the nypd has done it again, shooting unarmed men. what do you think?

Answer 1

I think I will wait until the facts are all in.

Answer 2

that's nevertheless too early to inform, yet i believe even as each and every of the information are in it is going to likely be shown that the guy who became shot confirmed violent intentions; he became probable performing like an fool and the officials idea he had a weapon. No cop needs to shoot an possibility free or unarmed human being, yet by a similar token no cop needs to take a danger and be killed because they were annoying about what untrained human beings contained in the typical public would imagine in the adventure that they ought to shoot someone. that's life and demise available on the streets once you're donning a uniform and a badge, and also you would possibly want to assume that everybody you come back throughout the time of has the flexibility to kill you or damage you badly. police officials do not receives a fee adequate to be stupid, sluggish or overly trusting even as their butt is on the line, and police officials manage those circumstances day in and outing. in case you imagine you could do extra useful then, by all ability, step up placed on a uniform and educate something else human beings how the interest should be finished. there is continually room for one extra idealist in a squad motor vehicle.

Answer 3

"Has done it again"? 1st the facts on the case are not all there. Secondly, if there was anyone out there with a ratio of doing their job to "doing it again" as good as that of the NYPD, I would hire them in a heartbeat.

Seriously, I don't know why people like yourself can not understand that their job is putting themselves in danger in EVERY situation they are in. They have no idea who has a gun, who doesn't, and don't have X-Ray vision.

I suggest you read the report in last year's NY Times that showed that the NYPD was fired upon three times as much as they fired shots.

These guys are heros, bottom line. Sure there are bad apples in there, and mistakes made, but that can be said of any profession. Again.. The facts are not out there yet, so right now I think you are following Al Sharpton's rally cry more than anything else.

Answer 4

I think you are, like the liberal leftist extremist media, telling only a fraction of the story in order to deceive.

You neglect to state that one of the subjects involved in the altercation before the Officers were assaulted with a 3000 pound weapon displayed a gun inside the night club.

You neglect to state that the driver who assaluted the Officers with a 3000 pound weapon stated he was going to shoot another person before he got in his car.

You neglect to state that the 'unarmed' driver assaulted two Officers with the 3000 pound weapon he was driving.

You neglected to state that the club was well known for gang activity, drugs, prostitution, and weapons violations.

You must have went to the same school of logic as the super-bigots jackson and sharpton, who claim that the black Officers were 'racist'.

I suppose if someone ran you over with a car you'd just sit there and say to yourself that you should take no action because he was 'unarmed'.

Liberalism, the mental disorder, strikes again.

Answer 5

Hotbutter...must be what your brain is made of. You must be a Jessie Jackson/Al Sharpton supporter and follower. I tell you what. Go get one of your friends and tell them to drive their car at you. If you don't feel as though you're threatened with iminent death or serious physical injury I'll kiss your rear end. Obviously there was a threat if more than one officer fired. Obviously you and the rest of your liberal comrades would rather we lie down and let your buddies kill us. Sorry, don't have to do it and am not gonna do it. Life is about choices and the young men in that car made a choice. It is unfortunate that the choice they made led to a death but again, the choice was theirs. Don't blame a police officer for doing his job and try getting off the band wagon and maybe wave your own little flag.

Answer 6

By "unarmed" I assume you mean these men were not in possession of a firearm. While this is true, some people would argue that they were armed with a 3,000 pound Nissan. Also, one man supposedly yelled to another man to get his gun. This essentially presents the police with two options: One, they can wait until they actually see a gun and then open fire, risking the deaths of police officers or innocent bystanders. Two, take the man at his word and open fire before he can retrieve the gun, which leads to the present scenario, a horrible tragedy. For the record, I also do not believe race had anything to do with it. The cop who fired first is black.

Answer 7

Lol....in Louisiana, they shot at this guy with a gun 50 times and only hit him with 6 bullets (or some ratio like that....)...I hope NYPD cops have better aim.

Answer 8

un‧armed  [uhn-ahrmd] Pronunciation Key
–adjective
1.without weapons or armor.


They hit a cop with a car. A car is classified as a deadly weapon. Therefore, they weren't unarmed.

Answer 9

You need to tell us which incident you're talking about.

It is unusual for police officers to shoot unarmed men. They may fire if they believe someone is armed (toy gun, etc) or they may fire when YOU consider someone unarmed (charging at them with a car, etc.).

Answer 10

Why don't you stick your head in a bucket of bleach and breath. The knuckle heads used the car as a weapon , if they would have listened they would be partying at the wedding

Answer 11

I think that in this country you are innocent until proven guilty. So I would give the cops the benefit of the doubt.