NYPD's Finest?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
261

[quote]david dunne wrote:

Ok good. Now read the part about trying to keep four suspects CONTAINED[/quote]

…inside a 3000 lb. battering ram…

…which is kind of a puzzling situation since the outside backup was aware of a potential gun threat from the suspect a full hour before he and his friends exited the club. That either means that

A) Instead of getting into more tactically advantageous takedown positions, the UC cops outside in the unmarked mini vans found something else to do with their time.

B) The UC cops outside decided it was best for uniformed backup to handle the situation, but an hour was not enough time for backup to arrive.

Granted, the UC’s had no way of knowing whether the suspect would exit the club in an hour or a few seconds, so “B” was probably (and understandably) not implemented.

[quote]where at the least you have a chaotic footchase in four directions and at worse one or more goes for a gun and the officer is now involved in a shoot out with 1-4 suspects on an open street.

Put it this way - if you were the UC would you bumrush the four guys like a movie hero or would you take into account the public’s safety too and try for the conatined scenario?[/quote]

262

[quote]Digital Chainsaw wrote:
A bunch of bullshit[/quote]

I was pointing out that the two jobs are very different. I wasn’t undermining Border Patrol. They are very different jobs. You’re slamming cops in general in your post, so you are guilty of what you THOUGHT I was doing. Very hypocritical.

Border Patrol isn’t patrolling the neighborhood. Border Patrol isn’t responding to suicide calls. Border Patrol doesn’t see the urban decay. The list goes on. That doesn’t mean that they aren’t important. I wasn’t saying that at all. GP’s and surgeons have different jobs too. What do they have in common? A medical background. Both are very important professions.

“Not even a cop?” “Not even close?”
The only similarities are that they wear a uniform, a badge, and carry a gun. So they are not even a cop, not even close to being a cop.

I think that you wanted me to bash BP. Just like you want the cops in this story to be hung out to dry.

You shouldn’t call people retarded. There are people out there that have mental disabilities, and you using the word “retarded” in such a derogatory fashion makes me think you are very immature. Very unprofessional on your behalf. Please, walk away from this conversation.

263

[quote]Professor X wrote:
NDM wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Clearly, you have not grown up in a part of town that was actually a threat. If you have, then your surprise me by acting like you don’t understand the “rules” in such an environment.

I live in an area where not too long ago a cop was shot in the face while identifying himself to a drug dealer. The guy that shot the cop in the face claimed the cop startled him. The story in NYPD went the other way than the one I just told you about. Can you understand my point of view now?

I would rather hear that story from the source rather than you interpretation of it. Besides that, no, your point is still not understood because what difference does that make? A cop startles a drug dealer and gets shot…therefore, every case you view from now on assumes that the cops did everything correctly when a life gets taken? How does that make sense to you?

You just proved yourself more biased than anyone else, only from the opposite position. How does that make you more right?[/quote]

Unlike many people in this conversation, I didn’t jump into it to be “right”. I got involved because the OP has a history of cop bashing. I didn’t like the manner in which he presented his argument, so I called him on it. I also think that a lot of people are followers on this website, and follow those who have many posts and bully people around on the forums. I will not apologize for going against the grain and supporting the NYPD officers in question. I would have done the same thing as them in that terrifying situation.

You say that you would have done the same as Bell in this situation. I can’t really blame you for that. I might have too. But, would you have conducted yourself the way that Bell and Guzman did leading up to the event? If they had not acted like criminals, which they are, they wouldn’t be in this mess right now. If you’re going to act like a gun toting criminal, expect to be treated as such.

264

[quote]PGA wrote:
Some of the things being said now is completely laughable…[/quote]

You think a cop getting killed on duty is “laughable”? You’re a disgusting human being if you think that is funny.

265

[quote]NDM wrote:
PGA wrote:
Some of the things being said now is completely laughable…

You think a cop getting killed on duty is “laughable”? You’re a disgusting human being if you think that is funny.
[/quote]

Dude get some medication…How you came to that conclusion is beyond a psychologist’s help.

266

[quote]NDM wrote:
If they had not acted like criminals, which they are, they wouldn’t be in this mess right now. If you’re going to act like a gun toting criminal, expect to be treated as such.
[/quote]

Bullshit. That is like saying, “if they had not looked like criminals, they wouldn’t be in this mess”. Until a crime is committed, to assume someone is definitely going to commit a crime is not what the law is. Often these assumptions are based on profiling, something I have been a victim of several times in the past. According to some cops, I apparently “look” like a criminal. I “fit the profile”…ie. a large bald black man who is breathing. Mind you, this has even come from other BLACK cops before you act as if the race of the officer makes a big difference.

No one has written that these guys were angels, however, what does that matter if the reason this one undercover was getting involved WAS NOT because of the altercation outside? They wait until they get in the car to drive away with no one hurt? If no one was hurt, why get involved now? If they were so concerned about the safety of the individual being threatened, why didn’t he jump in THEN?!

No, you would rather overlook that…because you read an article once where a cop got shot.

267

[quote]PGA wrote:
NDM wrote:
PGA wrote:
Some of the things being said now is completely laughable…

You think a cop getting killed on duty is “laughable”? You’re a disgusting human being if you think that is funny.

Dude get some medication…How you came to that conclusion is beyond a psychologist’s help.[/quote]

You said things being said were laughable. You hate cops. It’s a sound conclusion based on other shit you have said.

268

[quote]Professor X wrote:
NDM wrote:
If they had not acted like criminals, which they are, they wouldn’t be in this mess right now. If you’re going to act like a gun toting criminal, expect to be treated as such.

Bullshit. That is like saying, “if they had not looked like criminals, they wouldn’t be in this mess”. Until a crime is committed, to assume someone is definitely going to commit a crime is not what the law is. Often these assumptions are based on profiling, something I have been a victim of several times in the past. According to some cops, I apparently “look” like a criminal. I “fit the profile”…ie. a large bald black man who is breathing. Mind you, this has even come from other BLACK cops before you act as if the race of the officer makes a big difference.

No one has written that these guys were angels, however, what does that matter if the reason this one undercover was getting involved WAS NOT because of the altercation outside? They wait until they get in the car to drive away with no one hurt? If no one was hurt, why get involved now? If they were so concerned about the safety of the individual being threatened, why didn’t he jump in THEN?!

No, you would rather overlook that…because you read an article once where a cop got shot. [/quote]

Read an article? I didn’t hear it from the paper, I heard it from my friend who knew the cop really well. You asked for an article, so I produced one. I held up my end of the bargain. You didn’t. And if you want to talk about people who only read articles, let’s talk about the OP.

Don’t pull a race card. Don’t cheapen this argument. They weren’t followed because they were black, they were followed because they said they had a gun. If you ask me, assuming someone has a gun because they claimed ownership of one is a fair assumption. Why didn’t the UC take them down then? Because it was 8 on 1. I’m going to refrain from posting on this thread from now on because you guys don’t give a shit about the facts, you just want to see some cops go down.

269

[quote]Professor X wrote:
NDM wrote:
If they had not acted like criminals, which they are, they wouldn’t be in this mess right now. If you’re going to act like a gun toting criminal, expect to be treated as such.

Bullshit. That is like saying, “if they had not looked like criminals, they wouldn’t be in this mess”.[/quote]

No it’s not. They said they had a gun, they didn’t look like they had a gun. Looking like a criminal is fine, whatever. You have the right to look how you want. When you start acting like a criminal, you want to be noticed. And they were noticed. I don’t understand why you think you have a valid argument about this.

270

[quote]NDM wrote:
Professor X wrote:
NDM wrote:
If they had not acted like criminals, which they are, they wouldn’t be in this mess right now. If you’re going to act like a gun toting criminal, expect to be treated as such.

Bullshit. That is like saying, “if they had not looked like criminals, they wouldn’t be in this mess”.

No it’s not. They said they had a gun, they didn’t look like they had a gun. Looking like a criminal is fine, whatever. You have the right to look how you want. When you start acting like a criminal, you want to be noticed. And they were noticed. I don’t understand why you think you have a valid argument about this.

[/quote]

Let me ask you a question before you lose a cork, is it out of the realm of reality that someone could possibly say, “yo, go get my gun” as an empty threat simply because there was an argument?

I already know the answer to that question because I have heard people say it in arguments when no gun was around.

Bottom line, no one said, “I have a gun”. No one even SAW a gun. A gun was mentioned in a threat as if it were elsewhere and someone would have to go and get it for it to be present, but nowhere did anyone say, “hey, I have a gun in my hand!”. I have no doubt they will try to publicize every ounce of dirt they can find on these guys to save face. This isn’t even about how “innocent” these guys were in their daily lives…but rather they deserved to die.

Once you can finally admit that, perhaps there could actually be a discussion…as opposed to your hurt feelings being spread all over my computer screen.

That’s just not sanitary.

271

I could see it being an empty threat. I admit it. That doesn’t mean that it was an empty threat at the time. Why can’t you accept that?

My feelings aren’t hurt, I just think that you took advantage of a situation that I put myself in. Shame on me for thinking you were better than that. I asked you not to say anything about that, but you did.

272

[quote]NDM wrote:
I could see it being an empty threat. I admit it. That doesn’t mean that it was an empty threat at the time. Why can’t you accept that?

My feelings aren’t hurt, I just think that you took advantage of a situation that I put myself in. Shame on me for thinking you were better than that. I asked you not to say anything about that, but you did.[/quote]

What the hell are you talking about? You mentioned an article in THIS THREAD. Your pm didn’t even get read until after I responded, which means you have no point…aside from crying for no reason. You asked me not to say anything…THAT YOU ALREADY MENTIONED!!! It is time for your meds, sir.

273

[quote]NDM wrote:
Digital Chainsaw wrote:
A bunch of bullshit

I was pointing out that the two jobs are very different. I wasn’t undermining Border Patrol.[/quote]

OMFG…

I’m slamming cops? Wow, you are pretty far gone.

Whose?

Depends on who is making them.

Clueless doesn’t begin to describe this statement.

Of course not, how silly of me.

I’ve never seen such backpedaling in my life.

[quote]GP’s and surgeons have different jobs too. What do they have in common? A medical background. Both are very important professions.

“Not even a cop?” “Not even close?”
The only similarities are that they wear a uniform, a badge, and carry a gun. So they are not even a cop, not even close to being a cop. [/quote]

“Not even a cop”

But you’re not bashing them. I see.

They are cops with Federal arrest powers, you idiot!

My head is spinning…

When you allege someone is “not even” something, you are denoting that they are below the station of what you are comparing them to.

I mean, just in case you didn’t know…

No, I’m just not omitting uncomfortable holes in the police’s version of events, or downplaying them as acceptable after the fact (using your bizarre logic).

You’re right. They would probably feel very insulted being lumped in with you.

Oh, yes, a dressing-down from a bipolar loon using a Thesaurus makes me feel oh-so-ashamed.

274

[quote]NDM wrote:
You said things being said were laughable. You hate cops. It’s a sound conclusion based on other shit you have said. [/quote]

Wow, I’m actually sad for you right now man…

275

[quote]NDM wrote:

I’m going to refrain from posting on this thread from now on…[/quote]

6 minutes later…

[quote]Professor X wrote:
NDM wrote:
If they had not acted like criminals, which they are, they wouldn’t be in this mess right now. If you’re going to act like a gun toting criminal, expect to be treated as such.

Bullshit. That is like saying, “if they had not looked like criminals, they wouldn’t be in this mess”.

No it’s not. They said they had a gun, they didn’t look like they had a gun. Looking like a criminal is fine, whatever. You have the right to look how you want. When you start acting like a criminal, you want to be noticed. And they were noticed. I don’t understand why you think you have a valid argument about this.

[/quote]

And so on, and so on, and so on…

The least you could do is live up to your word.

276

It’s funny. The only argument you guys have are personal attacks on me. It just goes to show your character, and lack of intelligent debate. You guys need to get a life. Anyone who has the time to post nearly 15000 times needs to leave the house every once in a while.

277

[quote]Wreckless wrote:
Smart move to step in front of a car when you’re about to arrest them for carrying a gun.

You think they’re a threat because they might be carrying a gun. How does standing in front of the car make it any safer?[/quote]

A few years ago here in St. Pete, a uniformed SPPD officer stood in front of a car with his gun trained on the driver, who was a minor with a long history of auto theft. The kid’s foot let up on the brake slightly, causing the car to jump forward a few inches before he could reapply the brake. In this fraction of a second, the cop nailed him center mass at nearly point blank range numerous times, instantly killing the kid.

The officer was cleared of any wrongdoing because of the threat posed by the car. And… Wait for it, wait for it… He was following policy.

Because the slain youth was a black male, a number of residents from his neighborhood took to the streets, burning down portions of their own community.

SPPD official policy was then changed to specifically read that officers approaching a suspect vehicle on foot should do so at a 45 degree angle to the driver in order to avoid being directly in front of the car and in harm’s way.

Yes.

Policy had to be rewritten to tell adults entrusted with firearms and arrest powers that standing in front of a car is unsafe.

278

[quote]Digital Chainsaw wrote:
Wreckless wrote:
Smart move to step in front of a car when you’re about to arrest them for carrying a gun.

You think they’re a threat because they might be carrying a gun. How does standing in front of the car make it any safer?

A few years ago here in St. Pete, a uniformed SPPD officer stood in front of a car with his gun trained on the driver, who was a minor with a long history of auto theft. The kid’s foot let up on the brake slightly, causing the car to jump forward a few inches before he could reapply the brake. In this fraction of a second, the cop nailed him center mass at nearly point blank range numerous times, instantly killing the kid.

The officer was cleared of any wrongdoing because of the threat posed by the car. And… Wait for it, wait for it… He was following policy.

Because the slain youth was a black male, a number of residents from his neighborhood took to the streets, burning down portions of their own community.

SPPD official policy was then changed to specifically read that officers approaching a suspect vehicle on foot should do so at a 45 degree angle to the driver in order to avoid being directly in front of the car and in harm’s way.

Yes.

Policy had to be rewritten to tell adults entrusted with firearms and arrest powers that standing in front of a car is unsafe.[/quote]

I was told by NMD that this is not a race issue…but I can’t help but wonder where all of the non-minorities are that all of this happens to easing my suspicion.

279

[quote]Professor X wrote:
NDM wrote:
I could see it being an empty threat. I admit it. That doesn’t mean that it was an empty threat at the time. Why can’t you accept that?

My feelings aren’t hurt, I just think that you took advantage of a situation that I put myself in. Shame on me for thinking you were better than that. I asked you not to say anything about that, but you did.

What the hell are you talking about? You mentioned an article in THIS THREAD. Your pm didn’t even get read until after I responded, which means you have no point…aside from crying for no reason. You asked me not to say anything…THAT YOU ALREADY MENTIONED!!! It is time for your meds, sir.[/quote]

I never mentioned THE ARTICLE in the thread. You did. You mentioned it AFTER you read the article. How did you know there was an article unless I told you there was? It’s because you did read the PM before you made that post regarding the article. I didn’t bring up the article, I brought up an incident that was further explained in the article. I didn’t want the specifics of the article discussed with people on this forum. You asked for documentation, and I Pm’d it to you for a reason. I could have posted it on the forum, but I didn’t because of said reasons.

I’m getting out of this debate now. It’s a lost cause, and now you’re trying to make it a race issue, and I am definitely not getting involved into that bullshit.

280

[quote]Vandyl wrote:
I never mentioned THE ARTICLE in the thread. You did. You mentioned it AFTER you read the article. How did you know there was an article unless I told you there was?[/quote]

Because that’s COMMON SENSE. You HEARD about some cop getting shot. Therefore, it no doubt was in the newspaper. This didn’t exactly take the cast of CSI and Murder She Wrote to figure out, dear Watson.

I didn’t even read your pm until after I posted that. I can’t help it that I appear to be smarter than you.