Posted on 12/04/2006 12:20:29 PM PST by ventanax5
New York’s anti-cop forces have roared back to life, thanks to a fatal police shooting of an unarmed man a week ago. The press is once again fawning over Al Sharpton, Herbert Daughtry, Charles Barron, and sundry other hate-mongers in and out of city government as they accuse the police of widespread mistreatment of blacks and issue barely veiled threats of riots if they do not get “justice.”
The allegation that last weekend’s shooting was racially motivated is preposterous. A group of undercover officers working in a gun- and drug-plagued strip joint in Queens had good reason to believe that a party leaving the club was armed and about to shoot an adversary. When one of the undercovers identified himself as an officer, the car holding the party twice tried to run him down. The officer started firing while yelling to the car’s occupants: “Let me see your hands.” His colleagues, believing they were under attack, fired as well, eventually shooting off 50 rounds and killing the driver, Sean Bell. No gun was found in the car, but witnesses and video footage confirm that a fourth man in the party fled the scene once the altercation began. Bell and the other men with him all had been arrested for illegal possession of guns in the past; one of Bell’s companions that night, Joseph Guzman, had spent considerable time in prison, including for an armed robbery in which he shot at his victim.
(Excerpt) Read more at city-journal.org ...
Had one near us (3.5miles) and we ran them off. Most of them are on reservations where their relatives (BIA cops) protect them. Come off the reservation near my home and I will make your life miserable.
The cops were undercover from what I hear so the victim would not have known. We had something similar in Atlanta. Police broke down this door (no knock warrant) and shot an 88 year old woman. She had a gun and shot several police also. The police said an informant told them drugs were being dealt out of this house. The informant says he never told the police this.
I think the police are covering up the fact they hit the wrong house. This poor woman didn't know they were police. Armed men break in-it's the middle of the night. She defends herself. It's a cold cruel world out there.
If you mean displaying your utter ignorance of the difference between an undercover detail and an undercover operation is "demolishing" my post you are, of course, entitled to your own bizarre opinion.
But don't pretend that your inability to address my second post is somehow excused by your ignorance of undercover procedure.
I was just pointing out how many men were shot out. I made no inference to whether or not I thought the shots were too little or too many.
I don't know why they didn't stop. I'll take a chance and assume that they were trying to escape the police.
And, had he blown cover on the whole operation for an arrest that would not have gotten the needed outcome and even that arrest turned up no gun or any crime, his career would definitely suffer.
Those guys reacted because they believed Bell and crew were a danger to the public.
They were not about to blow the cover on an ongoing operation for a minor arrest that is normally punishable by maybe six months in stir for a first offense.
shot at not shot out
They were originally accosted by a single man, holding no weapon, who identified himself as a police officer.
They then tried to run him over.
After they tried to run him over they were surrounded by armed police officers and they still thought that if they barreled their way through the officers they could get away.
Alcohol plus being a dumb thug means bad decisions.
The cop-haters know not what they're talking about.
That's a command decision by corporation counsel.
I wouldn't want to go up against a crying mother in court with a jury specially selected by plaintiff's counsel to be none-too-bright rooters for the underdog.
There is something inherently wrong when you have police officers "commit a crime" as part of their undercover operation, then turn around and deal with a unarmed civilian as a criminal when he reacts in this kind of manner (i.e., arrest the people involved when they react as any normal person might react when confronted with criminal activity).
If someone asked me if I could sell him some drugs I would laugh at him rather than commit felonious assault.
Normal people don't attack people just for asking them a stupid question.
There are limits to police doing this, i.e. entrapment statutes.
Best law suit ever in NYC was Samuel L. Jackson after he was dragged by a subway car.
I do not mean to sound condescending, but I don't think you really understand what goes on in large cities or other populated areas.
First of all, groups of men and women do police these bad neighborhoods. They are the police, and their job is not as easy as you seem to think. NYC is actually a rather safe city compared to most cities in this country. The areas or major cities that are the most dangerous are controlled by organized criminal drug gangs, who are totally ruthless. You are not going to have ordinary citizens going in there and cleaning the places up by kicking ass like a Hollywood movie. People who would try to do that would be killed. The only real way to clean these places up is to use good police work like they usually do in the safest big cities, and to get more business and infrastructure in these neighborhoods. Major cities have always been dangerous, and they will probably never be totally safe because violent crime will always go up when you put large numbers of people in realtively small areas.
Your point about the real mean is actually very true because many of the children in these areas have no fathers to raise them, so they grow up to be criminals because criminals recruit them and it is the easiest way for them to support themselves. I do not mean this statement to sound like an excuse for their behavior, but it is a big part of the problem.
They showed the other night just how fast 50 rounds can be fired off in an emergency situation, and brother- it was super quick- it wasn't like some drawn out laborious process- it was a blink of the eye with 3 officers- this has been blown way out of proportion by the 'victimized agenda crowd' http://sacredscoop.com
Whatever you went through to get your NJ FPIC, imagine six more months of it to get a similar thing in NYC. And keep in mind that NYC created an 'assault rifle' registry, so that when they enacted a ban, Giuliani could send the NYPD on house to houses to make sure the residents got rid of their evil black rifles. New York City has smoking police. New York City is about to get trans fat police. New York City has laws prohibiting dancing in bars that do not have cabaret licenses. New York City has taxi police. New York City has code enforcement police, and comsumer affairs police, also they have a special police squad to catch you selling cigarettes from North Carolina or Indian Reservations. New York City has thought police who add special charges when white people attack minorities, but not the other way around. They do not yet have a library police, but if that pinhead Bloomberg wants one, it will happen. I am so glad I got out of that area.
Why'd you shoot him 31 times?
Ran outta ammo. < /rimshot>
Oh, but they do have library police -
Investigator The New York Public Library
Again, overregulation does make a police state.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.