'Don't Kill' Bill for NY Cops....Shoot them in the Leg Instead

[MotF Bane]

I grew up in New Zealand where hunting is common. I learned to shoot when I was about 10. This doesn't have anything to do with killing human beings.

Oh, New Zealand. Never mind.

 

[lord_emperor]

Until police are robots or wearing power armor a deadly threat should be met with deadly force.

If the criminal dies, it is his own fault for committing a crime while carrying a weapon.

I do think police need more non-lethal options though, since tazers are proving to be not-so-non-lethal.

Where are the net guns, glue cannons and tranquilizer darts?

 

[Fear No Evil]

I grew up in New Zealand where hunting is common. I learned to shoot when I was about 10. This doesn't have anything to do with killing human beings.

Have you shot a handgun? Do you realize how hard it is to hit a target 10 yards away accurately when standing without something to brace against like a bench? After 1 shot your gun is completely off target and you have to re-aim. Your wobble as you stand can cause the shots to be inches off if you are not in a stable shooting position. If you squeeze the gun to hard it can cause your shots to be way off, if you anticipate the 'bang' you push your shots off target, if you don't squeeze the trigger smoothly you can move your shots off target. Then do it in rapid fashion under the threat of death. You'll be lucky to even HIT a full human target at close range given those circumstances.

I don't think people realize how difficult it is to shoot accurately with handguns.

 

[Binarycow]

I'm not saying I support or don't support cops killing people or the death penalty or whatever, I'm simply asking how it fits with a small government position? Why don't you want people to defent _themselves_ and leave govt out of it? Seems you pick and choose when you want small governemt and when you want big government as it suits you.

As far as this topic is concerned, I don't really give a flying fuck about the size of the government. It is just down right moronic to require cops or anybody else for that matter to shoot only at the extremities of an ARMED suspect.

How about when cops show up and tell somebody to do something just FUCKING DO IT AS YOU'RE TOLD! you can always sue their asses later if cops are out of line. Our justice is not perfect but asshole cops usually do get their dates in court.

 

[PrinceofWands]

It's like everyone in government rode the short bus and only made it through the fifth grade.

I'm not sure a truer statement has ever been made in P&N.

 

[waggy]

It's better than them dying.

and you really think this is going to have less innocents getting killed? really?

this is not the movies. when a cop has to shoot its because his or someone else's life is at risk. teh pressure is far greater then at the shooting range. to try to hit a arm or leg is going to cause more stray bullets.

cops are still going to shoot if they have to. no law is going to stop that.

i really am amazed at how naive some are.

 

[spidey07]

Not only that, bullets go through arms and legs. Good jacketed hollow points will have slowed down significantly at exit delivering all their energy to vital organs and nervous system at center mass. It's actually safer to hit in the chest.

 

[child of wonder]

Gotta side with spidey on this one. If a life is in danger, the officer needs to eliminate that threat with deadly force.

 

[nick1985]

Not only that, bullets go through arms and legs. Good jacketed hollow points will have slowed down significantly at exit delivering all their energy to vital organs and nervous system at center mass. It's actually safer to hit in the chest.

Yep. Hollow points will still tear right through an arm or leg. Completely unsafe

 

[waggy]

Not only that, bullets go through arms and legs. Good jacketed hollow points will have slowed down significantly at exit delivering all their energy to vital organs and nervous system at center mass. It's actually safer to hit in the chest.

yeah and that.

really this law is so bad on so many levels

 

[Zebo]

hahahahaaaaahahhaaaaahahaha!

This will never fly. Police need to strike and let these fools experience their no right to self defense utopia for about a month. But like I said this will never happen.

 

[Zebo]

Have you shot a handgun? Do you realize how hard it is to hit a target 10 yards away accurately when standing without something to brace against like a bench? After 1 shot your gun is completely off target and you have to re-aim. Your wobble as you stand can cause the shots to be inches off if you are not in a stable shooting position. If you squeeze the gun to hard it can cause your shots to be way off, if you anticipate the 'bang' you push your shots off target, if you don't squeeze the trigger smoothly you can move your shots off target. Then do it in rapid fashion under the threat of death. You'll be lucky to even HIT a full human target at close range given those circumstances.

I don't think people realize how difficult it is to shoot accurately with handguns.

This. Head shots are for video games and leg shot for movies this tactic never works in RL. Hell, cops I know can barley hit COM at the range with no stress and hunt like shit. I get my limit shortly after sun rises they are still hunting at noon while I'm drinking in the truck. You definitely don't want to cripple them further with leg shots.

 

[Zebo]

wtf. cops don't blow people away for stealing shit.

Sometimes they do.. Supreme court has ruled Cops can shoot unarmed feeling felons in some cases.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_v._Garner

Don't run from the cops.

 

[nobodyknows]

I remember when criminals would sue for loss of income, hospital bills, pain and suffering, etc. when shot and not killed in the commission of a crime. Shoot to kill or don't bother shooting.

 

[Throckmorton]

There are plenty of situations where Tasers don't work very well. They have their uses, but they aren't suitable for a split-second, life or death situation.

Taser bullets, not tasers. It wouldn't be any different than a regular bullet except it would disable the target instead of kill

 

[BoberFett]

Taser bullets, not tasers. It wouldn't be any different than a regular bullet except it would disable the target instead of kill

/facepalm

When you invent such a device, let us know.

 

[CaptainGoodnight]

Taser bullets, not tasers. It wouldn't be any different than a regular bullet except it would disable the target instead of kill

We already have a problem with cops resorting too quickly with their tasers.

 

[spidey07]

/facepalm

When you invent such a device, let us know.

Believe it or not they do have taser bullets now. Looks like a 12 gauge shell. It's meant to cover longer distances and have more force through thick clothing.

 

[cubeless]

this is just coverage for the cops when they can't hit the bad guys where they're aiming... now they can say they were aiming for the arms and legs...

 

[MotF Bane]

Taser bullets, not tasers. It wouldn't be any different than a regular bullet except it would disable the target instead of kill

Set pistols to STUN!

 

[BoberFett]

Believe it or not they do have taser bullets now. Looks like a 12 gauge shell. It's meant to cover longer distances and have more force through thick clothing.

And these taser bullets will be ineffective in situations which require firearms. If a taser was the answer, police already have that option. We're talking about a situation where the threat has been elevated beyond tasers.

 

[Zebo]

Believe it or not they do have taser bullets now. Looks like a 12 gauge shell. It's meant to cover longer distances and have more force through thick clothing.

I'd give the officer zero change vs. a real 12ga full of #1 buck. 10/10 I would kill him first.

This reminds me of those stupid self defense guys disarming another guy pointing a gun at them with a arm sweep. I asked them to try it with live ammo but they never do for some reason. Good in theory not in practice.

 

[Zargon]

I'm not saying I support or don't support cops killing people or the death penalty or whatever, I'm simply asking how it fits with a small government position? Why don't you want people to defent _themselves_ and leave govt out of it? Seems you pick and choose when you want small governemt and when you want big government as it suits you.

I want that

its called Concealed Carry

most states in the USA have it now.

generally though small government positions does include eliminating the police force(its a piece of LOCAL GOVERNMENT) not federal.(except of course the FBI but they arent cops/doing policing)

I guess pro small gov should be against having a non volunteer fire dept too?

 

[spidey07]

And these taser bullets will be ineffective in situations which require firearms. If a taser was the answer, police already have that option. We're talking about a situation where the threat has been elevated beyond tasers.

Absolutely agree. Just saw a show about them and they're pretty cool.

There's a simple rule though, deadly threats can only really be met by deadly force.

 

[Daedalus685]

Absolutely agree. Just saw a show about them and they're pretty cool.

There's a simple rule though, deadly threats can only really be met by deadly force.

That isn't exactly true. It must be met by nearly instant incapacitating force. Right now that is lethal by default (nothing else is nearly fast enough to save the life of an officer)... but as was mentioned earlier there is no reason phasers couldn't be set to stun eventually.

Tasers are not there yet, but who knows what the future will bring. They were made to take up the lower part of the threat escalation occupied by fire arms (obviously they are useless against someone who is well armed, but they are a sound replacement for a gun in some situations... just not as a blanket to lazy), but something that is not lethal may one day take up the rest that is occupied by guns.