Investigation Vowed in L.A. Shooting

>>>> Those weren't the only hits though. (you made the mistake of
>>> assuming the
>>>> cops were actually firing all 120 rounds at the guy who was hit 4
>>>> times) -Dave
>>>
>>> What, prey tell, do you think they were shooting at?
>>>
>>
>> Well what did they hit? -Dave
>>
>>
>
> People's houses,cars,walls.....whatever was inline with their gun barrel.
>

EXACTLY!!! Now you get it. -Dave

Ted B. wrote:
> >>>> Those weren't the only hits though. (you made the mistake of
> >>> assuming the
> >>>> cops were actually firing all 120 rounds at the guy who was hit
4
> >>>> times) -Dave
> >>>
> >>> What, prey tell, do you think they were shooting at?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Well what did they hit? -Dave
> >>
> >>
> >
> > People's houses,cars,walls.....whatever was inline with their gun
barrel.
> >
>
> EXACTLY!!! Now you get it. -Dave


What I get is that they're lousy shots.

> > The real investgation should be "why are LA cops such suck ass
shots?"
>
> Because they rarely fire their weapons,especially under duress.

And if you think about how nobody has a problem with cops who rarely
practice shooting their weapons carry all the time, vs. the private
avid shooter, who I would put up against any cop any day, and the
controversy of CCW.

Ashton Crusher > wrote in
:

> On Tue, 10 May 2005 20:27:13 -0400, "JohnH" >
> wrote:
>
>>
>>> Cops are allowed to use lethal force only when life or limb (their or
>>> the public's) is at risk.
>>
>>A 4,000 lb vehicle careening down a highway is a lethal projectile; a
>>serious public risk.
>>
>>Use ALL force necessary to terminate it.
>>
>
> Shooting the driver of a careening vehicle does not make the situation
> safer.
> --
> New service to compete with paypal
> Get $25 pre-registration bonus by
> following this link
> www.greenzap.com/25smackers4u
>

Better a .50BMG round thru the engine block.The vehicle will stop quickly.
Just don't do it in the middle of a neighborhood.(same goes for shootouts)

(BTW,that's what USCoastGuard is doing for fast drug smuggling boats
offshore.If they can hit a speedboat's engine on the seas with a single
..50BMG round,then a SUV's should be much easier on solid land.)

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Ashton Crusher > wrote in
:

> On 10 May 2005 09:58:18 -0700, "N8N" > wrote:
>
>>
>>MidnightDad wrote:
>>> http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=744016
>>>
>>> LOS ANGELES May 10, 2005 - Authorities promised a full
>>investigation
>>> Tuesday into why deputies riddled a sport utility vehicle and a
>>> Compton neighborhood with 120 bullets after the driver led them on a
>>> chase, wounding an unarmed driver and possibly striking a deputy.
>>>
>>> ...
>>
>>Um, ****ing DUH? the cops got a shots fired call and when they
>>attempted to pull over a vehicle fitting the description of the perp's
>>vehicle the driver ran for it.
>
> Except he had no gun and had fired no shots and they did NOT have a
> positive ID. Firing on him was NOT warranted anymore then they would
> fire on a car that speed away when they stopped if for a traffic
> ticket.

He was not "speeding away",he was trying to ram police in front of him.
Clear justification for shooting him.


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Nate Nagel wrote:
> If they're obviously fleeing (and in this case it sounds like they were,
> not just "driving to a safe location) why the hell not? My only
> question is why it took so many rounds to stop them. Geez, why don't we
> take away the officers' guns and just issue them bullhorns so they can
> politely ask drivers to pull over.

There are perfectly good tactics for stopping a suspect like that
which don't endanger bystanders nearly as much. The obvious one here
would be to surround him with cop vehicles, which then gradually stop.
Maybe a few parked cars get crunched in the process, but nobody gets
shot.

What a bunch of Barney Fifes.

"Scott en Aztlán" wrote:
>
> On Tue, 10 May 2005 15:33:55 -0400, "Ted B." >
> wrote:
>
> >>> Those weren't the only hits though. (you made the mistake of
> >> assuming the
> >>> cops were actually firing all 120 rounds at the guy who was hit 4
> >>> imes) -Dave
> >>
> >> What, prey tell, do you think they were shooting at?
> >
> >Well what did they hit?
>
> Each other?

Pity about the bulletproof vest. Killing one of their own might have actually
taught them something.

--
Cheers,
Bev
***********************************************
"A complete lack of evidence is the surest sign
that the conspiracy is working." -- Tanuki

N8N wrote:
>
> MidnightDad wrote:
> > http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=744016
> >
> > LOS ANGELES May 10, 2005 - Authorities promised a full
> investigation
> > Tuesday into why deputies riddled a sport utility vehicle and a
> > Compton neighborhood with 120 bullets after the driver led them on a
> > chase, wounding an unarmed driver and possibly striking a deputy.
> >
> > ...
>
> Um, ****ing DUH? the cops got a shots fired call and when they
> attempted to pull over a vehicle fitting the description of the perp's
> vehicle the driver ran for it. Good for the cops I say, although some
> remedial target practice might be in order.

I don't think 35 mph qualifies as running for it, especially when you drive
around in circles. The guy had a previous drug history and was apparently
wearing headphones -- stupid, but not nasty enough to merit a death penalty.

> Does this REALLY require an investigation? Run from the cops, get
> shot. Not rocket science.

I don't think they're allowed to shoot someone just for running away. They
might band together and agree that they saw the guy with a gun, but if they
don't do that I think they'd be in deep ****.

120 shots, many nearly hitting residents in their homes, and only 4 wounded
him? That's gotta be a pretty high level of incompetence of SOME sort.

--
Cheers,
Bev
***********************************************
"A complete lack of evidence is the surest sign
that the conspiracy is working." -- Tanuki

The Real Bev wrote:

> N8N wrote:
>
>>MidnightDad wrote:
>>
>>>http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=744016
>>>
>>>LOS ANGELES May 10, 2005 - Authorities promised a full
>>
>>investigation
>>
>>>Tuesday into why deputies riddled a sport utility vehicle and a
>>>Compton neighborhood with 120 bullets after the driver led them on a
>>>chase, wounding an unarmed driver and possibly striking a deputy.
>>>
>>>...
>>
>>Um, ****ing DUH? the cops got a shots fired call and when they
>>attempted to pull over a vehicle fitting the description of the perp's
>>vehicle the driver ran for it. Good for the cops I say, although some
>>remedial target practice might be in order.
>
>
> I don't think 35 mph qualifies as running for it, especially when you drive
> around in circles. The guy had a previous drug history and was apparently
> wearing headphones -- stupid, but not nasty enough to merit a death penalty.

When you "end" the chase by backing into (or attempting to) the cops,
extreme measures are IMHO warranted. Ditto for any other action that
seems likely to put cops or any non-involved parties at risk.

>
>
>>Does this REALLY require an investigation? Run from the cops, get
>>shot. Not rocket science.
>
>
> I don't think they're allowed to shoot someone just for running away. They
> might band together and agree that they saw the guy with a gun, but if they
> don't do that I think they'd be in deep ****.
>
> 120 shots, many nearly hitting residents in their homes, and only 4 wounded
> him? That's gotta be a pretty high level of incompetence of SOME sort.
>

Yeah, I'll agree with that. Shouldn't have taken that many shots.

nate

--
replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel

JohnH wrote:
>
> > Cops are allowed to use lethal force only when life or limb (their or
> > the public's) is at risk.
>
> A 4,000 lb vehicle careening down a highway is a lethal projectile; a
> serious public risk.

He wasn't careening down a highway, he was driving around a residential
neighborhood (one where he was known) at speeds UP TO 35 mph. When the cops
blocked him he drove up onto a lawn and backed up. The guy is guilty of
stupidity, but I don't think he was a danger to anybody.

> Use ALL force necessary to terminate it.

Surely you remember the cops shooting thw homeless old lady who brandished a
screwdriver at them. Yeah, of course the bitch deserved it.

--
Cheers,
Bev
***********************************************
"A complete lack of evidence is the surest sign
that the conspiracy is working." -- Tanuki