NYPD cops badly beaten by suspects during arrest

originally posted by: CallmeRaskolnikov

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: CallmeRaskolnikov
I didn't say it would compel anyone to be compliant. I suggested that perhaps it would make the situation more manageable having 2 less people to deal with and thus allow more of a chance to detain to remaining two. So instead of having to fight 4 people into cuffs at once, each officer would only have to contend with one person at a time and then they could deal with suspects that were tasered and incapacitated.

Why would they want to engage them in close-quarters, hand to hand combat at that point? Their non-lethal weapons would have been useless after discharge. The suspects are fortunate they were not shot and/or killed.

Perhaps they actually took into consideration the fact that if even just one of their potential bullets passed through a wall, a floor or a ceiling in the wrong manner then they would have collateral damage on their hands. Is the potential killing of an innocent resident of that apartment complex by accident worth it?

Your knowledge of firearms is a bit lacking, the type of ammunition that police officers use is not designed to penetrate hard targets and would have been unlikely to travel through the fireproof masonry walls used in apartment complexes such as in the one they were located.

you're really not getting this. so i'm just going to stop trying to explain how reducing the number of people you have to contend with at once by 50% would be productive.

and the potential still exists for a resident of that building to be injured if the four officers were to open fire regardless of if the bullets are hollow point or not.

you can continue to think that shoot first ask questions later is an appropriate attitude for a police department to have. i disagree. oh well.

You have absolutely ZERO knowledge of how tasers work. I will do my absolute best to break this down for you completely Barney style.

Scenario:
2 cops approach 4 suspects and order them against the wall. All four suspects refuse and charge the officers. Both cops draw their tasers. Both cops deploy their single shot tasers and hit 2 out of the four suspects. Now, to keep those two suspects that have been hit with tasers neutralized, the cops have to continue holding the trigger on the taser to continue to deliver the electric charge. Now it is true the officers have temporarily immobilized the two suspects that have been hit with Tasers, for maybe 5 seconds. But in those 5 seconds, each of the remaining two suspects have engaged an officer each in a physical altercation. To protect themselves from the now more immediate threat of physical harm, the police have to release the taser trigger and more than likely drop their tasers. Now, depending if each officer is in tip top shape and good wrestlers, they have to put their all into the suspects they are now in physical contact with. But wait, the two suspects that were being tased are no longer being tased. Now they get up and join their two buddies in attacking their officers. Now I don't care who you are, defending yourself against a single grown man is a struggle enough, but now each officer is engaged with TWO SUSPECTS. They are at the complete mercy of these suspects, who, through attacking the Police officers have shown they have ZERO regard for the law. I don't know about you, but if someone was attacking me as a Police Officer, they have shown two things: They have no regard for the law (they are assaulting me), and they do not fear the laws that 'protect' Police officers, because once again, they are attacking me. . . . . . a Police Officer. These people have shown they care not that they have already committed two felonies, what is to stop them from going all the way and beating me into a coma and then maybe finishing the job because now they don't want to get caught?


Scenario 2:
2 cops approach 4 suspects with their weapons drawn and order them against the wall. All four suspects see they are looking down the barrel of two guns and comply because they don't want to get shot.

Now, going by your assumed belief that 'they simply don't want to go to jail so let's assume they don't want to do any more 'harm' to the Police Officers than is necessary to escape" (because that is what you are insinuating, that these guys really don't want to hurt anyone). Why is it so difficult to believe that when staring down the barrel of a gun, the fear of being shot is not more than the fear of being arrested. Me personally, I would rather get arrested and go peacefully than struggle with a cop and be shot.

Scenario 3:
2 cops approach 4 suspects and order them against the wall. All four suspects charge the two cops. The cops, outnumbered two to one by criminal suspects fear for their safety and draw their weapons and fire to neutralize the threat.


These are the options cops had available to them in the situation. But do to fear of public backlash and losing their jobs, they didn't follow any of them and were severely beat as a result. This is ONE ENCOUNTER. For a cop who is in it for the long haul, they will encounter MANY MORE scenarios that are life threatening. But in the interest of revenge, you expect Cops to be public punching bags at the whim of criminals.

Something tells me you live a very safe and sheltered life in a privileged area with low crime rates surrounded by people who hardly want for anything. Any normal person would pick scenario 2 or 3. You on the other hand say Scenario 1 is the best because you assume criminals are just a little misguided and deserve chance after chance after chance. It truly baffles me how you can sit here and see this as the best solution to the scenario because it was cops that was hurt and not people.

Guess some people can't be helped. Not to sound vindictive, but I really hope you are faced with a similar circumstance. I would pay good money to watch how fast your mind changes when you are victimized by thugs and seem to get a hard-on for leaving your fate in their hands in the name of 'trust' and 'tolerance' and some misguided sense of supposed moral superiority.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: CallmeRaskolnikov

ok, ya got me. all four of those scumbags should have been shot to death in the apartment complex.

Yeah, and after that they should have tased them, pepper sprayed them, cuffed them, applied a choke hold, strip searched them, shot their dogs, shot their neighbor's dogs, not read them their rights and sprinkled some crack on them.

Hysteria much?

well that's the normal NYC police procedure right? lol


a reply to: chuck258

i can't even address the amount assumptions and insanity in that post. i think you need anger management.

guess it's too hard to address the subject and not the person speaking on it

originally posted by: CallmeRaskolnikov
well that's the normal NYC police procedure right? lol

No, they give you a parking citation prior to the crack-sprinkling.

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: CallmeRaskolnikov
I didn't say it would compel anyone to be compliant. I suggested that perhaps it would make the situation more manageable having 2 less people to deal with and thus allow more of a chance to detain to remaining two. So instead of having to fight 4 people into cuffs at once, each officer would only have to contend with one person at a time and then they could deal with suspects that were tasered and incapacitated.

Why would they want to engage them in close-quarters, hand to hand combat at that point? Their non-lethal weapons would have been useless after discharge. The suspects are fortunate they were not shot and/or killed.

Perhaps they actually took into consideration the fact that if even just one of their potential bullets passed through a wall, a floor or a ceiling in the wrong manner then they would have collateral damage on their hands. Is the potential killing of an innocent resident of that apartment complex by accident worth it?

Your knowledge of firearms is a bit lacking, the type of ammunition that police officers use is not designed to penetrate hard targets and would have been unlikely to travel through the fireproof masonry walls used in apartment complexes such as in the one they were located.

Close quarters is where hand to hand is safest and most effective.

You pull a gun on me anywhere within 10 feet and that gun is now mine. Fact.

Lol, I love when tough people behind keyboards make this claim.
Can you make a video of you demonstrating this bad ass claim of your and post it for us, thanks.

originally posted by: thesaneone

Lol, I love when tough people behind keyboards make this claim.
Can you make a video of you demonstrating this bad ass claim of your and post it for us, thanks.

Somebody probably said the same thing to Lightsaber Kid.

I didn't go through the whole thread, nor did I click the link in the OP. So if this has already been addressed, my bad...

I noticed in the quoted text the officers encountered the men in the hall way then went to "cuff them" and that is when they attacked the police.

I am NOT condoning what these men did, however, did the police KNOW it was the suspect they were after and why did they feel the need to start off by putting ALL the men in cuffs?

I guess it is one thing if the LEO's knew they found their suspect, but if the other men didn't have warrants and were doing nothing wrong but hanging out, what was the point in cuffing them all from the jump??

Like I said before, I don't condone what the men did, I am just wondering why they went for the cuffs, for ALL the men, right off the bat??

originally posted by: thesaneone

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: CallmeRaskolnikov
I didn't say it would compel anyone to be compliant. I suggested that perhaps it would make the situation more manageable having 2 less people to deal with and thus allow more of a chance to detain to remaining two. So instead of having to fight 4 people into cuffs at once, each officer would only have to contend with one person at a time and then they could deal with suspects that were tasered and incapacitated.

Why would they want to engage them in close-quarters, hand to hand combat at that point? Their non-lethal weapons would have been useless after discharge. The suspects are fortunate they were not shot and/or killed.

Perhaps they actually took into consideration the fact that if even just one of their potential bullets passed through a wall, a floor or a ceiling in the wrong manner then they would have collateral damage on their hands. Is the potential killing of an innocent resident of that apartment complex by accident worth it?

Your knowledge of firearms is a bit lacking, the type of ammunition that police officers use is not designed to penetrate hard targets and would have been unlikely to travel through the fireproof masonry walls used in apartment complexes such as in the one they were located.

Close quarters is where hand to hand is safest and most effective.

You pull a gun on me anywhere within 10 feet and that gun is now mine. Fact.

Lol, I love when tough people behind keyboards make this claim.
Can you make a video of you demonstrating this bad ass claim of your and post it for us, thanks.

LOL, maybe they have Go-Go Gadget arms and/or legs??

originally posted by: thesaneone

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: CallmeRaskolnikov
I didn't say it would compel anyone to be compliant. I suggested that perhaps it would make the situation more manageable having 2 less people to deal with and thus allow more of a chance to detain to remaining two. So instead of having to fight 4 people into cuffs at once, each officer would only have to contend with one person at a time and then they could deal with suspects that were tasered and incapacitated.

Why would they want to engage them in close-quarters, hand to hand combat at that point? Their non-lethal weapons would have been useless after discharge. The suspects are fortunate they were not shot and/or killed.

Perhaps they actually took into consideration the fact that if even just one of their potential bullets passed through a wall, a floor or a ceiling in the wrong manner then they would have collateral damage on their hands. Is the potential killing of an innocent resident of that apartment complex by accident worth it?

Your knowledge of firearms is a bit lacking, the type of ammunition that police officers use is not designed to penetrate hard targets and would have been unlikely to travel through the fireproof masonry walls used in apartment complexes such as in the one they were located.

Close quarters is where hand to hand is safest and most effective.

You pull a gun on me anywhere within 10 feet and that gun is now mine. Fact.

Lol, I love when tough people behind keyboards make this claim.
Can you make a video of you demonstrating this bad ass claim of your and post it for us, thanks.

I believe the research shows within 21 ft you are at risk of being attacked before you can fire your weapon.

I'm not sure how much faith you have in yourself, I am assuming when someone is about to attack you, your not going to drop to tje ground in fetal position. If you have any desire to save yourself, you WILL be on top of that gun before it goes off.

In context of what I was trying to explain was that if those officers had pulled a gun on the suspects while being assaulted, the gun is now in play and the officer is not in control. That would be a STUPID move and these officers were very wise and possibly alive today because they didn't try.

And the correct expression is keyboard tough guy. Are you aware of the 21 ft rule? 10 ft? It is a fact regardless of what you think of me or how I said.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

They are public police officers. They are not private contractors and take them same training as every other NYPD officer.

And parked out side your front door. Well… not yours, you're probably not low income "housing'.

originally posted by: KaelemJames
a reply to: butcherguy

Police officers, as these, should hand their guns & badges in so we can see how this world will fall apart, thanks to bad cops and all those who hate/dislike ALL cops.

When we choose to stand up against authority, no matter if they're good or evil, we will end up the shortest.

Most do not agree. I'd rather zip it, and wait for that big wheel to turn.

i see your point.

we need a police force. a knowledgeable and well trained police force is one of the most important parts of our society. what we don't need is a militarized police force. when the police force went from protect and serve to kick in your door and flash bang grandma is when people became angry.

a reply to: HawkeyeNation

Justifying the beating the suspects gave the cops because they were scared...C'MON that's bull#. How about it's because they are criminals and have no remorse of their actions.

'Criminals' don't generally out and out fist fest cops. More like they were tired of being harassed in their own building, being blamed for s*** they don't do, again and again.

Thats righteous rage.

In fact, I bet they hang inside the stairwell in their own building because if they go outside they will get harassed there, too. They know that. They have to hide in the stairwell and now thats not even a safe place to just hang out.

What happened sounds like a final straw thing. Sure, they went off and they shouldn't have…

walk a mile in their oppressed shoes.

Don't bother giving me the law and order bit. Just tell me if they were the suspects the cops were looking for.

As it turned out, they did just fine, huh?

originally posted by: intrptr
And parked out side your front door. Well… not yours, you're probably not low income "housing'.

I would ask you the intelligent point contained within that post but their obviously was none.

I would have shot the closest one to me. If they didn't disburse, I'd go down the line with another bullet. Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.