This Page

has been moved to new address

New York Assembly Bill To Cops: "Wing 'Em, Just Like In The Westerns"

Sorry for inconvenience...

Redirection provided by Blogger to WordPress Migration Service
Bloviating Zeppelin: New York Assembly Bill To Cops: "Wing 'Em, Just Like In The Westerns"

Bloviating Zeppelin

(in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

Sunday, May 30, 2010

New York Assembly Bill To Cops: "Wing 'Em, Just Like In The Westerns"

You've seen it all on the silver screen before.

The cops who just "wing 'em" when shooting bad guys.

Western "good guys" who somehow manage to shoot the guns right out of "bad guys' " hands.

The New York State Legislature will expect its cops to do precisely that, shortly.

From the New York Post:

City cops are livid over a legislative proposal that could handcuff the brave officers involved in life-and-death confrontations every day -- requiring them to shoot gun-wielding suspects in the arm or leg rather than shoot to kill, The Post has learned.

The "minimum force" bill, which surfaced in the Assembly last week, seeks to amend the state penal codes' "justification" clause that allows an officer the right to kill a thug if he feels his life or someone else's is in imminent danger.

The bill -- drafted in the wake of Sean Bell's controversial police shooting death -- would force officers to use their weapons "with the intent to stop, rather than kill" a suspect. They would be mandated to "shoot a suspect in the arm or the leg."

In the category of "stating the obvious":

Michael Paladino, president of the NYPD Detectives Endowment Association, said: "It is not realistic, and it exists only in cartoons.

"It's moronic and would create two sets of rules in the streets if there is a gunfight. This legislation would require officers to literally shoot the gun out of someone's hand or shoot to wound them in the leg or arm. I don't know of any criminal who doesn't shoot to kill. They are not bound by any restrictions."


Section of Assembly Bill A02952

“A police officer or peace officer . . . uses such force with the intent to stop, rather than kill . . . and uses only the minimal amount of force necessary to effect such stop.”


Section of state Penal Law S 35.15(2)(a)(ii)

“A person may not use deadly physical force upon another person . . . unless: he or she is . . . a police officer or peace officer or a person assisting a police officer or a peace officer at the latter’s direction.”

Here is the New York bill in its totality.

Verbiage directly from the AO2952 Memo:

This bill would modify how a police officer responds when he believes he must use his gun to defend himself or another, or to apprehend a suspect who is resisting arrest. It requires the officer to use his weapon with the intent to stop, rather than to kill such a person. There is no justification for terminating another’s life when a less extreme measure may accomplish the same objective.

For example, an officer would have to try to shoot a suspect in the arm or the leg. The bill will not penalize a good faith effort to shoot with this intent, even though the shot may prove fatal. Further, the number of times an officer shoots a person should not exceed the minimal number necessary to stop the person. If one shot accomplishes the purpose, it is neither necessary or appropriate for an officer to empty his barrel. The bill is intended to limit the use of force to the minimal amount needed.

"Empty his barrel"?

I'll not go into a detailed explanation of why this is good or bad. I'll simply leave it up to my learned and common-sense readers to draw their own conclusions. Check here for commentary from the Jim Vicevich Show.

And, oh yes, this bill was -- of course -- drawn up by two Demorats.

I would ask that you very much weigh in on this one.


Blogger Z said...

I'm not up on police work and this legalese is beyond me but it seems to me cops are just as stressed and panicked as the perps in a life/death situation and it's got to be hard to aim for a LEG when the perp's shooting to kill, isn't it?

Seems to me that we're going to have less and less guys signing up to protect and serve when their hands are tied by laws like this, no? ... sort of like our soldiers having to give a week's notice to Afghans before house searches or being told they can't save their comrades if saving them might mean killing innocent civilians....
What are we COMING TO?

Sat May 29, 09:29:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Bloviating Zeppelin said...

Z: yes, that would be quite correct. It is MUCH more difficult to shoot for a smaller target than what we call "center mass."

And yes: what ARE we coming to?


Sat May 29, 11:09:00 PM PDT  
Blogger A Jacksonian said...

I prefer the standard on Ironside -

Don't reach for your weapon unless you plan to pull it.

Don't pull out your weapon unless you mean to aim it.

Don't aim your weapon unless you mean to shoot it.

And when you shoot, you shoot to kill.

That 'just wing them' business is for the movies, not real life. Look at the guys in LA a couple of years back in full body armor with FA AK's. You couldn't 'wing them' in any meaningful sense of the term as you were likely to get a face full of lead if you tried such lunacy. One of the guys shrugged of a 12ga shot in the back and then returned fire on the officer with the shotgun. Modern criminals have access to body armor that was only something of a dream back in the old west, and has become the nightmare of law enforcement today.

If you have to resort to lethal force, then your life and the lives of others are on the line. Trying to be 'nice' will just get people killed who would not have been killed if the criminal was taken down, and hard. As it is you normally get a 'please put down the weapon' from a cop before he shoots someone. That IS restraint and civilized. Trying to be 'nice' to someone who is not being restrained or civilized is not a good idea for anyone and puts us all at risk.

Absolutely insane... about what I expect from NY, land of the highly over-taxed.

Sun May 30, 03:27:00 AM PDT  
Blogger Bloviating Zeppelin said...

AJ: you've said it, albeit in a very nice, civilized fashion -- one that I tried very hard to emulate. It took me some time to bring my pulse rate down after having read the source article.


Sun May 30, 11:11:00 AM PDT  
Blogger TexasFred said...

I have long been a proponent of shooting to wound the suspect...

Head wounds and chest wounds...

BIG honkin' chest wounds...

Sucking chest wounds...

And I have also long believed that given the stupidity of so many departments and their idea that a 9MM is a GREAT police round, anything worth shooting is worth shooting at least twice...

Personally, I still carry a .45 loaded with 230gr Golden Sabers...

Why shoot twice?

Sun May 30, 11:49:00 AM PDT  
Blogger Bloviating Zeppelin said...

TF: I concur. A proposed bill like this is at once frightening, unrealistic, and an indicator of the sheer incompetence of politicians.


Sun May 30, 12:52:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Greywolfe said...

When I worked for the Oklahoma Dept. of Corrections, Cleet standards were that you shoot to stop the action. You aim center mass, and keep pulling the trigger until the action stops.

Anything else will result in cops dying. personally, if I were a cop in NY, this would be a good time to transfer out to NJ or somewhere else. Or put in for early retirement. The idiot dems want to handcuff the cops? let them fight the bad guys (including future terrorist attackers) without cops on the streets.

Sun May 30, 01:01:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Bloviating Zeppelin said...

Greywolfe: my sentiments exactly. As my department's former Rangemaster, I've done my best to keep my comments short and not filled with expletives. In summary: a bill like that is the sheerest of insanity.


Sun May 30, 01:11:00 PM PDT  
Blogger christopher said...

I would love to get your feeling on this BZ. Since I was an infantryman and not a cop, my view on it is: "kill them all. Shoot.for.the center of mass and empty the mag." Yet, that's my infantry side talking. In my time as an infantryman and a CO at a very nasty Close Management Prison, I have noticed the inmates getting much more violent and committing more violent crimes. In my opinion, shoot them. I was trained in the Army to exterminate the threat, and to not let emotions or politics get in the way. These armchair quarterbacks need to be on the thin blue line for a few days so they know what you guys are going up against. This is the famous "hug a thug" syndrome we talked about in the prison system. These people show compassion for murderers and rapists who shoot at police. Their actions put them in jail for a reason. They are a menace to society and need to be isolated from it. If one has the balls to draw down on an officer, then the natural consequences of that action is the perp being shot himself. Anyway, good post BZ.

Sun May 30, 02:10:00 PM PDT  
Blogger christopher said...

Btw BZ, I switch from my Christopher screename and my Chris one every once in a while. Its still me Chris though.

Sun May 30, 02:11:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Bushwack said...

it goes right along with the liberpuke mentality that you can rehabilitate murdering thugs or pedophiles by being nicer to them... Shoot to wound? I would suggest that every cop in that area QUIT as soon as this bill is passed for their own health. There will be MANY blue suits buried because of this shit...Fkn Sad.

Sun May 30, 05:16:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Old NFO said...

They must be on drugs... That is one of the STUIPIDIST proposals I've ever seen...

Sun May 30, 05:38:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Spokes said...

The fact is, that in a shooting, adrenaline flows like Niagara falls, which means that the bad guy could suffer a “fatal” wound to the heart and STILL keep coming at the officer returning fire. The thought of firing one shot center mass at the suspect then standing down is the most moronic policy bleeding heart liberals have come up with. The NY policy makers have not a fucking clue what a shooting encounter entails……

Sun May 30, 05:38:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Spokes said...

The fact is, that in a shooting, adrenaline flows like Niagara falls, which means that the bad guy could suffer a “fatal” wound to the heart and STILL keep coming at the officer returning fire. The thought of firing one shot center mass at the suspect then standing down is the most moronic policy bleeding heart liberals have come up with. The NY policy makers have not a fucking clue what a shooting encounter entails……

Sun May 30, 05:42:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Spokes said...

The fact is, that in a shooting, adrenaline flows like Niagara falls, which means that the bad guy could suffer a “fatal” wound to the heart and STILL keep coming at the officer returning fire. The thought of firing one shot center mass at the suspect then standing down is the most moronic policy bleeding heart liberals have come up with. The NY policy makers have not a fucking clue what a shooting encounter entails……

Sun May 30, 05:49:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Just John said...

Even the wording of the bill indicates that its author(s) is ignorant and possibly mildly insane. What a load of crap.

Sun May 30, 06:16:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Cunning Linguist said...

As a member of the thin blue line (who has been required to fire my weapon at a person)...let me say we (Law Enforcement) are NOT trained to "shoot to kill," rather to "shoot to stop" the offender/offending action. Thus, center mass is the target. Usually if one shoots (and hots) center mass with a). A large enough caliber and b). enough hits the offender stops. Mission accomplished. Almost always I would say it is safe to say, that the POS' leg is NOT what is causing the offensive action--it's usually their hand (with a weapon in it)...
I too was able (with great self-control, I might add) to complete my post without using any expletives :)

Sun May 30, 07:17:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Jo said...

I'm still trying to figure out how society allowed police officers to become the 'bad guys'.
I know there's the occasional rotten cop...there's a rotten someone in every profession, but this mindset we have now---slowly taking away an officers authority/ability to do his job is terrifying.
I've been fortunate to have been blessed with many police officers in and around my life, as have my family...and was raised to believe they sit right next to God. Even at my 60+ age, I still believe that.

This idiotic law is certain to cause the deaths of more officer's...where once I was proud to hear "I'm joining the police force", I'm terrified of those words now.

Sorry to be so long winded but this angers me so much, and I needed to vent, :-)

Sun May 30, 10:53:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Bloviating Zeppelin said...

As TF and Greywolfe know, law enforcement is taught to shoot "center mass" and/or, depending on the agency, a "triple-tap" which my agency teaches: two to the body, one to the head. We do NOT "shoot to kill." We shoot to stop the aggressor from further utilizing deadly force. One the aggressor stops, we stop.

Two excellent examples of aggressors who, once hit, kept going on adrenaline or drugs or both:

1. Miami/FBI Shootout, 1986:
EXCELLENT tactical article here. Fairly accurate video here from a made for TV movie. More examination of the rounds utilized here.

2. Metasareanu/Phillips North Hollywood Shootout, 1997:
Overview here. Other site here. Another resource here.

Suspects in both events were hit multiple times, particularly Platt in the Miami Shootout who, it was later determined, was NOT on drugs but instead relied upon an adrenaline dump coupled with military training.


Mon May 31, 06:07:00 AM PDT  
Blogger Bloviating Zeppelin said...

Spokes, JJ and particularly CL, thanks also for weighing in. I too have been in my own "critical incident" where I had to utilize deadly force. Mine, however, resulted in the death of the suspect. I therefore know from whence I speak and write. Jo: I believe it comes from the manner and fashion in which we raise our children, with esteem Uber Alles, coupled with the very popular, with young idiots, gangsta mentality -- and, gangs being a replacement for "acceptance" in our urban youth -- and gangs actually being a replacement for, in many cases, PARENTS.


Mon May 31, 06:14:00 AM PDT  
Blogger TexasFred said...

If you are an Officer, if you know and/or love an Officer, if you are related to an Officer, if you support our LEOs and you are on Facebook, join us here: Facebook The Thin Blue Line

Mon May 31, 12:02:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Bloviating Zeppelin said...

Excellent point TF, thanks.


Mon May 31, 12:39:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Animal said...

This strikes me as absurd. I don't like guns *for myself*, and I prefer to not be around them in public if I can help it. That said: I feel like if an officer is in a situation where unholstering a weapon is necessary, there's probably more to think about than "Oh, crap, where can I safely shoot this jackass?" No, no, no…pull, AIM (hopefully) and fire. That's why they're cops: because they've already been trained to know when to use their weapons. Pols need to stop meddling in their affairs, and if this is a rebound-law intended to curtail some "bad" cops, then it strikes me as a vastly overreaching waste of time.

Next we'll see our officers rebranded as British bobbies, all threatening-like with their nightsticks…

Mon May 31, 02:04:00 PM PDT  
Blogger cj said...

Oh. My. God.

Has everyone gone freakin' insane?

My mother once, in all seriousness, asked me why cops didn't shoot the bad guys in the arm or leg.

My answer?

Mom, if I ever have to shoot someone it will be because he is trying to kill me or someone else. I have no intention of giving him a second chance to achieve his goal. He is going down and he is staying down.

Here's an idea: Someone needs to get the idiots who sponsored this crap out on a range, teach them to shoot, give them a gun, run their sorry asses up and down several flights of stairs while having firecrackers thrown at them, and then they need to be taken to the firing line and, without time to calm down, have to shoot a paper targe in the freakin' arm or leg.

Dear Lord, protect us from the idiots. There are so many of them and so few of us...


Mon May 31, 03:01:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Bloviating Zeppelin said...

Animal: we might not be too terribly far away from certain strata of society actually wanting back the image of the Bobby.

cj: what a few hours in even an old FATS simulator would do, eh?


Mon May 31, 04:03:00 PM PDT  
Blogger mrchuck said...

Remember the "running negro" target of the early 70's?
I started that as a prank after the Watts riot where I sustained facial injuries from a brick-bat, and then it went nation-wide.
A great target to qualify on.
However,,, it was shunned by the black officers association and that was just fine.
The point being,,, any suspect held at gunpoint, or an officer stumbling upon a felony in progress, must hold this suspect in his his/her sights, give the commands. and await the perpetrator to follow those commands to the tee, without any deviation. Deviation will mean command repeated, and any deviation will be followed by one repeat of the command, and if not followed to the letter, will be an aimed and squeezed of round from the police officer who is holding the perp in his or her sights.
I know, you are required to repeat it a 3rd time, but you as the police officer, that the perp is trying to make up his or her stupid mind as to what to do, draw and shoot back, run, or lay down spread eagle.
This is where the perp normally takes one.
I have written up many reports, and know how the drill goes with a shit-load of adrinelan coursing thru the Officer's veins.
This is now the designated stooting supervisor's responsibility, and I will leave it to them to fill out the forms.

Mon May 31, 06:29:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Bloviating Zeppelin said...

Hey Spokes --

I saw your profile. Are you somebody I know, perchance? Cause I work in Sacratomato as well. . .

Just askin'. . .


Tue Jun 01, 06:55:00 AM PDT  
Blogger A Jacksonian said...

I just use the old standard from Ironside... it has been prettied up since that era, but the basic is that you have real problems aiming to 'wound' in a firefight. Especially if your opponent has body armor on.

During the Moro Insurrection the .38 sidearm of the Army just wouldn't stop someone hyped up on drugs and able to take more than one hit and keep on coming. In jungle warfare that can get you seriously dead. The Army wanted a new design and had a competition for it. That got the Browning designed Colt Model 1911 in .45 ACP. They didn't want to wound the guy, they wanted him down.

The concept is rounds on target, center of mass... in the old FBI world that meant 'shoot to kill'. Don't be fancy that will get you killed. In a jungle close encounter that is all you have time for, and the urban jungle is no different.

If you have tactical surprise, you have options... bashing a door down is not tactical surprise save in small enclosed spaces. Don't expect milk and cookies when bashing a door down.

The only other thing... keep your cool. You might get hit but if you are rushed, emotionally flushed with adrenaline, and otherwise caught up in things, your aim isn't the greatest and that shortens your lifespan no end.

I want my police to not take risks with their lives, my life nor the lives of the innocent. That means you do what is necessary...

Tue Jun 01, 01:23:00 PM PDT  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home