White NY cop shoots and kills black NY cop BY ACCIDENT

[Gonad the Barbarian]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05...ml?partner=rss&emc=rss

A New York City police officer who had just gotten off duty was fatally shot late Thursday in East Harlem by a fellow officer who mistook him for an armed criminal, Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly said.

The officer who was killed, Omar J. Edwards, 25, a two-year veteran who was assigned to patrol housing projects and was wearing plain clothes, was shot in the arm and chest after a team of three other plainclothes officers in a car came upon him chasing a man on East 125th Street between First and Second Avenues with his gun drawn, Mr. Kelly said.

The team?s members, assigned to the anticrime unit in the 25th Precinct, got out of their vehicle and confronted Officer Edwards. The police were investigating whether the officers had identified themselves or demanded that Officer Edwards drop his weapon before one of them opened fire.

Mr. Kelly identified the officer who fired the shots only as a four-year veteran of the department, and said he had fired six rounds from his 9-millimeter Glock. Two bullets struck Officer Edwards.

Officer Edwards, a recently married father of two from Brooklyn, was taken to Harlem Hospital Center, where he was pronounced dead at 11:21 p.m. No one else was injured.

First of all, this is tragic. Second, cops have itchy trigger fingers. Third, fingers seem to get even more itchy around black suspects. Fourth, the shooting officer only hits 2 out of six shots putting even more people at risk. Fifth, the two other officers didn't see fit to fire at all.


-------------------------------------------------
Title edited to remove the trolling impression

Senior Anandtech Moderator
Common Courtesy

 

[Moonbeam]

To a hammer everything looks like a nail.

 

[Dari]

Reminds me of The Wire when Prezbo shot and killed a black plainclothes undercover cop.

 

[ProfJohn]

Thread title is to sensationalistic.

This was an accident. Not a white cop shooting a black cop on purpose.

 

[OCGuy]

Way to race bait and jump to conclusions.


Stay classy :thumbsup:

 

[MotF Bane]

Nice thread title. Troll much?

 

[Munky]

Seriously, from the title of the thread you'd think the white cop just puled out a gun and shot a black cop in uniform in some racial hate crime.

 

[techs]

Well, you have to assume a black guy running down the street with a gun is obviously a criminal?

:shocked:

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

My title is absolutely accurate and factual. It's not sensationalistic or misleading in any way.

 

[OCGuy]

:music: Trollin' , Trollin
Trollin down a river :music:

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Thread title is to sensationalistic.

This was an accident. Not a white cop shooting a black cop on purpose.

Uh, the white cop did shoot the black cop on purpose.

I suppose you mean the when the white cop decided to gun down the black man he didn't know that the person happened to be a cop.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Thread title is to sensationalistic.

This was an accident. Not a white cop shooting a black cop on purpose.

Uh, the white cop did shoot the black cop on purpose.

I suppose you mean the when the white cop decided to gun down the black man he didn't know that the person happened to be a cop.

they're trying hard to derail the thread by focusing on the messenger.

 

[Cuda1447]

No, I think they are trying hard to point out that this is NOT A RACE CRIME, despite what the OP wants to make it seem like. This was an accident. From what I gather, the suspect was black, probably looked similar to the cop that got shot. I am by no means defending the cop, they have itchy trigger fingers and fucking suck at their job probably, but I HIGHLY doubt race had anything to do with this. If the cop was white and the suspect was white I would guess the same thing would have happened.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Cuda1447
No, I think they are trying hard to point out that this is NOT A RACE CRIME, despite what the OP wants to make it seem like. This was an accident. From what I gather, the suspect was black, probably looked similar to the cop that got shot. I am by no means defending the cop, they have itchy trigger fingers and fucking suck at their job probably, but I HIGHLY doubt race had anything to do with this. If the cop was white and the suspect was white I would guess the same thing would have happened.

Again it is not an accident. The gun didn't go off on accident, the cop intended to shoot and kill the victim.

You have no idea if the officer shoot because of race issues.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Cuda1447
No, I think they are trying hard to point out that this is NOT A RACE CRIME, despite what the OP wants to make it seem like. This was an accident. From what I gather, the suspect was black, probably looked similar to the cop that got shot. I am by no means defending the cop, they have itchy trigger fingers and fucking suck at their job probably, but I HIGHLY doubt race had anything to do with this. If the cop was white and the suspect was white I would guess the same thing would have happened.

The OP is stating the obvious. How is his title incorrect?

 

[sandorski]

Give it a rest. Title is 100% accurate(assuming it hasn't been changed).

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Look, you guys reading something into my title that's not there, that is on you, not me. It in no way implies a race crime. Nor do my comments in my post. I do however think race was a factor.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
Look, you guys reading something into my title that's not there, that is on you, not me. It in no way implies a race crime. Nor do my comments in my post. I do however think race was a factor.

LOL!


Thats like a white dad saying to his wife: "Hey, did you see little Timmy's new black girlfriend?"

Factually correct, yes. Does it have other motives? I think most people here would say yes.


You put the race of them in there intentionally to get a reaction. Thankfully it looks like most of P&N is smarter than that.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
Look, you guys reading something into my title that's not there, that is on you, not me. It in no way implies a race crime. Nor do my comments in my post. I do however think race was a factor.

Race was a factor in that white cops are inherently wary of young black males running with guns in urban settings. Of course, black cops are also inherently wary of young black males running with guns in urban settings.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
Look, you guys reading something into my title that's not there, that is on you, not me. It in no way implies a race crime. Nor do my comments in my post. I do however think race was a factor.

LOL!


Thats like a white dad saying to his wife: "Hey, did you see little Timmy's new black girlfriend?"

Factually correct, yes. Does it have other motives? I think most people here would say yes.


You put the race of them in there intentionally to get a reaction. Thankfully it looks like most of P&N is smarter than that.

Too much reading between the lines. Paranoia is destructive.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
Look, you guys reading something into my title that's not there, that is on you, not me. It in no way implies a race crime. Nor do my comments in my post. I do however think race was a factor.

LOL!


Thats like a white dad saying to his wife: "Hey, did you see little Timmy's new black girlfriend?"

Factually correct, yes. Does it have other motives? I think most people here would say yes.


You put the race of them in there intentionally to get a reaction. Thankfully it looks like most of P&N is smarter than that.

I put race in the title, because like I said, I think it's relevant. And yeah, you guys are showing just how smart you are.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Too much reading between the lines. Paranoia is destructive.

:roll:


More like too much head in the sand? Or you see the race baiting title, you just feel like debating for the sake of debating?

 

[Cuda1447]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Cuda1447
No, I think they are trying hard to point out that this is NOT A RACE CRIME, despite what the OP wants to make it seem like. This was an accident. From what I gather, the suspect was black, probably looked similar to the cop that got shot. I am by no means defending the cop, they have itchy trigger fingers and fucking suck at their job probably, but I HIGHLY doubt race had anything to do with this. If the cop was white and the suspect was white I would guess the same thing would have happened.

Again it is not an accident. The gun didn't go off on accident, the cop intended to shoot and kill the victim.

You have no idea if the officer shoot because of race issues.

The accident was that he killed the wrong person. That's like saying a car accident isn't an accident because the steering wheel doesn't turn itself into another car.


You're right, I do not know that he didn't shoot this cop because he was a black man he just wanted to kill. But by that same token, you don't know that he did because of those reasons. With that said, to assume either way is silly. You can't just ASSUME everything that involves a white person and a black person is a racist action.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: sandorski

Too much reading between the lines. Paranoia is destructive.

:roll:


More like too much head in the sand? Or you see the race baiting title, you just feel like debating for the sake of debating?

?? Title is 100% accurate. I think you should ask youself those questions, because from where I stand you are describing yourself.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: sandorski

Too much reading between the lines. Paranoia is destructive.

:roll:


More like too much head in the sand? Or you see the race baiting title, you just feel like debating for the sake of debating?

?? Title is 100% accurate. I think you should ask youself those questions, because from where I stand you are describing yourself.

Again, you are debating the accuracy, instead of the implications made by including the race of the parties involved.

Although it pains me to say it, you are not stupid, so dont pretend to be.