention with the snippet I’ve yanked out to comment upon, other than to say that training only takes you so far.
There’s few if any training methods that can realistically simulate a life-or-death situation (even if it’s not really one, but merely perceived to be one). No matter how realistic the training, there’s always that little thought in the back of your mind saying, “it’s only training; it ain’t real.” Theefore, people an pass training with flying colors, and go completely to pieces in a real-life situation.
As such, the most reliable barometer of how someone is going to act in “crunch time” is for them to be “in the shit,” shaking and tweaking on adrenalin overload.
I’m not making excuses for anyone, Biggirl,; I’m really not. I’m just saying that even the best training methods only take you so far. Whether the NYPD is using the best training methods available, I’ll let more knowledgeable law-enforcement Dopers comment on that.
But this incident does make one tend to think that something, somewhere, ain’t right, and is in need of fixing.
I just don’t understand this logic. The same attitude came up in another thread about the cop shooting a guy in a restaraunt parking lot.
The cops are already on site. What good does calling the cops do? If he’s driving a car into them repeatedly, how would it help to have more cops present? If there are three cops standing around with guns, or 1,000 cops standing around with guns, what’s the difference? Either way, they can’t do much except for shoot at the person trying to kill them, or not.
(I’m not saying that this is certainly the case here. We don’t have enough info to go on yet.)
But, I just don’t get this attitude of people who want cops to quietly back away from a bad guy and call the cops. What would this accoplish?