Today, Sean Bell, was supposed to have been married. But instead, this happened. Notice the differences in the way the news organizations are reporting the story.
From the BBC: Police in New York City have killed a man on the morning of his wedding and wounded two others. The groom and two friends were leaving a strip club in Queens on Saturday morning after the groom's bachelor party when police opened fire on them.
From the NY Times: Hours before he was to be married, a man leaving his bachelor party at a strip club in Queens that was under police surveillance was shot and killed early yesterday in a hail of police bullets, witnesses and the police said. Two of his friends were wounded, one critically, they said.
Faux News leads with this: The incident began when a car full of three men rammed into an undercover officer as the group left a bachelor party at the Kalua Cabaret at roughly 4:14 a.m.
Isn't it nice the way they try to make it sound like the driver of the car was purposefully trying to run down a police officer? With that kind of malicious disregard for our precious law enforcement, those drunken thugs deserved what they got, right?
Now, there's an investigation into why in God's name the NYPD felt it necessary to fire more than fifty rounds into his car.
For now, we don't know all the facts. But here are some facts that are certain:
- An unarmed man is dead.
- There are two more orphaned children in New York City.
Saturday, November 25, 2006
You Decide
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
The incident is truly a tragedy, no matter how you view it. IF..., an unmarked police car was rammed, then police had no way of knowing what the intentions were of the occupants. And IF..... some or all of them were armed, then it again changes the dynamics.
The police do have the right to protect themselves. They had no way of knowing if they were going to be rammed again, or shot. 50 shots into a car is not unusual. Many of the bullets are not going to penetrate, some are going to glance off, etc. Their #1 job was to stop that car, #2 was apprehend the alleged suspects so they could do no further harm to the officers.
There's a lot of "if's" there, because I have the feeling we are not hearing nearly the whole story. The club was under surveillance, which meant there was some suspected illegal activity taking place. I also suspect this may have racial overtones, and that always blows the truth all to hell.
What a horrible story!!
FAUX news is beyond redemption. That they have the same standing as other "news" organizations would laughable if so many people didn't actually believe what they report.
This story is sad beyond belief. The vastly different means of disseminating information about it is criminal, a la Faux.
Did you hear about that 90-something-year-old woman who was shot to death by police?
Rev Sharpton said something to the effect that it took them 50 shots before they realized no one was shooting back?
Abuse of power. Police State. I think what Laurie was talking about was the cold blooded murder of a 95 year old woman in Atlanta by the stormtroopers that busted down the door to her home. Unbelievable.
two words: amadou diallo. did you hear about the 90-ish year old woman that was recently shot to death after the undercover cops busted down her door and she fired her legally registered gun, i'm guessing, out of fear that someone was breaking in to hurt her? this pisses me off to no end. there needs to be some better level of training. i also think that cops should have to LIVE where they work, so they aren't all freaked out and on edge.
Amadou Diallo. It took them, what, 40-something shots to kill him, for pulling out his wallet when they approached him on his front porch? This was a murder, an assassination.
Faux News was going to pay off the Brown and Goldman families last week, to keep them from complaining about their OJ Simpson interview specials. They are not a news organization. They should be IGNORED.
You got tagged. See my blog for details. :-)
That is so sad. The investigation is being conducted by? Don't answer that...we know.
Unbeleivable......the ass covering in New York must clipping along at a furious rate. Just friggin wrong
Stories like this one just make my blood boil. It also makes you wonder how many go unreported that we never hear about.
Tragic, absolutely tragic.
You have been tagged.......
http://undeniableliberalism.blogspot.com/2006/11/tagged-6-weird-things.html
I know that I am going to get bashed for inserting some facts, but here I go anyway...lol.
I will say before I begin that not one of us was there, and it is somewhat unfair to judge police actions in the light of day by armchair quarterbacking. When you are ready to change the real world, go to the police academy and strap on the weapon and the badge.
First, two of the NYPD offices were black. The racial overtones thing is largely those who are looking for something to gripe about.
Secondly, it doesn't matter if it was 1 round or fifty. It doesn't matter if the guy was armed or not. The law does not deal with those issues, but instead what the perception of the police officers. ALL of the victims had lengthy criminal records, the car hit an officer not one time, but twice. Aftr the first he backed up and hit another one (or almost, I forgot). The reason that they were following these "gentlemen" in the first place was that one of the officers heard one of them say "Go to the car and get my gun" to another one. The officer followed, and had a badge in plain view around his neck, identified himself as a police officer, and then fired on the car when he was hit.
Police are trained NOT to wound, maim, or any of that nonsense. They are trained to shoot center mast, and continue shooting until the threat is eliminated. That could mean by killing the perp, or it could mean shooting once and getting lucky and the guy rops the weapon. I heard that one officer fired 31 times. That is at least one reload, and might have been uncalled for in the situation.
It is a tragedy, and it should be investigated. But jsut because three people were shot at 50 times does not, in and of itself, reflect something illegal or racial.
One last thing - the woman in Atlanta was killed AFTER she shot 3 police officers. Anyone here care that officers were injured in both of these incidents, or do you view that as acceptable?
Melissa, stop by my new blog, OK? I have a surprise for you. :-)
Hmm - give a man a gun, we all get unhappiness.
Give a woman an organism, we all get happiness.
Pattern developing here I think.
a luego,
S
I dont think its correct that the ;aw does not "deal with that" and that there is no distinction between being armed or not, or how many rounds.
Police are not instructed to shoot to kill an unarmed person. They are supposed to use the least amount of force relative to threat and relative to the context which includes their support, simultaneous threats, etc.
You are wrong on many matters of police protocol and while we all have a right to an opinion, and its true we were not there- the differences in reporting are clear observable facts and hopefully an internal investigation gets to the bottom of it. Gee, unless its a joke investigation aimed at covering up culpability.
Not that THAT would ever happen!
It is extremely important that the police be able to do their jobs, but it is also important that society prioritize justice for everyone. Being a cop is no green light to hold one's self above the law.
I actually came back to get the correct link but could not let that go...
Lily, I must respectfully submit that I am not mistaken at all, and some of your comments are not accurate. I was a police oficer for seven years, and have a graduate degree in Justice and Public Safety. I not only teach at the univerity level, but I train police officers on several issues. I am jsut pointing out that conventional knowledge is not always correct.
Police are instructed to shoot center mast (the widest part of the body) and to continue shooting until the threat is no longer present. They are instructed and trained for many hours in how to defend themselves and others from threats. Unarmed persons are occasionally shot, but what counts is what the officer thought at the time. No one, police or otherwise, are expected to wait until they are shot at to return fire. Go to Findlaw.com, and I challenge you to find a single U.S. Supreme Court case that defines how many rounds and officer is allowed to discharge or where on the body they are allowed to aim.
Police are NOT supposed to use the least amount of force possible. In fact, the law set by the U.S. Supreme Court, and upheld numerous times, is that when one is defending oneself or others, the formula is "Threat + 1." That means that is someone punches me, I can use a baton. If someone has a knife, I can use a gun. If someone has a gun and I am in my car, I can hit them with a car. The Court has held many times that there is no duty to return an equal level of force, that when one is confronted by a life and death issue, on has the right to win the confrontation. If someone has a knife, I could possibly stop them with a baton. However, he court does not expect an officer to take the chance.
For everyone - If you have questions about police protocol in your area, contact the closest police academy. They will be more than happy to answer your questions. in fact, many departments, like mine, run a "Citizen's Academy" or similar title, whereby civilians can attend some police training which usually includes firearms, deadly force, and basic constitutional law as it applies to police officers. I is usually free, and if you are not in law enforcement, can be more addictive than COPS!
Post a Comment