The fact that he was black had nothing to do with it. They would have shot a white man just the same if he tried to run over a police officer. He was killed as a result from his own actions. (the actions that cop hating CNN doesn't tell you.)
2006-11-30 04:15:11 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Gerty,
It is not the job of NYPD to uphold the 'policy.' It is not a procedure, it is a policy. In Law Enforcement there is a big difference between the two.
One of the most important parts of their job is to protect themselves from a deadly threat. This supercedes any 'policy' that has been set.
2006-11-30 04:40:43 · update #1
I don't know the story but, the only thing we can do is offer support to our law enforcement officers. Many people feel as you do but their voices are unheard. If someone tries to run over an officer, his or her hands must not be tied by PC. Whoever a crimminal is, should be handled as such reguardless of background or income.
2006-11-30 04:21:02 · answer #1 · answered by profile image 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes........ I believe things would have been different. I believe that it is a case of profiling and stereotyping. I understand some of the men killed might have had some sort of trouble with the law in the past. Who hasn't? Ever run a stoplight or stop sign? Ever speed? we all break laws everyday, but that doesn't give reason to riddle a past offender with bullets.
Question: How many of the officers were wearing uniforms? How were men who had been partying for hours to know that they truly WERE police officers and not just some gang trying to rob them? What would you do if you thought it was a gang? How many shots did the officers see or hear being returned from the car they were riddling with bullets?
Come on people. This is not about taking sides here. This is about common sense. Maybe some of the undercover officers were drinking along with the slaughtered men. Was it self-defense?Clearly NO.........they were trying to flee from some people that they may or may-not have known or believed were law officers.
Next question: Was it 1st degree. Answer: NO. It was not pre-meditated, so that excludes that charge. Was it 2nd degree or criminally negligent. YES. Anytime someone that is entrusted to carry weapons as a tool to use as a last resort violates that trust as these officers clearly did. It is criminally negligent. They go through extensive training at great expense to the taxpayers to insure that this type of thing doesn't happen.
It would be the same if a doctor who had finished his training decided to operate on a person using a non-sterile kitchen butter knife. It would be criminally negligent because he had been trained to know better. Lets call a duck a duck here and quit blowing smoke.
2006-11-30 05:46:36 · answer #2 · answered by N Y F D 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, I don't think the actions of the OFFICERS would have been much different.
YES I think the COVERAGE and outrage would have been different... note that the FIRST thing the family of the deceased did was to contact Al Sharpton.
We don't have the FULL report from the police yet, so I can't say if 50+ shots WERE excessive... if the car was still being used as a weapon the officers (in my opinion) were justified to use force until the subject(s) desist or are neutralized.
My LITTLE experience with firearms in anything close to law-enforcement was as a rapid-response-team member aboard three US Navy ships... responding to intruder threats... and it is AMAZING how LITTLE time one has to assess a threat and deal with it. I was "killed" several times during paint-gun training...
I guess it's just the way I was raised... but when a COP tells you to FREEZE... you freeze, and follow his/her every direction !
2006-11-30 04:34:13 · answer #3 · answered by mariner31 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree that there is no evidence yet that race was a factor. But he was not killed as a result of his own actions. He was killed because several police officers violated police policy. You may not like or agree with that policy, but it is their job to uphold it.
From Yahoo news: "Bloomberg also said police appeared to have violated the policy stating that officers cannot shoot at a vehicle being used as a weapon if no other deadly force is involved."
2006-11-30 04:31:48 · answer #4 · answered by Gerty 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I am not sure, i have heard that two of the officers involved were black and one was hispanic. However I feel that 51 shots is very excessive, regardless of the crime. I may not agree with the actions of the criminal but if it comes down to excessive force it should be used in moderation, 51 shots is WAY overboard. one or two shots and that would have killed him or injured him enough to where he would have had to surrender.
2006-11-30 04:21:53 · answer #5 · answered by givelife 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
People are way too eager to blame things on racial issues. The truth is that the guy put himself in a position where he was likely to get killed by police. His race had nothing to do with it. I don't even know why they mention it other than to stir up some news.
2006-11-30 04:18:07 · answer #6 · answered by Average Joe 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Oh wow, I thought the guy was white. I didn't know the victim was Black. I think the reaction would be the same, what happened was messed up and should not have happened.
2006-11-30 04:23:18 · answer #7 · answered by GirlUdontKnow 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋