NYC Shooting

[MJS]

I'm sure this will cause some tension.

Apparently a mentally challenged 18yo was shot by police because it was believed that he had a handgun. It turned out that he was holding a brush. It could be heard on 911 tapes that a male was saying, "I have a gun!"

Apparently 20 shots were fired. Its interesting because they also mention Sean Bell, the groom that was killed, also in NY. Of course, I was not surprised to see Sharptons name mentioned in this.

As always, its hard to judge a situation like this, because we usually don't have all of the facts, however, I figured it would make a good topic for discussion.

A small portion of the article.

NEW YORK - An unarmed, mentally ill teenager could be heard yelling, “I’ve got a gun!” in a 911 call made by his mother before police arrived and killed him in a 20-bullet barrage, according to a transcript of the call released by police Tuesday.
Five officers opened fire after Kheil Coppin, 18, ignored warnings and suddenly charged them outside his mother’s home with a black object in his hand, police officials said. The object turned out to be a hairbrush.
Officers received the 911 call from the teen’s exasperated mother around 7 p.m. Monday, police spokesman Paul Browne said.

 

[michaeledward]

The first four or five articles I read on this subject today did not mention Mr. Bell or Mr. Sharpton. In fact, I read four articles trying to find the race of the young man who was shot. All of the initial reports said nothing concerning Bell, or Sharpton.

What was mentioned was a hair brush.

And many reports from the police department about a 'gun'.

Of course, the gun never materialized.

 

[grydth]

On first impression, it sounds like suicide by cop.

The cops have every reason to think they are being charged by an armed nut - who can blame them for shooting?

But - and large but - what's with 20 rounds? This is what troubled me about the Diallo case- what are these officers taught about use of a fire arm? Are they panic shooting and just emptying the gun?

Sharpton should never be considered after his dishonest antics in the Tawana Brawley circus, he is a nonfactor. Funny how Sharpton never apologized and was successfully sued, but still gets air time. Hmmmmmmm.

 

[MJS]

The first four or five articles I read on this subject today did not mention Mr. Bell or Mr. Sharpton. In fact, I read four articles trying to find the race of the young man who was shot. All of the initial reports said nothing concerning Bell, or Sharpton.

What was mentioned was a hair brush.

And many reports from the police department about a 'gun'.

Of course, the gun never materialized.

I have to wonder if the mother gave any input as to whether or not her son had a gun? I mean, you'd think that she might know, but the article never mentions that.

 

[MJS]

On first impression, it sounds like suicide by cop.

Good point. I didn't think about that.

But - and large but - what's with 20 rounds? This is what troubled me about the Diallo case- what are these officers taught about use of a fire arm? Are they panic shooting and just emptying the gun?

Yes, that does seem like alot. Then again, we don't know how many each officer fired, nor how many hit the kid. Of course, I don't know what procedure is. Are they supposed to shoot until the target is no longer a threat?

Sharpton should never be considered after his dishonest antics in the Tawana Brawley circus, he is a nonfactor. Funny how Sharpton never apologized and was successfully sued, but still gets air time. Hmmmmmmm.

My question is...why does he have to get involved at all? Seems to me like anytime people like him get involved, they act as if they already have their minds made up about who was wrong and who was right.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

As if death by one bullet is somehow better or different then 20??

 

[grydth]

As if death by one bullet is somehow better or different then 20??

Your inexperience shows itself in your sarcasm.

If you needlessly empty your gun on one assailant, but there are three assailants.... you die.

If you shoot without discipline until the gun empties, it is very likely that at least 3/4 of your rounds will not go where you want them.... as, into innocent bystanders. Happens all the time in gangster drive-bys, but not what a cop should be doing.

 

[MJS]

Your inexperience shows itself in your sarcasm.

If you needlessly empty your gun on one assailant, but there are three assailants.... you die.

If you shoot without discipline until the gun empties, it is very likely that at least 3/4 of your rounds will not go where you want them.... as, into innocent bystanders. Happens all the time in gangster drive-bys, but not what a cop should be doing.

Regarding the last paragraph...I'd say that it all comes down to proper training.

 

[michaeledward]

I have to wonder if the mother gave any input as to whether or not her son had a gun? I mean, you'd think that she might know, but the article never mentions that.

Again, I read several articles on this shooting throughout the day.

All the reports of a gun came from the police ... The police reported they heard 'I have a gun' on the phone call.

I admit, I was wondering about race ... and, if the story would show up here ... I almost posted it myself. I do think it is unfortunate that the first report shows up with the name Sharpton. As grydth post shows. By post 3, much is already discredited because of his invovlement.

As grydth suggests, this may very well be suicide by police.

The first reports were 20 rounds, later reports had 15 rounds. Further reports tell of multiple entrance and exit wounds.

Not a good day. Very sad.

 

[jks9199]

On first impression, it sounds like suicide by cop.

The cops have every reason to think they are being charged by an armed nut - who can blame them for shooting?

But - and large but - what's with 20 rounds? This is what troubled me about the Diallo case- what are these officers taught about use of a fire arm? Are they panic shooting and just emptying the gun?

Sharpton should never be considered after his dishonest antics in the Tawana Brawley circus, he is a nonfactor. Funny how Sharpton never apologized and was successfully sued, but still gets air time. Hmmmmmmm.

I'm working on digging up some of the research (check the Force Science Institute at http://www.forcescience.com/ as well as Col. Grossman's site at http://www.killology.com), but it's really not uncommon for anyone involved in a shooting situation to fire multiple shots without even realizing it.

I'm not saying it's ideal -- I'm just saying it's what happens. In this case, several officers each fired a few shots; they add up quick. And a shooting situation is chaotic beyond words.

 

[MJS]

Again, I read several articles on this shooting throughout the day.

All the reports of a gun came from the police ... The police reported they heard 'I have a gun' on the phone call.

I admit, I was wondering about race ... and, if the story would show up here ... I almost posted it myself. I do think it is unfortunate that the first report shows up with the name Sharpton. As grydth post shows. By post 3, much is already discredited because of his invovlement.

As grydth suggests, this may very well be suicide by police.

The first reports were 20 rounds, later reports had 15 rounds. Further reports tell of multiple entrance and exit wounds.

Not a good day. Very sad.

Believe it or not, this is the first that I've heard of this. I havent seen anything on the news or the paper in my area. I agree with you Mike, this is sad. Whats worse IMHO, is that rather than try to investigate what made this kid do this, people, ie:Sharpton, are totally turning the tables, making the cops to the be the bad guys, as usual, and will most likely bring race into this.

 

[michaeledward]

That's kind of the point though, Mike, isn't it. When Sharpton gets involved, suddenly a local news story gets carried outside the five borroughs.

Twenty shots by three officers against a young man wielding a brush. Well, that's outrageous. And, outrage, for good or ill, is where Mr. Sharpton is drawn, like a moth to flame.

And once he is there, the news media pick up the story. Because the news media loves to hate Mr. Sharpton. As do many who post here. The virtue of his arguments are void, because he makes them. And the story can be pivoted to be about Sharpton, rather than a challenged 18 year old that is dead.

 

[dubljay]

I heard about this earlier this morning. It was very tragic to hear. Watching it on the news... CNN I believe, and they were reporting on the number of shots, that there was no gun, there were claims about a gun over the 911 call.

All I kept thinking about was how tragic this was. Tragic that the boy lost his life, and for his family. Tragic for the officers to have to do it, and for the inevitable ****storm to follow.

Domestic violence calls are among the most dangerous for an officer to face. They always seem to be something of a no win situation and very unstable. The time in which those officers had to make a decision is too small to even comprehend.

Most of all, the information thats been made available is far too incomplete to even begin to make an accurate assessment of what happened, let alone judge the actions of all parties involved. The public is already going to be making judgments on incomplete and inaccurate information which is unfair to both the officers and the victim.

My heart goes out to all that are involved with this tragic mess.

 

[MJS]

That's kind of the point though, Mike, isn't it. When Sharpton gets involved, suddenly a local news story gets carried outside the five borroughs.

Twenty shots by three officers against a young man wielding a brush. Well, that's outrageous. And, outrage, for good or ill, is where Mr. Sharpton is drawn, like a moth to flame.

And once he is there, the news media pick up the story. Because the news media loves to hate Mr. Sharpton. As do many who post here. The virtue of his arguments are void, because he makes them. And the story can be pivoted to be about Sharpton, rather than a challenged 18 year old that is dead.

LOL, very true. We all know how the media loves to look for the flavor of the moment. Seriously though, why do people like Sharpton feel the need to get involved in things like this? Do they think they'll have some light to shed? Doubtful IMO. It is a shame that someone died. However, if I was an officer and someone pointed a gun at me, or what appeared to be a gun, I'd shoot too. Could something have been done differently? What made this 18yo act like this? Those are just a few of the questions.

 

[Cruentus]

Your inexperience shows itself in your sarcasm.

If you needlessly empty your gun on one assailant, but there are three assailants.... you die.

If you shoot without discipline until the gun empties, it is very likely that at least 3/4 of your rounds will not go where you want them.... as, into innocent bystanders. Happens all the time in gangster drive-bys, but not what a cop should be doing.

Thinking 20 or so rounds is too many on one assailant among a number of cops is usually thought by people who have never been in a shooting.

First, I can unload an entire magazine with accuracy into an 11X8" piece of paper within 10 meters and mag change within about 2 seconds. I don't know how many cops train that way, but I know a few that do. Even if it takes them longer, a few seconds is not a long time. You could in theory unload an entire mag very easily before it was evident that your assailant had been "stopped." Keep in mind, that once shoots are fired, it is not apparent where the shots are all coming from. You see a guy with a "gun" pointing at you or one of your buddies, and you hear a bunch of shots echoing all over the place. You orient yourself to the perceived threat and shoot until the threat has stopped. Plus, adrenaline is running high. And, all this occurs within a few seconds.

But, all of the above aside, if we consider that there were 5 cops involved, that leaves about 4 shots per cop, give or take. If there was 15 shots instead of 20, then that is even less. So, provided that this was what we call a "clean" shooting (meaning that the shooters reacted reasonably), this is hardly a case of undisciplined cops, or cops with insufficient training here.

Now, I don't know all the facts, but based on what I do know, this seems like a clean shooting (albeit a very tragic one). But I do know for sure that "a lot of shots" in incidents like these is not an indicator of excessive force, and is in fact very common in shootings like these.

One thing that is for sure also is that this is a very tragic incident. It's a shame that the kid had to do what he had done for him, for his family, and for the police involved...

C.

 

[jks9199]

That's kind of the point though, Mike, isn't it. When Sharpton gets involved, suddenly a local news story gets carried outside the five borroughs.

Twenty shots by three officers against a young man wielding a brush. Well, that's outrageous. And, outrage, for good or ill, is where Mr. Sharpton is drawn, like a moth to flame.

And once he is there, the news media pick up the story. Because the news media loves to hate Mr. Sharpton. As do many who post here. The virtue of his arguments are void, because he makes them. And the story can be pivoted to be about Sharpton, rather than a challenged 18 year old that is dead.

I'm going to be quite blunt. Be warned.

Have you ever been there? Have you responded to the report of a man with a gun threatening someone? I have; thank God, I didn't have to shoot, but I've been within ounces and hundredths of an inch of doing so.

Let me paint a picture for you. I don't know if this is how it went down -- but I wouldn't be at all surprised if it's pretty close. Dispatch sends you to an address; they advise you that the call taker has heard statements about that the suspect has a gun, and that it's a domestic dispute. Oh, ****, you think, this is gonna be bad. You start running possible scenarios through your mind, all while figuring out the best way to get there, dealing with traffic, and wondering if you're going to have to shoot someone, or if you'll be shot. All this is going on at light speed.

You get there; the suspect comes out of the house. You see he's got something that's kind of long, and black in his hand. He's acting nuts. He's not doing what you're telling him to. Then he charges at you...

NOW -- all this is taking place in a matter of moments. Maybe you're the first to fire; maybe you just suddenly hear gunshots or see muzzleflash out of the corner of your eye, and you're primed to go off, because in the tunnel vision of combat all you really know is the guy's charging, maybe you're hearing the gunshots (maybe your not; it's not uncommon under this sort of situation for your senses to focus and many people in shootings don't remember the sound of the gunshots). In a matter of seconds, it's over. You've fired 2 to 5 shots, the suspect is down... and that longish black object turns out to have been a hairbrush.

The little I've seen or read on this sounds like a clean shooting. I hope maybe my little story has put you a little closer to being in their shoes, because I'm virtually certain that those cops are second guessing themselves, trying to decide if they could have done anything better. You know what I'd tell them? They obeyed rule 1; THEY went home at the end of their watch. Acting on the information available, with the time they had to react -- they did the best they could to ensure that. There may or may not have been anything they could have done. In the real world, there's no shooting to wound, there's no tackling him a la Walker, Texas Ranger, and there's no way that this was a case for a Taser or similar less lethal weapon. Had the man (we do generally consider 18 year olds men, adults) had a gun, and had they not responded had they did, the headlines could easily have read "Police officer shot" or, even worse, "Innocent bystander killed by mentally ill 18 year old."

 

[Blotan Hunka]

Your inexperience shows itself in your sarcasm.

If you needlessly empty your gun on one assailant, but there are three assailants.... you die.

If you shoot without discipline until the gun empties, it is very likely that at least 3/4 of your rounds will not go where you want them.... as, into innocent bystanders. Happens all the time in gangster drive-bys, but not what a cop should be doing.

I beilieve I have much more experience on this topic than you. Real world isnt lie the movies/TV or what you think a gunfight is like from the gun mags, And BTW...3 shooters, 20 shots...about 6-7 shots per officer, thats not excessive IMO.

 

[grydth]

I beilieve I have much more experience on this topic than you. Real world isnt lie the movies/TV or what you think a gunfight is like from the gun mags, And BTW...3 shooters, 20 shots...about 6-7 shots per officer, thats not excessive IMO.

Believe whatever you wish, its irrelevant. Your first insulting post added nothing to the discussion here.

Nobody has mentioned any movie or TV reference. This is a cheap straw man tactic on your part. So is the "gunfight" reference.... there was no gunfight. The decedent had a hair brush..

Just how do you know that each officer fired the same number of shots, with equal discipline? Care to give us a source on that.

 

[grydth]

Thinking 20 or so rounds is too many on one assailant among a number of cops is usually thought by people who have never been in a shooting.

First, I can unload an entire magazine with accuracy into an 11X8" piece of paper within 10 meters and mag change within about 2 seconds. I don't know how many cops train that way, but I know a few that do. Even if it takes them longer, a few seconds is not a long time. You could in theory unload an entire mag very easily before it was evident that your assailant had been "stopped." Keep in mind, that once shoots are fired, it is not apparent where the shots are all coming from. You see a guy with a "gun" pointing at you or one of your buddies, and you hear a bunch of shots echoing all over the place. You orient yourself to the perceived threat and shoot until the threat has stopped. Plus, adrenaline is running high. And, all this occurs within a few seconds.

But, all of the above aside, if we consider that there were 5 cops involved, that leaves about 4 shots per cop, give or take. If there was 15 shots instead of 20, then that is even less. So, provided that this was what we call a "clean" shooting (meaning that the shooters reacted reasonably), this is hardly a case of undisciplined cops, or cops with insufficient training here.

Now, I don't know all the facts, but based on what I do know, this seems like a clean shooting (albeit a very tragic one). But I do know for sure that "a lot of shots" in incidents like these is not an indicator of excessive force, and is in fact very common in shootings like these.

One thing that is for sure also is that this is a very tragic incident. It's a shame that the kid had to do what he had done for him, for his family, and for the police involved...

C.

Why, I didn't know the thread participation was limited to baaaaad gunfighters in black. Maybe we can have the mods check kill tallies before allowing anyone to post.

What you can do with a gun on a paper target is irrelevant, The focus should be on what these cops, with their training level, did against this assailant.

Maybe you shoot until "the threat has stopped"..... and in the past, isn't it true that some have continued shooting well after that? How, exactly, do you know that did not happen here?

Same question to you as to Blotan: where do you get the 'fact' that each officer on the scene fired the same number of rounds? Now, I don't gunfight every morning on my way in to work, but don't accounts of armed engagements often show that some participants empty their guns while others don't shoot at all? Or, did I get that from some TV show while I was knitting?

 

[MJS]

Well, this happened at 7pm. By that hour, I'm sure it was dark outside. Now, you have someone acting crazy, yelling, screaming, making comments that he has a gun, started moving towards the officers and kept moving despite warnings to stop. I wasn't there either, but as I said, given the situation, I'd have shot as well.

We don't know how many shots were fired from each of the 5 officers there. 20 sounds like a big number, but I don't believe the cops are going to pick and choose which one of them fires. No, I would imagine they're all going to fire.

As far as the stray shots go....like I said, alot of it comes down to training. There are some that're going to focus more time on shooting than others. But hey, its part of the job. Look at the shooting a while back in L.A. The one with the guys that held up the bank, that were armed with high power weapons. Hell of a shootout and I'm sure there were many stray shots.