Oversight in upcoming New York gun control law: Law Enforcement is not exempt from "high-capacity ma - Polidicks

[QUOTE=UziXxX;39284362]Police usually don't shoot to kill. Most times they shoot to neutralize. It helps avoid wrongful death law suits and allows the police to take the criminal into custody and press charges on them.[/QUOTE] No, actually, many police have complained about the fact that they can't shoot to wound. When a cop fires his gun, it's as a last resort, and the intention is to kill the threat that is a danger to the lives of officers and anyone else in the area.

[QUOTE=DaCommie1;39284556]No, actually, many police have complained about the fact that they can't shoot to wound. When a cop fires his gun, it's as a last resort, and the intention is to kill the threat that is a danger to the lives of officers and anyone else in the area.[/QUOTE] Hence the advent of tazers and pepper sprays.

[QUOTE=galenmarek;39283831]Because having all the criminals having guns and taking all police guns away is a good idea right?[/QUOTE] baZiiIIIiiIIinnnnNNnGGGGGggg

[QUOTE=DaCommie1;39284556]No, actually, many police have complained about the fact that they can't shoot to wound. When a cop fires his gun, it's as a last resort, and the intention is to kill the threat that is a danger to the lives of officers and anyone else in the area.[/QUOTE] Police don't shoot to kill, they just shoot to probably kill.

[QUOTE=Mingebox;39285091]Police don't shoot to kill, they just shoot to probably kill.[/QUOTE] no. Cops are trained to shoot to kill. Nothing else. They KNOW implicitly that if their gun is out, and they make a shot, it better be lethal.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;39285246]no. Cops are trained to shoot to kill. Nothing else. They KNOW implicitly that if their gun is out, and they make a shot, it better be lethal.[/QUOTE] I believe the cops around here are told to empty their magazines so they could effectively say their life was in danger. Just a little perspective.

[QUOTE=snapshot32;39285379]I believe the cops around here are told to empty their magazines so they could effectively say their life was in danger. Just a little perspective.[/QUOTE] that's a good source

[QUOTE=snapshot32;39285379]I believe the cops around here are told to empty their magazines so they could effectively say their life was in danger. Just a little perspective.[/QUOTE] want to find some proof of that? Cops who get in fire fights empty their weapons out of a few reasons. 1) They're panicked, you don't unload a whole magazine into a person if you're calm. 2) They want to make sure they've been lethal because they're only supposed to use their gun to BE lethal. In a combat situation, seeing someone fire 2-3 well grouped shots and that's it should be a lot more terrifying than a guy who unloads his weapon. The former shows that the person is calm and experienced, the latter shows fear and panicked reactions.

What does this accomplish?

[QUOTE=Mingebox;39285091]Police don't shoot to kill, they just shoot to probably kill.[/QUOTE] Anybody who knows anything about guns knows that you only ever point your gun at someone if you intend to kill. There is no "non-lethal" shooting, that is part of basic gun safety.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;39285415] 2) They want to make sure they've been lethal because they're only supposed to use their gun to BE lethal.[/QUOTE] Cops take a weapons course similar to a CCW. That's what they teach in a CCW. The dead cant testify and if you had to take a life its because it was necessary. I heard that from talking to the various law enforcement in my family, take it at face value if you wish, I'm just throwing my knowledge into the mix.

[QUOTE=Mingebox;39284347]When 12 bad guys robbed the bank, the police officer could only kill 7 , leaving 5 alive. That's as many as five ones. And that's terrible.[/QUOTE] Magazines.

[QUOTE=S31-Syntax;39283850]A: Can't express how much I missed you. B: How does this reduce crime?[/QUOTE] It's sarcasm referring to a history of heavy handed policing on the part of the NYPD [editline]19th January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=ButtsexV3;39283843]dude what [editline]19th January 2013[/editline] have you ever even left your bedroom because that is literally the most sheltered thing I've ever heard anywhere in my entire life[/QUOTE] yes outside of my bedroom is where I learned to say sarcastic things

If placed on a list of nations by defense budget, the NYPD would be at 40 of 156. They spend so much on heavy weapons, it's fucking crazy.

[QUOTE=UziXxX;39283563]That's the liberal New York state government for you. They were so eager to ban guns, they were so stupid and didn't even read the damn bill before they voted on it. I can see these guys are really dependable when it comes to passing legislation. I was going to post this article but I see I was beaten to it. :v:[/QUOTE] God damn commie liberal fascists.

[QUOTE=Valnar;39285544]Anybody who knows anything about guns knows that you only ever point your gun at someone if you intend to kill. There is no "non-lethal" shooting, that is part of basic gun safety.[/QUOTE] What about incapacitation, which is what officers are trained to do?

[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;39285962]What about incapacitation, which is what officers are trained to do?[/QUOTE] Dude. You're just WRONG if you think an officer is trained to shoot to wound. Okay? It's NOT how they do things. Guns are lethal fucking tools, you do not pull one out to shoot to wound. AFAIK no police force in North America or Europe is trained to "shoot to incapacitate" they have tools specifically for that. They would, and do not use a gun for that.

[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;39285962]What about incapacitation, which is what officers are trained to do?[/QUOTE] There is no such thing as shooting to incapacitate with live firearms. There is only shooting to kill, if someone has a gun in their hands and they have the mindset that they are "shooting to incapacitate" than that person is extremely dangerous and should not be handling a gun.

[QUOTE=UziXxX;39284362]Police usually don't shoot to kill. Most times they shoot to neutralize. It helps avoid wrongful death law suits and allows the police to take the criminal into custody and press charges on them.[/QUOTE] Police are trained to aim to the heart if they have to use their gun in last defence, they are not told to wound the enemy

[QUOTE=Valnar;39285544]Anybody who knows anything about guns knows that you only ever point your gun at someone if you intend to kill. There is no "non-lethal" shooting, that is part of basic gun safety.[/QUOTE] All I've ever heard is that cops are taught to shoot to "stop" or "neutralize," not kill. Some quick googling seems to support me in that. It's probably mostly semantics, but I there's a difference between shooting to kill and only shooting if you're prepared to kill.

Is this actually a bad thing?

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;39285978]Dude. You're just WRONG if you think an officer is trained to shoot to wound. Okay? It's NOT how they do things. Guns are lethal fucking tools, you do not pull one out to shoot to wound. AFAIK no police force in North America or Europe is trained to "shoot to incapacitate" they have tools specifically for that. They would, and do not use a gun for that.[/QUOTE] Officers don't shoot to kill. They shoot to neutralize, not kill. The fact that they use non-lethal weapons is because a gun shot will most likely kill instead of just neutralize the target. Cops get into a lot of paper work whenever they kill someone on the line of duty, intended or not intended.

[QUOTE=Mingebox;39286060]All I've ever heard is that cops are taught to shoot to "stop" or "neutralize," not kill. Some quick googling seems to support me in that. It's probably mostly semantics, but I there's a difference between shooting to kill and only shooting if you're prepared to kill.[/QUOTE] Well everything you've heard is wrong then. It's always a shot to kill. It doesn't always end up killing. You NEVER fire at something you don't want to kill. This is gun safety rule number 1. Okay? If that's rule number 1, how can any rule supercede that for a cop? A gun is only used to kill. Not wound. Not stun. Not hurt. Not incapacitate. [editline]19th January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;39286073]Officers don't shoot to kill. They shoot to neutralize, not kill. The fact that they use non-lethal weapons is because a gun shot will most likely kill instead of just neutralize the target. Cops get into a lot of paper work whenever they kill someone on the line of duty, intended or not intended.[/QUOTE] They do shoot to kill actually. That's what they're trained to do with guns. They don't use a gun if they're not trying to kill someone. Yes, they do get in a lot of paperwork, as they should. But they get in just as much if they shoot to wound and not shoot to kill and end up wounding.

[QUOTE=fruxodaily;39286042]Police are trained to aim to the heart if they have to use their gun in last defence, they are not told to wound the enemy[/QUOTE] Wrong. They aim for center mass, not precisely the heart, and it isn't to kill, it's to incapacitate. Where the hell are you guys getting the idea that when a cop shoots its for the kill? Do you have any idea of the ammount of trouble one could get into?

[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;39286109]Wrong. They aim for center mass, not precisely the heart, and it isn't to kill, it's to incapacitate. Where the hell are you guys getting the idea that when a cop shoots its for the kill? Do you have any idea of the ammount of trouble one could get into?[/QUOTE] Where the hell are you getting the idea they use a killing tool for incapacitation? I'm getting it from gun safety basics. They shoot center mass because it's only movies and games that have anyone shooting for the head. You shoot centre mass to maxamize damager to the body.

[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;39286109]Wrong. They aim for center mass, not precisely the heart, and it isn't to kill, it's to incapacitate. Where the hell are you guys getting the idea that when a cop shoots its for the kill? Do you have any idea of the ammount of trouble one could get into?[/QUOTE] Because as Humanabyss said, gun safety rule number 1 is that you never fire at something you don't want dead. If you have the mindset that you are not shooting to kill than you are much more dangerous of a person.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;39286078]Well everything you've heard is wrong then. It's always a shot to kill. It doesn't always end up killing. You NEVER fire at something you don't want to kill. This is gun safety rule number 1. Okay? If that's rule number 1, how can any rule supercede that for a cop? A gun is only used to kill. Not wound. Not stun. Not hurt. Not incapacitate. [editline]19th January 2013[/editline] They do shoot to kill actually. That's what they're trained to do with guns. They don't use a gun if they're not trying to kill someone. Yes, they do get in a lot of paperwork, as they should. But they get in just as much if they shoot to wound and not shoot to kill and end up wounding.[/QUOTE] What? You're gonna use a taser on a possibly dangerous suspect who is fleeing from you? You sound like you play too much GTA where cops pull out the guns and shoot you till your dead, and resume their walk along the sidewalk. [url]http://www.lvrj.com/news/deadly-force/always-justified/FAQ-on-Deadly-Force-134255538.html[/url] Here. [editline]20th January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;39286129]Where the hell are you getting the idea they use a killing tool for incapacitation? I'm getting it from gun safety basics. They shoot center mass because it's only movies and games that have anyone shooting for the head. You shoot centre mass to maxamize damager to the body.[/QUOTE] Uhm... You actually shoot center mass to be sure you don't miss, not to maximize damage to the body... Hence why cops don't shoot guns out of someone's hand or legs.

This article, and most of the comments from both police officers and firearms instructors seem to support "shoot to stop": [url]http://www.policeone.com/Officer-Safety/articles/3468112-Shooting-center-mass-Shooting-to-kill-or-to-stop/[/url] They probably just tell "shoot to kill" in basic gun safety to drill in the idea that you only use it as a last resort, and that even a shot to "wound" can be fatal.

[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;39286146]What? You're gonna use a taser on a possibly dangerous suspect who is fleeing from you? You sound like you play too much GTA where cops pull out the guns and shoot you till your dead, and resume their walk along the sidewalk. [url]http://www.lvrj.com/news/deadly-force/always-justified/FAQ-on-Deadly-Force-134255538.html[/url] Here.[/QUOTE] nice dumb and stupid assumption. I'm the one who's saying a gun is a lethal tool designed to kill people and should ONLY be pulled out to kill people, and I'm the fucking immature one? Are you kidding me? Shooting centre mass puts a target down, it's also an easy way to kill someone because of the close proximity of organs. It is used to put a target down quickly to stop them from firing back. This is shooting to kill. Yes, I read the article. [editline]19th January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;39286146] Uhm... You actually shoot center mass to be sure you don't miss, not to maximize damage to the body... Hence why cops don't shoot guns out of someone's hand or legs.[/QUOTE] As even your own link says, a shot centre mass is to stop a target. Why does it stop a target? Because it does more damage and it's easy to hit. You don't shoot the head and you should really stop being such a condescending dick because I'm not fucking trivializing anything like you would like to imply.

[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;39285962]What about incapacitation, which is what officers are trained to do?[/QUOTE] The entire idea of shooting to wound is a dangerous concept that goes against a main principle of gun safety. You cannot use a lethal weapon to 'just' wound someone. Once the gun has been fired the person firing it has no control over what that round does and where it hits the person. A nice "wounding" shot could easily turn into a fatal headshot. [editline]20th January 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Mingebox;39286060]All I've ever heard is that cops are taught to shoot to "stop" or "neutralize," not kill. Some quick googling seems to support me in that. It's probably mostly semantics, but I there's a difference between shooting to kill and only shooting if you're prepared to kill.[/QUOTE] Shooting to stop or neutralise isn't the same as shooting to wound. If you shoot someone and they die you have stopped them. From what I understand, if you shoot to stop someone you acknowledge you might kill them.