MR

8 wounded at Empire State Building, 2 dead after coworker dispute ends in gun battle

By LARRY CELONA, JAMIE SCHRAM, ISABEL VINCENT and DAVID SEIFMAN

Last Updated: 10:04 AM, August 24, 2012

A dispute between coworkers exploded into gunfire outside the Empire State Building this morning — with the guman killing an innocent bystander before he was fatally shot by police, sources said.

There were a total of 10 people struck — and the 9 a.m. shooting sent panicked pedestrians scrambling from the jam-packed intersection of 34th Street and Fifth Avenue.

“This is the last thing you are expecting to see walking to work – someone shot dead in broad daylight in Midtown,” said Sid Dinsay, 38, who works in a PR firm on Fifth Avenue.

“I am shocked – something like this is enough to rattle your nerves. My nerves are rattled right now.”

It’s unclear what sparked the deadly argument, which happened in the heart of the morning rush on a street loaded with commuters and tourists.

The two men fought right on the sidewalk before one suddenly drew his weapon and opened fire.

Responding NYPD cops fatally shot the gunman.


The shot bystanders include a female who died from her wounds, the sources said. Others were shot in the buttocks and legs.

The victims were taken to St. Luke’s Hospital and Bellevue Hospital.

The FBI is assisting in the investigation, which has caused a traffic nightmare in Midtown that has effectively shut down all of the streets around the scene.

Eeerily, just minutes before the mayhem, Mayor Bloomberg was warning about the dangers of “too many guns on the streets” on his weekly radio show.

“The argument guns don’t kill people, people kill people is one of the most disingenuous things you can say,” he said shortrly before 9 a.m. while discussing tougher guns laws being proposed in Albany.

“It does take a person to pull the trigger, but if they didn’t have the gun... We are the only developed country in the world with this problem.”


Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manh ... z24TOw7huM

The mayor is a retard. All politicans who push this anti-gun agenda are retards, because you won't ever find a single one of them that do not have personal armed security around the clock at their place of business and their home of residence. This mayor and all the other politicans who are so anti-gun will always have armed security around them. They don't have to worry. Its the common citizens who will have to worry if guns are outlawed. But this is no different from what the politicans do now with regular politics. They sit up in their safe zones while making rules and regulations that don't effect their life style, only the common citizens life style.

The Sushi Hunter wrote:The mayor is a retard. All politicans who push this anti-gun agenda are retards, because you won't ever find a single one of them that do not have personal armed security around the clock at their place of business and their home of residence. This mayor and all the other politicans who are so anti-gun will always have armed security around them. They don't have to worry. Its the common citizens who will have to worry if guns are outlawed. But this is no different from what the politicans do now with regular politics. They sit up in their safe zones while making rules and regulations that don't effect their life style, only the common citizens life style.

The difference, of course, being that, ideally, the armed security people with the mayor are well-trained when it comes to using firearms. If every random person is allowed to carry a gun, I just fear a lot of innocent people will be caught in deadly crossfire as untrained people panic and start shooting in situations like this.
I'm becoming envious of places like Japan and England and, well, most other civilized countries where this sort of crap doesn't happen on a weekly basis. I understand people's arguments against certain gun control laws, but those places DO have very strict gun control laws, and it DOES cut down drastically on these situations. Something has got to be re-evaluated. I'm not sure about in other countries, but in England, the police don't even have guns. Sadly, I doubt we could ever get to that point here, as things have already spiraled so far in the opposite direction.

Yeah but in Japan they still have serial killers that do things without the use of guns. Overall the people of Japan in general are much more peaceful and that also contributes to less crimes, though they still have some crime.

When I was living in Japan, I remember one such crime where two Japanese guys were staging accidents. One would be out working in his yard, while the other would be down the street on a motorcycle. When I Japanese girl on a bike would approach the house where the one was working in and if the coast was clear, the guy on the motorcycle would drive past and knock the girl off her bike and drive away. The one doing the work in the yard would come to her aid and offer her to use the house phone to call for help. Inside the house the guy would tie her up and the other on the motorcycle would come back. They did this to a bunch of young girls before eventually getting caught. They found all the girls remains in 55 gallon drums dumped in various locations. They would keep the girls tied up in the house for weeks raping them before eventually killing them.

So this is just one example of a crime where there were mulitiple victims and a gun was not used. Case and point, if someone is out to kill people, they are going to utilize whatever means posible to do so, not just because they have a gun readily available to them. You take guns away and these people who want to kill will find other means to do so.

The Sushi Hunter wrote:Case and point, if someone is out to kill people, they are going to utilize whatever means posible to do so, not just because they have a gun readily available to them. You take guns away and these people who want to kill will find other means to do so.

Sure, but definitely nowhere near as easily. Would be alot harder to walk into a room of people and start killing them with a knife as opposed to a gun. With a knife you have to get close enough to do it.......more of a chance of a stronger person taking you out.

Deb wrote:

The Sushi Hunter wrote:Case and point, if someone is out to kill people, they are going to utilize whatever means posible to do so, not just because they have a gun readily available to them. You take guns away and these people who want to kill will find other means to do so.

Sure, but definitely nowhere near as easily. Would be alot harder to walk into a room of people and start killing them with a knife as opposed to a gun. With a knife you have to get close enough to do it.......more of a chance of a stronger person taking you out.

And Jeffrey Dahmer killed how many without a gun? Take guns away and there will be many more Dahmer style mass killings.

Saying guns kill people is like saying vacuum cleaners and coat hangers commit abortions.

AR wrote:Saying guns kill people is like saying vacuum cleaners and coat hangers commit abortions.

Yep, also like blaming spoons for making Rosie O'Donnell fat.

How many inmates kill each other in prison without guns? If guns was the problem no one would be getting killed while in prison.

How many people are killed by people that didn't use a gun? Taking away guns will not stop or slow down the number of crimes committed. What are you going to outlaw next? Bats, tire irons, knifes, golf clubs, rope, rocks, etc. etc.

The Sushi Hunter wrote:

AR wrote:Saying guns kill people is like saying vacuum cleaners and coat hangers commit abortions.

Yep, also like blaming spoons for making Rosie O'Donnell fat.

How many inmates kill each other in prison without guns? If guns was the problem no one would be getting killed while in prison.

How many people are killed by people that didn't use a gun? Taking away guns will not stop or slow down the number of crimes committed. What are you going to outlaw next? Bats, tire irons, knifes, golf clubs, etc. etc.

You at least have to be crazy enough or have the balls to get close enough to kill somebody with any of those. Guns are a chickenshit way of killing people. I'm not saying guns kill people, of course it's the person behind it. Was just saying it's ALOT easier to take out a room full of people with a gun than anything else. You would have less mass deaths in these cases if someone came charging into a theatre with a bat, tire iron, knife......

Deb wrote:

The Sushi Hunter wrote:

AR wrote:Saying guns kill people is like saying vacuum cleaners and coat hangers commit abortions.

Yep, also like blaming spoons for making Rosie O'Donnell fat.

How many inmates kill each other in prison without guns? If guns was the problem no one would be getting killed while in prison.

How many people are killed by people that didn't use a gun? Taking away guns will not stop or slow down the number of crimes committed. What are you going to outlaw next? Bats, tire irons, knifes, golf clubs, etc. etc.

You at least have to be crazy enough or have the balls to get close enough to kill somebody with any of those. Guns are a chickenshit way of killing people. I'm not saying guns kill people, of course it's the person behind it. Was just saying it's ALOT easier to take out a room full of people with a gun than anything else. You would have less mass deaths in these cases if someone came charging into a theatre with a bat, tire iron, knife......

Read up on how Jeffrey Dahmer killed all his victims. And as I mentioned before in the batman shooting thread, yeah, with guns you can take out a bunch of people in one pop but if the guns become harder to get, people will just change up the game and do it in a more silent approach. Again, using the Dahmer example, how much time was he able to kill people, without ever using a gun, before he was caught? He actually was able to bag more of his victims because he was doing it in such a silent closed door way. Outlaw guns and this type of killing spree will grow in popularity among those who want to kill.

You're going to look pretty helpless and pathetic standing there with your mouth hanging wide open when some nut comes breaking down your front door with a brick in one hand and an aluminum baseball bat in the other cause he's high on something and wants to kill you. What are you going to do then?

Since 2008 more guns have been sold in this country, EVERY YEAR than the year before...


and yet, as of Sept. 2011, violent crime has fallen EVERY YEAR since 2006...


Don't believe me? Read it for yourself: http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-20108263.html

Here's the FBI report for 2010: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010

Here's the table from that report showing the trend:





Here's the preliminary data for the 2011 report, the trend is still DOWN.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/preliminary-annual-ucr-jan-dec-2011

DavidWT wrote: If every random person is allowed to carry a gun, I just fear a lot of innocent people will be caught in deadly crossfire as untrained people panic and start shooting in situations like this.

Every American citizen over the age of 21 who has not committed a felony is allowed to carry a weapon here in Arizona and all of those people who have completed a course and a background check is allowed to conceal the weapon they carry and trust me when I tell you they do. And they carry them proudly. As I noted in a thread a couple of weeks ago after the Aurora shooting, there are so many people carrying a weapon here - whether concealed or not - that it would be infinitely surprising if something like that ever happened here. It's not uncommon to see 25 people or more with a sidearm on their waist as you go about your average day. And, to date, there has not been a single incident of this kind. If someone did decide to just start picking people off randomly, it would be mere seconds before he/she was taken down and it would be probably be by a citizen rather than a member of law enforcement. Since you pretty much have to assume everyone's packing, road rage isn't very common, armed robberies are committed less often here than most other states, and on and on. There are some very interesting studies that compare Arizona to the states who don't allow carrying a weapon and the statistics would surprise you.

JRNYMAN wrote:

DavidWT wrote: If every random person is allowed to carry a gun, I just fear a lot of innocent people will be caught in deadly crossfire as untrained people panic and start shooting in situations like this.

Every American citizen over the age of 21 who has not committed a felony is allowed to carry a weapon here in Arizona and all of those people who have completed a course and a background check is allowed to conceal the weapon they carry and trust me when I tell you they do. And they carry them proudly. As I noted in a thread a couple of weeks ago after the Aurora shooting, there are so many people carrying a weapon here - whether concealed or not - that it would be infinitely surprising if something like that ever happened here. It's not uncommon to see 25 people or more with a sidearm on their waist as you go about your average day. And, to date, there has not been a single incident of this kind. If someone did decide to just start picking people off randomly, it would be mere seconds before he/she was taken down and it would be probably be by a citizen rather than a member of law enforcement. Since you pretty much have to assume everyone's packing, road rage isn't very common, armed robberies are committed less often here than most other states, and on and on. There are some very interesting studies that compare Arizona to the states who don't allow carrying a weapon and the statistics would surprise you.

ty JRNYMAN... (there's fear and then there's fact)

Deb wrote:

The Sushi Hunter wrote:

AR wrote:Saying guns kill people is like saying vacuum cleaners and coat hangers commit abortions.

Yep, also like blaming spoons for making Rosie O'Donnell fat.

How many inmates kill each other in prison without guns? If guns was the problem no one would be getting killed while in prison.

How many people are killed by people that didn't use a gun? Taking away guns will not stop or slow down the number of crimes committed. What are you going to outlaw next? Bats, tire irons, knifes, golf clubs, etc. etc.

You at least have to be crazy enough or have the balls to get close enough to kill somebody with any of those. Guns are a chickenshit way of killing people. I'm not saying guns kill people, of course it's the person behind it. Was just saying it's ALOT easier to take out a room full of people with a gun than anything else. You would have less mass deaths in these cases if someone came charging into a theatre with a bat, tire iron, knife......

If they want to take out mass people they use bombs...any moron can google how to make one of those. I think if they want to hurt large amounts of people, or one person they will find a way. It is the fact that we have morally declined as a society that is a major part of the problem. We have more people who have no moral compass. And I am not talking about religious morality alone, but any morality. We have become a society that is touting if it feels good do it, pleasure self, fend for yourself, take what you want and screw the other guy mentalities. Children are raised with a desensitized look at mankind. I have kids in kindergarten who have come into class talking how they saw the movie SAW and SAW II. If parents don't teach their kids empathy for another they become numb and can do things to hurt others without blinking an eye. Watch how many fights go on and are posted to youtube. Go there and type in fight and see how much it happens. We look to this as entertainment. Murder and killing are glorified and revered in this country. People who kill get their 15 minutes of fame. We should not show their faces or names. It is this kind of glory that they crave.

Fact Finder wrote:Breaking News‏@BreakingNews

Official: All 9 people injured in shooting near NY's Empire State Building were wounded by police gunfire - @cnnbrk http://bit.ly/Qe66tF

Just read that. Yeah lets take firearms away from the citizens and only let the government be armed.

Fact Finder wrote:Breaking News‏@BreakingNews

Official: All 9 people injured in shooting near NY's Empire State Building were wounded by police gunfire - @cnnbrk http://bit.ly/Qe66tF

In an emergency situation when a police officer is forced to draw his weapon and fire it, the best trained only hit their intended target 25% of the time. Which translates to 75% of their rounds hitting something/someone else.

JRNYMAN wrote:

Fact Finder wrote:Breaking News‏@BreakingNews

Official: All 9 people injured in shooting near NY's Empire State Building were wounded by police gunfire - @cnnbrk http://bit.ly/Qe66tF

In an emergency situation when a police officer is forced to draw his weapon and fire it, the best trained only hit their intended target 25% of the time. Which translates to 75% of their rounds hitting something/someone else.

actually that 25% number is not accurate... you're referring to NYC SOP#9 from 1970

Officer-Involved Shootings: What We Didn’t Know Has Hurt Us ©
By Thomas J. Aveni, M.S.
The Police Policy Studies Council
http://www.theppsc.org/Staff_Views/Aveni/OIS.pdf


NYPD SOP #9: America’s First Exhaustive Firearms Discharge Report

Implemented in 1970, NYPD’s “Standard Operating Procedure #9” became an instant vehicle of enlightenment. SOP-9, a formal "Firearms Discharge Report," was implemented to establish documentation of all gunshots fired by NYPD officers. As you might imagine, ammunition expended in training and recreational shooting pursuits were (and are) exempted. However, firearms incidents as diverse as gunfights and officer suicides are documented, as are all "accidental" discharges of firearms.

While imperfect from the outset, SOP-9 ventured where few agencies had previously dared to go. The brainchild of NYPD’s Frank McGee, SOP-9 became the Holy Grail to inquisitive police trainers.


Lethal Encounter Proximity

The early years of SOP-9 contained more narrative than it did definitive breakdowns of the data culled from the reporting mechanism. Hit probability was discussed in very general terms, estimated to be “about 25 percent” and it then dismissed accurate tabulation as being, “impossible to document” (SOP-9 – 1981). However, this data does provide an early glimpse of gunfight proximity, which (as you’ll see from tables to follow) has a profound effect on hit probability.


Research Summary of Facts

To encapsulate and contrast the conclusions reached through the course of this research, the following observations are offered:

1. It appears that using officer hit ratio data from metropolitan law enforcement agencies has skewed our expectations.
   Individual hit ratios may be substantially higher than previously thought.
   Since bunch-shooting data was seldom (if ever) segregated from other officer hit ratios, we might surmise that much of the historical metro police shooting data has been misleading.
   Shootings involving singular officers appear to have hit ratios approaching (if not exceeding) 50%.
   
2. Mistake-of-Fact shootings remain a troublesome issue, representing 18-33% of police shootings.
   
3. Bunch-shootings seem to increase the number of rounds fired per officer by at least 45%, and reduce per officer hit ratios by as much as 82%.
   
4. Bunch-shootings may very well influence the nature in which officers utilize deadly force through the manner in which judgment and reactions are influenced (e.g., MOF shootings, associative threat identification, sympathetic firing impulse, etc.).
   
5. Low light shootings account for at least 60% of police applications of deadly force. They seem to diminish police hit ratios by as much as 30%. Low light also accounts for as many as 75% of all mistake-of-fact shootings.
   
6. Applications of deadly force seem to be more frequently preceded by unsuccessful attempts to employ less-lethal alternatives.

I read where they shot the bad guy 16 or so times. I'd say if the cops are using .40s and .45s, the additional shot victims were secondary impacts, meaning the bullets or portions of the bullets went completely through the bad guy and then continued on and struck others. When a bullet hits something hard like bones and then frag off into a few directions and out the person. Even a bullet hitting a belt buckle worn by the bad guy could also cause it to frag off and go into different directions.

In this situation, it's highly probable that there were people getting hit with bullets and or fragments of bullets that had already penetrated and exited the bad guy either in one piece or in fragments, and since they had primary impact on the bad guy, they had slowed down considerably by the time the secondary impact occured.

There was a shooting today at our local high school a half mile from where I live.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/08/27/po ... latestnews

JRNYMAN wrote:Every American citizen over the age of 21 who has not committed a felony is allowed to carry a weapon here in Arizona and all of those people who have completed a course and a background check is allowed to conceal the weapon they carry and trust me when I tell you they do. And they carry them proudly. As I noted in a thread a couple of weeks ago after the Aurora shooting, there are so many people carrying a weapon here - whether concealed or not - that it would be infinitely surprising if something like that ever happened here. It's not uncommon to see 25 people or more with a sidearm on their waist as you go about your average day. And, to date, there has not been a single incident of this kind. If someone did decide to just start picking people off randomly, it would be mere seconds before he/she was taken down and it would be probably be by a citizen rather than a member of law enforcement. Since you pretty much have to assume everyone's packing, road rage isn't very common, armed robberies are committed less often here than most other states, and on and on. There are some very interesting studies that compare Arizona to the states who don't allow carrying a weapon and the statistics would surprise you.

The Gabby Giffords shooting happened in Tucson. 19 shot, 6 killed. I am a believer in the right to bear arms, just pointing out that these things happen everywhere.

DavidWT wrote:

The Sushi Hunter wrote:The mayor is a retard. All politicans who push this anti-gun agenda are retards, because you won't ever find a single one of them that do not have personal armed security around the clock at their place of business and their home of residence. This mayor and all the other politicans who are so anti-gun will always have armed security around them. They don't have to worry. Its the common citizens who will have to worry if guns are outlawed. But this is no different from what the politicans do now with regular politics. They sit up in their safe zones while making rules and regulations that don't effect their life style, only the common citizens life style.

The difference, of course, being that, ideally, the armed security people with the mayor are well-trained when it comes to using firearms. If every random person is allowed to carry a gun, I just fear a lot of innocent people will be caught in deadly crossfire as untrained people panic and start shooting in situations like this.
.

You must have missed the part where 9 of the 10 people hit were hit by "trained" police.

So much for "trained police" and "only police should have weapons"

I didn't miss that. But I may have missed where it says they were directly shot at and hit. Again, until I hear otherwise, I'm going to assume they were hit indirectly by either bullets or frags of bullets that either passed completely through the bad guy or hit bone and or exterior items such as belt buckle causing the bullets to frag and then hit others.

Similar situation when people shoot guns in close quarters like in an apartment with calibers such as .40 and .45, which I'm sure Law Enforcement had in this NY situation, bullets will pass through multiple units before they travel no further. Even more so when a guy gets shot in a crowd of people. Those bullets exit the bad guy and can go on and hit more people. I'm sure that's what happened in this situation and I'm going to assume so until I get facts that state otherwise. People with little to no experience with weaponry must believe that once a person gets hit with a bullet, it stays in them or can't travel any further than that, which is incorrect in most cases, again depending on the caliber of weapon, distance between the gun that was fired and the point of impact, what the bullet hits while its traveling through the target, angle, size of the target, what the target is wearing, etc. Various factors involved. Even that smelly blimp Rosie O'fucking lard ass Donnell couldn't completely stop most larger caliber bullets, but she'd be something worth seriously thinking about hiding behind if you were being shot at and she was standing near you.

The Sushi Hunter wrote:I didn't miss that. But I may have missed where it says they were directly shot at and hit. Again, until I hear otherwise, I'm going to assume they were hit indirectly by either bullets or frags of bullets that either passed completely through the bad guy or hit bone and or exterior items such as belt buckle causing the bullets to frag and then hit others.

Similar situation when people shoot guns in close quarters like in an apartment with calibers such as .40 and .45, which I'm sure Law Enforcement had in this NY situation, bullets will pass through multiple units before they travel no further. Even more so when a guy gets shot in a crowd of people. Those bullets exit the bad guy and can go on and hit more people. I'm sure that's what happened in this situation and I'm going to assume so until I get facts that state otherwise. People with little to no experience with weaponry must believe that once a person gets hit with a bullet, it stays in them or can't travel any further than that, which is incorrect in most cases, again depending on the caliber of weapon, distance between the gun that was fired and the point of impact, what the bullet hits while its traveling through the target, angle, size of the target, what the target is wearing, etc. Various factors involved. Even that smelly blimp Rosie O'fucking lard ass Donnell couldn't completely stop most larger caliber bullets, but she'd be something worth seriously thinking about hiding behind if you were being shot at and she was standing near you.

I spent two years working for a firearms manufacturing company and have been shooting my entire life. There's no way that 9 people were hit by bullets passing through the guy. NYPD approved firearms are Glock 19 9mm, Double Action Only Sig P226 9mm and the S&W 5946 . They're loaded with hollow points. 9mm hollow points generally do stop in a human sized target. These two cops basically fired wildly when they saw shooting. They exercised poor muzzle discipline and weren't sure of their target or what was beyond it before they opened fire. The shooter was carrying a 1911 .45ACP which holds 7 rounds. He fired 5 and two were found in his gun after he was taken down. All five shots he fired hit his intended target. Every innocent bystander was struck by police bullets. They showed a lot of incompetence in this situation.

"Only the police and military should have guns."

Yeah, right. The biggest morons about guns are usually police officers. Come watch my local PD do their twice a year qualification. You'll be disgusted.

Archetype wrote:

The Sushi Hunter wrote:I didn't miss that. But I may have missed where it says they were directly shot at and hit. Again, until I hear otherwise, I'm going to assume they were hit indirectly by either bullets or frags of bullets that either passed completely through the bad guy or hit bone and or exterior items such as belt buckle causing the bullets to frag and then hit others.

Similar situation when people shoot guns in close quarters like in an apartment with calibers such as .40 and .45, which I'm sure Law Enforcement had in this NY situation, bullets will pass through multiple units before they travel no further. Even more so when a guy gets shot in a crowd of people. Those bullets exit the bad guy and can go on and hit more people. I'm sure that's what happened in this situation and I'm going to assume so until I get facts that state otherwise. People with little to no experience with weaponry must believe that once a person gets hit with a bullet, it stays in them or can't travel any further than that, which is incorrect in most cases, again depending on the caliber of weapon, distance between the gun that was fired and the point of impact, what the bullet hits while its traveling through the target, angle, size of the target, what the target is wearing, etc. Various factors involved. Even that smelly blimp Rosie O'fucking lard ass Donnell couldn't completely stop most larger caliber bullets, but she'd be something worth seriously thinking about hiding behind if you were being shot at and she was standing near you.

I spent two years working for a firearms manufacturing company and have been shooting my entire life. There's no way that 9 people were hit by bullets passing through the guy. NYPD approved firearms are Glock 19 9mm, Double Action Only Sig P226 9mm and the S&W 5946 . They're loaded with hollow points. 9mm hollow points generally do stop in a human sized target. These two cops basically fired wildly when they saw shooting. They exercised poor muzzle discipline and weren't sure of their target or what was beyond it before they opened fire. The shooter was carrying a 1911 .45ACP which holds 7 rounds. He fired 5 and two were found in his gun after he was taken down. All five shots he fired hit his intended target. Every innocent bystander was struck by police bullets. They showed a lot of incompetence in this situation.

"Only the police and military should have guns."

Yeah, right. The biggest morons about guns are usually police officers. Come watch my local PD do their twice a year qualification. You'll be disgusted.

Archetype - Note in my post above regarding police fire efficiency... key finding (below) pretty much supports your point.

3. Bunch-shootings seem to increase the number of rounds fired per officer by at least 45%, and reduce per officer hit ratios by as much as 82%.

Sushi - The study itself is worth the read if you want the actual facts... http://www.theppsc.org/Staff_Views/Aveni/OIS.pdf

So Archetype, with your cops like that you must be from Mayberry then, yes? Do you know for a fact the cops in this situation were firing 9MMs with hollow tip ammo? If that is true, yeah, the bullets would most likely not pass through the guy as my theory has it. But if they were using that type of setup, they were definitely outgunned cause the fact is, the bad guy had a .45.

My theory is based on the assumption that the cops were firing .40s and/or .45 with "FBI Loads/full metal jacket ammo". I did read an interesting article today in which authorities are already discussing the fact that many of the people that were hit, were done so after bullets that were fired had bounced off objects and then hit the people, either in fragments or whole. I would expect that in a large crowd where the gunman was firing randomly at the cops while moving through the crowded street, the cops had no other choice but to fire back in split second reaction in an attempt to prevent the guy from hitting more people and for their protection as well, which some rounds may have missed the bad guy. But from what some are commenting on forums and news article comments, they are taking it as though the cops freaked and just started firing randomly into the crowd or towards anything or anyone that was moving, which is not true. They knew exactly who they were after and there were lots of factors and obstacles involved.

We will just have to wait and see what the autopsy report shows in regards to the number of entrance and exit wounds the bad guy sustained, and I can almost guarantee you he has exit wounds and he doesn't look like he was that big of a guy so if a round went through him without hitting any bone, it could continue on and hit someone else, again depending on the size of the gun that shot the round and what type of round. How many bullets were found in him, what type of weapons and ammo the cops were using, and how many shots the cops fired in total, which shouldn't be too difficult to determine since it didn't last more than a magazine or two per cop.

Out of the number of bullets that the bad guy fired, do you think any of those hit anyone besides the guy he shot and killed? Any of his shots bounce off objects and then hit people? There is a probability factor there as well. I think the point here is, if the cops weren't there firing on him, he may have killed more than just his initial target.

The Sushi Hunter wrote:So Archetype, with your cops like that you must be from Mayberry then, yes? Do you know for a fact the cops in this situation were firing 9MMs with hollow tip ammo? If that is true, yeah, the bullets would most likely not pass through the guy as my theory has it. But if they were using that type of setup, they were definitely outgunned cause the fact is, the bad guy had a .45.

My theory is based on the assumption that the cops were firing .40s and/or .45 with "FBI Loads/full metal jacket ammo". I did read an interesting article today in which authorities are already discussing the fact that many of the people that were hit, were done so after bullets that were fired had bounced off objects and then hit the people, either in fragments or whole. I would expect that in a large crowd where the gunman was firing randomly at the cops while moving through the crowded street, the cops had no other choice but to fire back in split second reaction in an attempt to prevent the guy from hitting more people and for their protection as well, which some rounds may have missed the bad guy. But from what some are commenting on forums and news article comments, they are taking it as though the cops freaked and just started firing randomly into the crowd or towards anything or anyone that was moving, which is not true. They knew exactly who they were after and there were lots of factors and obstacles involved.

We will just have to wait and see what the autopsy report shows in regards to the number of entrance and exit wounds the bad guy sustained, and I can almost guarantee you he has exit wounds and he doesn't look like he was that big of a guy so if a round went through him without hitting any bone, it could continue on and hit someone else, again depending on the size of the gun that shot the round and what type of round. How many bullets were found in him, what type of weapons and ammo the cops were using, and how many shots the cops fired in total, which shouldn't be too difficult to determine since it didn't last more than a magazine or two per cop.

Out of the number of bullets that the bad guy fired, do you think any of those hit anyone besides the guy he shot and killed? Any of his shots bounce off objects and then hit people? There is a probability factor there as well. I think the point here is, if the cops weren't there firing on him, he may have killed more than just his initial target.

Sushi.. you keep confusing FACT with you opinion...


The police have already admitted that... all the shots fired were fired by the police...

So that means all the shots that injured bystanders came from the police...

Police: All Empire State shooting victims were wounded by officers
http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/25/justice/n ... ?hpt=hp_t1

New York (CNN) -- On a busy Friday morning in Manhattan, nine pedestrians suffered bullet or fragment wounds after police unleashed a hail of gunfire at a man wielding a .45 caliber pistol who had just killed a former co-worker.

The officers unloaded 16 rounds in the shadow of the Empire State Building at a disgruntled former apparel designer, killing him after he engaged in a gunbattle with police, authorities said.

Three passersby sustained direct gunshot wounds, while the remaining six were hit by fragments, according to New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly. All injuries were caused by police, he said Saturday.

One officer shot nine rounds and another shot seven.

16 shots to hit a man who was STANDING STILL less than 10 feet away when they opened fire.. watch the video... one officer is within 10 feet.. the other backs away...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYWgrHwrlf8

The Sushi Hunter wrote:So Archetype, with your cops like that you must be from Mayberry then, yes? Do you know for a fact the cops in this situation were firing 9MMs with hollow tip ammo? If that is true, yeah, the bullets would most likely not pass through the guy as my theory has it. But if they were using that type of setup, they were definitely outgunned cause the fact is, the bad guy had a .45.

Mayberry is more realistic than you'd like to believe. Cops really are not the brightest people. They way that society puts them on a pedestal is quite absurd. No other countries do it like we do here. I know with 100% certainty that they were firing 9mm hollowpoints, because they were using magazine-fed pistols and all 3 NYPD approved magazine-fed pistols are chambered in 9mm. Using full metal jacket rounds is a big, big liability for police departments and I don't know of a single one that uses them in their standard carry sidearms. The only other caliber they could be firing from a sidearm is .38 Special, and that would be from revolvers, which they weren't using. Your comment about them being outgunned by a .45 says a lot about your knowledge about shooting and firearms in general. 9mm and .45 are nearly equivalent in their ballistics with one being light and fast and the other being heavy and slow. The difference is like getting hit by a golf ball going 400 miles per hour or a baseball going 300 miles per hour. See where I'm going? Plus with 9mm you have the advantage of higher capacity and faster follow-up shots, so now, the cops weren't outgunned at all. TRhey were just poorly trained, or incompetent. Likely both. Plus, as posted before, the police have already confirmed that all the bystanders were struck by police bullets, so your theory is dead wrong,

I have a number of close friends who I’ve known back to the years of my military career who are currently or who have been in law enforcement after separating from the military, and because of that I have dialog with others who I met through my friends who are also in law enforcement, in both Texas and some parts of California, and none of them carry a 9MM as their service weapon, only .40 and .45’s. You have a very negative outlook and opinion on law enforcement. I'm sure you have your reasons, right or wrong. I don't share the same outlook and opinion on that as you do though and for that I am greatful.

In regards to the New York shooting, I’m looking forward to learning more about what exact type of weapons and ammo the cops used during that situation and the findings in the autopsy report. We pretty much know that he’s got 16 entrance wounds, what I’m interested in is the number of exit wounds and where they are located. If say he’s got 10 exit wounds about the neck arms shoulder and legs and the cops only fired a total of 20 rounds, we already know he’s got 16 entrance wounds and 9 others were hit with either fragments of our entire bullets. This information would then point to some of the exiting projectiles moving on to hit other people. Now let’s say that the cops shot 30 rounds in total, the bad guy has the 16 entrance wounds but only 3 exit wounds. Since 9 others were hit, yeah, then you can say that bullets fired by the police either bounced off objects other than the bad guy and hit the people or, were hit directly by gunfire by the cops. There were no other fatalities beyond the bad guy and his victim.

Even hollow tip ammo fired from a .45 at close range can completely pass through a neck, arm, shoulder, or leg if it doesn’t hit bone and then go on to hit others. Even if it does hit bone, it can still bounce off the bone and exit the area and still have enough velocity to injure another person. Hollow tip ammo can penetrate up to 18 inches of flesh before it stops. The areas I mentioned above are far less than that. Again, it’s all speculation right now until we get the reports.

I just read a report that indicates the bad guy sustained 10 bullet holes. Doesn't mention how many are entrance or exit wounds and how many bullets were found in his body. The report also indicates only 16 shots in total that the police fired. 9 bystanders were hit by bullet fragments but none were seriously injured. So many focus on the big bad police officers but nothing about the fucking creep that brought it on.

The Sushi Hunter wrote:I have a number of close friends who I’ve known back to the years of my military career who are currently or who have been in law enforcement after separating from the military, and because of that I have dialog with others who I met through my friends who are also in law enforcement, in both Texas and some parts of California, and none of them carry a 9MM as their service weapon, only .40 and .45’s.

That's fine, but there are no pistols approved for use by the NYPD in either of those two calibers. Only 9mm.