"Legitimate Sacrificial Citizen"?

Fuller Malarkey · May 19, 2013

I'm posting this in "News" as it happened about 24 hours ago.

N.Y. college student was killed by police

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/201...bbery-was-killed-by-police-officials-say?lite

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...hofstra-student-was-killed-by-police/2322929/

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57585185/authorities-n.y-college-student-was-killed-by-police/

At the risk of sounding crass, I delicately ask if is OK to sacrifice a citizen as long as the officer goes home at the end of the shift?

SFCRetired · May 19, 2013

There is no excuse for the taking of an innocent life, whether it be by police or by a private citizen. Had this been a private citizen, he/she would be facing a grand jury indictment, criminal trial, and very probably a long stretch in prison.

shastadude17 · May 19, 2013

As a self described critic of law enforcement, I'm going to refrain from armchair quarterbacking on this one...I wasn't there, it was a tragedy, and it was a truly damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario it sounds like. Very sad all around, and now a family has to live without their loved one, and a law enforcement officer has to live knowing that not only was he forced to take someone's life, but he also took an innocent he was trying to protect in the process. Very sad.

Fuller Malarkey · May 19, 2013

Using this incident as discussion fuel, let's replace the police officer with a legal open carrying citizen.

Had this been a self defense shooting by an open carrier, that carrier shooting an innocent young woman in the head under the guise of self defense because a bad guy made demands of the open carrier, would you be surprised if that open carrier WAS NOT jailed for a homicide charge? Remember, reports indicate the bad guy fired no rounds. 911 KNEW this was a hostage situation BEFORE the cops went in, as did the cops.

How many times have you read on in a forum post by a police officer "no matter what, I'm going home at the end of my shift"? Is this one of those "no matter what" situations?

MAC702 · May 19, 2013

When police do it, it is only collateral damage.

Notice that this was a KNOWN bad guy that was released on parole, and then guess what? He had an arrest warrant out for violating the terms of that parole.

Of course, we all know that it was the gun's fault. A gun he was already not allowed to possess.

But at least we have the moral satisfaction of knowing that the innocent young lady broke no laws. She was an unarmed victim that did her duty to wait for police to come to her aid.

And then the police did their duty of helping society at large, not the victim.

I would like to know which one of the eight bullets struck the victim.

WalkingWolf · May 19, 2013

This is becoming all to common in the Socialist Republic of New York. I wonder when the people of NYS are going to put their foot down and say "enough is enough".

9026543 · May 19, 2013

Fuller Malarkey said:
I'm posting this in "News" as it happened about 24 hours ago.

N.Y. college student was killed by police

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/201...bbery-was-killed-by-police-officials-say?lite

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...hofstra-student-was-killed-by-police/2322929/

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57585185/authorities-n.y-college-student-was-killed-by-police/

At the risk of sounding crass, I delicately ask if is OK to sacrifice a citizen as long as the officer goes home at the end of the shift?

Hell yes it is. Anything for officer safety you know.

rushcreek2 · May 19, 2013

This is a good example of WHY every adult should assume responsibility for their own safety, and the safety of their family - and NOT TOTALLY rely upon a 911 call to " save" them.

When we call 911 for police assistance we relinquish our ability to control the outcome of the situation.

MAC702 · May 19, 2013

rushcreek2 said:
This is a good example of WHY every adult should assume responsibility for their own safety, and the safety of their family - and NOT TOTALLY rely upon a 911 call to " save" them...

And the only reason there was a 911 call was because the bad guy let a girl out to go get money. It was a home invasion and none of them could even call for help until then.

joanie · May 19, 2013

How many times have you read on in a forum post by a police officer "no matter what, I'm going home at the end of my shift"? Is this one of those "no matter what" situations?

So they flip out and start shooting at anything that might possibly be a threat to them. After a time, more and more of what they see in the corse of their duty shift starts looking like a threat. Your children playing in the yard, a school class on a field trip, and you won't see it on the news when a cop walks into a school and starts killing in mass. They'll pick out one of the teachers and say they did it.

skidmark · May 19, 2013

The police are highly trained experts in handling and shooting guns. They actually are tested on a regular periodic basis in order to be allowed to continue carrying their guns.

Unlike mere mortal citizens, who may not even have had to fire a single shot before being issued a license/permit to carry a gun - or even worse, those who "open carry" because they do not even need a license/permit to do that.

I've watched many a "practical shooting" match in which a hostage target was part of the scenario. There are invariably quite a few target pasters on the "no shoot" hostage cardboard. I guess that means that even mere mortals that practice regularly are prone to hitting the wrong target at times.

What I don't understand is why the officer was not using cover that would have both reduced the chance of getting hit if shot at, and providing a stable firing position. All the details are not given, but it sounds to me as if the officer was quite exposed when the BG "menaced him" by pointing the gun towards him. And it sounds like the officer did a full magazine dump once he started shooting.

A hostage situation with the BG holding the gun on the hostage seems to call for instant decapacitation of the BG, which generally means a head shot. One supported, aimed shot to the head, obseerve its effect, and apply an additioonal supported, aimed shot if necessary. If the first shot did not instantly decapacitate the BG is is likely that he would be falling in some manner, which ought to put the hostage further below the point of the first supported, aimed shot. I'm thinking the officer "shot him to the ground" and that the BG's body twisted/turned while going to the ground, putting the hostage in the line of fire.

Without some very specific details to counter my general thoughts, my thinking is the cop was both reckless and negligent.

stay safe.

WalkingWolf · May 19, 2013

skidmark said:
(snip) And it sounds like the officer did a full magazine dump once he started shooting.

Without some very specific details to counter my general thoughts, my thinking is the cop was both reckless and negligent.

stay safe.

Typical ROE for NYS police~~spray and pray. Until the police are held accountable for shooting innocent civilians this will continue, and continue. But hey it is only citizens anyway. I hope this officer is held accountable, but considering it is NYS, I highly doubt it.

While I carried a semi auto as a police officer, I think the change to high capacity weapons for police in general was a huge mistake for the safety of citizens.

eye95 · May 19, 2013

Barring some very specific information that the officer acted criminally or negligently, I give him a pass. The only fault I see so far rests with the criminal.

The story does highlight one reason why we should not be relying solely on the police for our safety. We should be able to rely on ourselves, our family, and our friends. Cowering behind a couch or running screaming from the house did nothing to help save the student. Nor did she seem prepared in the least to protect herself.

As far as I can tell, the cops did what they could. It wasn't good enough.

WalkingWolf · May 19, 2013

Not in my book, the officer is just as responsible for his shots as any citizen. IMO the hostage's life is just as important if not more than the police officer. She was not getting paid to put her butt on the line, in fact she was counting on the good judgement of the police officer, which was lacking. If the officer was actually being fired on I might cut him some slack, but so far that does not appear to be the case. The officer IMO should have sought a position of cover to take a responsible shot. What good does killing the hostage to save the hostage make?

Fuller Malarkey · May 19, 2013

I find it interesting that by all news accounts, the bad guy had the girl victim in a headlock, gun pointed at her head threatening to the police "I'm going to kill her". The police did not fire on the bad guy. An eyewitness, John Kourtessis [male hostage inside the house] has given some statements:

'I can’t go back to jail! One of you, get over here,' Smith said.

He grabbed Andrea in a headlock and forced Mr Kourtessis to crawl with him down the stairs in an effort to evade the officers inside.

'I see an officer there, with his gun out, standing by the steps. So I’m thinking, "Good, there’s a cop there,"' he told the Post.

At that point, he escaped, running and hiding behind a couch.

Police spotted Smith and trained their guns on him.
'Put the gun down and let her go,' officers shouted.
Smith replied, 'I'm going to kill her.'
'I hear POP POP, two shots,' he said.

No mention of the bad guy Smith pointing the gun at police.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...g-Andrea-Rebello-shot-dead.html#ixzz2Tmx5SWco
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

The bad guy had his gun to the woman's head. The police did not feel the need to fire. No threat worthy of shooting the bad guy as long as the gun was pointed at the woman they would in moments themselves shoot. Eight shots fired at a suspect using a hostage as a human shield.

I wonder if much of this is due to the mindset that the police must dominate at any cost? That hostage negotiation is overrated and a contradiction to the mantra "dominate at any cost".

To summarize:

Young woman head locked and helpless by bad guy.

Bad guy hiding behind helpless girl, has his gun to her head. Police see no threat, do not open fire.

Cops with bullet proof vests and guns and most likely backup moments away open fire when it is purported THEY feel afraid, killing hostage.

Hostages offer reports differing from the police reports of the incident.

Fuller Malarkey · May 19, 2013

eye95 said:
Barring some very specific information that the officer acted criminally or negligently, I give him a pass. The only fault I see so far rests with the criminal.

The story does highlight one reason why we should not be relying solely on the police for our safety. We should be able to rely on ourselves, our family, and our friends. Cowering behind a couch or running screaming from the house did nothing to help save the student. Nor did she seem prepared in the least to protect herself.

As far as I can tell, the cops did what they could. It wasn't good enough.

You can say all you want about the hostage taker's choices, but he is not the trained professional with a responsibility to the public.

eye95 · May 19, 2013

The "hostage taker"? What are you talking about. The only thing I said about him was that he is ultimately responsible for the crime and its outcome. Were you objecting to that??

I am confused by your reply.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

SavageOne · May 20, 2013

skidmark said:
The police are highly trained experts in handling and shooting guns. They actually are tested on a regular periodic basis in order to be allowed to continue carrying their guns.

Unlike mere mortal citizens, who may not even have had to fire a single shot before being issued a license/permit to carry a gun - or even worse, those who "open carry" because they do not even need a license/permit to do that.

I've watched many a "practical shooting" match in which a hostage target was part of the scenario. There are invariably quite a few target pasters on the "no shoot" hostage cardboard. I guess that means that even mere mortals that practice regularly are prone to hitting the wrong target at times.

What I don't understand is why the officer was not using cover that would have both reduced the chance of getting hit if shot at, and providing a stable firing position. All the details are not given, but it sounds to me as if the officer was quite exposed when the BG "menaced him" by pointing the gun towards him. And it sounds like the officer did a full magazine dump once he started shooting.

A hostage situation with the BG holding the gun on the hostage seems to call for instant decapacitation of the BG, which generally means a head shot. One supported, aimed shot to the head, obseerve its effect, and apply an additioonal supported, aimed shot if necessary. If the first shot did not instantly decapacitate the BG is is likely that he would be falling in some manner, which ought to put the hostage further below the point of the first supported, aimed shot. I'm thinking the officer "shot him to the ground" and that the BG's body twisted/turned while going to the ground, putting the hostage in the line of fire.

Without some very specific details to counter my general thoughts, my thinking is the cop was both reckless and negligent.

stay safe.

To be proficient one must practice regularly. I believe all LEOs should practice regularly. I include those at the Federal level. I ran some simply numbers and was rather surprised by the outcome.

Number of Federal LEOs = 75, 000 × 200 practice rounds per month = 15, 000, 000 rounds × 12 months = 180, 000, 000 rounds a year × 5 years ( this was the time frame of the DHS purchase order that caused so much up roar) = 900, 000, 000 rounds.

That is almost 1 billion rounds for practice alone. This does not include duty ammo or ammo for additional training for special response teams (ie hostage rescue and that sort).

With these numbers I think the government ammo scandal may have been greatly exaggerated. That is unless you think less than 200 rounds a month is all that is necessary to maintain proficiency at a level nesessary to minimize tragedies like the one in the OP.

eye95 · May 20, 2013

Thanks for the enlightening math. Just a few questions though:

Does DHS purchase the ammo for all 75,000 federal LEOs, or just for those within the DHS?

Was the ammo that they bought primarily range ammo, or the more lethal variety, or some mix thereof?

Did you notice that the order was for 78% more ammo than the amount you calculated?

OC for ME · May 20, 2013

Thread title needs changing. The innocent victim was not sacrificed. I await further information. The officer's name will be released at some point.

"Legitimate Sacrificial Citizen"?

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Well-known member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Well-known member

Regular Member

Well-known member

Regular Member