However, it turns out the officer lost it while speeding to the scene and hit a barrier in the street.
Posted on 10/06/2013 11:46:55 AM PDT by nickcarraway
It's been two days since 34-year-old dental hygienist Miriam Carey was killed after she rammed her car into a barricade in front of the White House and led security forces on a chase toward the U.S. Capitol, and some are asking whether the use of deadly force against her was truly necessary. While the first accounts of Carey's death said she exited her black Infiniti before she was shot, investigators now say she was still in the vehicle when officers fired the fatal bullets. Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Terrance W. Gainer told reporters that Carey "was trying to make a U-turn [toward the officers] between a United States Capitol Police security booth and some planters in the middle of the street on Constitution Avenue. Capitol Police officers and uniformed Secret Service officers shot at the car with semiautomatic pistols." D.C. Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier indicated that the car was not moving at that time and confirmed that officers shot at Carey beforehand, near Garfield Circle, when the car was still moving.
As has been noted, D.C. police have a policy against shooting at moving vehicles "unless deadly force is being used against the officer or another person...For purposes of this order, a moving vehicle is not considered deadly force." But when speaking to the Washington Post, Gainer acknowledged that the location of the incident complicated the situation: "The thing that’s distinctive about this is it was not your typical traffic violation...We operate in an environment under the constant threat of attack from suicide bombers and improvised explosive devices." He added, "Whenever there are bullets flying, there are risks. I think these officers minimized the risks to others." (Carey was unarmed, so — appropriately discharged or not — the only bullets flying were those of the security officers.) The New York Times points out that it is "not clear" whether the Secret Service or the Capitol Police share the D.C. Police Department's policy against shooting at moving cars. Spokespeople for both the Secret Service and Capitol Police declined to provide the Post with more information regarding their organizations' protocols.
Scores of experts have weighed in on the matter, though they mostly (and understandably, given that many details are still unavailable) seem unable to say whether it was handled correctly. Geoffrey Alpert, a criminologist at the University of South Carolina who spoke to the Times, said, "[Carey] had to be stopped. The question is, were there better ways to stop her? I don’t know what the answers are." William J. Bratton, who has led the Boston, L.A., and New York City police departments, also pointed out that D.C. offers "a different set of challenges than most police agencies. It’s truly an exceptional city with exceptional security circumstances." (He also said it was hard to judge the situation because we don't know if Carey "disobeyed commands" form officers.) Chuck Wexler of the Police Executive Research Forum told the Post this was "clearly an out-of-control situation" and said that "it's very important to think, what did the officers know at that point in time versus what we know today," which he said was a reference Carey's widely reported history of postpartum depression and possible psychosis and the fact that her 1-year-old daughter was also in the car.
In an interview with ABC News, Carey's sisters said she was not violent and attributed her struggle with mental illness. They also said the police should have acted differently. Valarie Carey, a retired NYPD sergeant, said, "Officers had enough time to assess the occupants of the vehicle. They actually not only put someone at harm's way, but they took someone's life." "She had no political agenda. She didn't hate her country. She wasn't a terrorist. She was on medication," said another sister, Amy Carey Jones, a registered nurse. "Mental illness really should have more attention."
Because they can... An example had to be made...
One question is why doesn’t Dianne Feinstein want to re-start the “reasonable debate” on gun control? She seems to be a big fan of the government shooters killing their citizens.
I urge folks to read the comments at the article. Even though NY Magazine is a pretty liberal NY Publication (although not as bad as some) with a readership to match many of the comments sound just like Freepers.
I’m not sure what to think of this story, but I do question why they weren’t able to stop the car sooner than they did.
sure doesn’t look like anything was rammed
or am I missing something?
That needs to be repeated. I knew very well a very disturbed young man that turned to alcohol and drugs to self medicate for mental illness. He became violent one day- throwing things out of the house and setting them on fire. His sister is a nurse in a hospital and got him admitted so he could get help. As soon as his mind cleared a bit he simply checked himself out before he could even be evaluated. He killed himself less than 6 months later and thank the Lord he took no one else with him. His family tried everything and even law enforcement was involved, but it is nearly impossible to get help for mental illness in this country. We are far more concerned with Civil Rights of the mentally ill than the safety of the people they encounter. We are even more concerned with their rights than we are their safety. We see that in spades with the firearms issues, we have a definite mental illness issue in this country that we are choosing to ignore.
I think that the rules of engagement (anywhere) are that if someone uses a car as a weapon, the gloves are off. You stop the car, immediately, because OTHERS are now in danger. This involves disabling the car (iffy) or shooting the driver (definitely).
Yeah. Check what looks like bullet holes in the driver's door!
Just wait. Homeland security had the presentation in the pipeline but the CIA section that produced the TWA 800 explanatory video mistaken went on furlough. Any day now...
Hearing about the DC case felt a bit unsettling to me as just a couple of days before that situation, there was a similar situation in New Hampshire with a car chase and the driver was also shot dead when she tried to ram a police car with her car.
Where’s the Trayvon outrage? Ooooh, can’t have any criticism of our first black _resident’s finest, now can we? That might tarnish “our lord and savior’s” image. The only one to open their mouth was Sheila and she has kept mum after that first day.
No. Supposedly, the incident started when she rammed a barrier near the White House. How hard would you have to ram a barrier with that car in order for it sustain visible damage?
Maybe Infinity should make it into a commercial. In the spirit of that delightfully tasteless VW Polo ad of a few years ago.
One more car and you could have blocked her in. Then you shoot the tires, not her. Then you take her in.
Instead, they chose to shoot an unarmed black woman. I guess there aren’t enough black orphans to suit these people. Very caring!
Liberals cheer.
Justice for Miriam!
Why is that? What has happened to have them change so in the past 5 years? You know this wouldn't have happened 5 years ago. hussein is getting his civilian army and this proves without a doubt it will turn on The People without a second thought.
However, it turns out the officer lost it while speeding to the scene and hit a barrier in the street.
Threat = Kill = MILITARY.
Threat = Massive Option List = POLICE
Otherwise, what use ANY training at all? You "kill first, ask questions later" people are still endangering cops. After all, if any threat requires killing, then why put cops out there at all where they could be hurt? Why not go straight to military drones, and missile strikes or snipers against anyone deemed a threat? THAT is perfect police safety.
Not this half-assed endangerment where multiple police officers have to first put themselves in harm's way to determine that an unarmed woman with a baby is a threat before they can murder her.
All I'm saying is say what you mean. The sooner we go to complete military takeover and drones firing missiles at "threats," from offsite computer terminals, the sooner cops will stop being endangered in the line of duty.
That witness comes across as very credible.
Nothing is as it seems....more to this than meets the eye....what about the babydaddy who supposedly works in the WH????
Then your instincts and training would be yelling at you that bullets will cause it and you to be blown to smithereens.
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.