Yet another officer gets crapped on.

[RoadRunner440]

http://www.verdictsearch.com/news/docs/041003ny-range.jsp

My only problem with this story is the officer didn't put another one into mr.gangbanga.

[Evnings]

That really stinks for the cops. Oh darn for the bad guy. He'll have a hard time enjoying the money living in a nursing home confined to a wheelchair.

[retired]

I'm not trying to second guess the actions of the officer, but if he was actually in fear of his life, why did he rush toward an armed suspect to fire a shot, rather than take cover? I believe the trained reponse, is to take cover from the suspect rather than expose yourself, and get within inches of him, thus allowing the suspect an opportunity to fire at the officer from close range. Again I have no love or sympathy for the suspect, nor am I sorry the suspect got shot, just curiosity why the officer took the maneuvers he did to shoot the suspect.

[jarhead6073]

quote:

---

He contended that Barnes then proceeded onto Edward L. Grant Highway, where he eventually stopped and, with his back to Jerome, raised one hand, indicating surrender

---

Not knowing what this area of Edward L. Grant Highway looks like it is hard to judge what the officers options were. But on what sounds like a substantial road there may not have been any useful cover around. And given that he was only 15 feet away, there isn't much of a chance that reaching cover was any more feasible than reaching the suspect.

Though I'm not sure why the officer would rush the suspect rather than shoot first. But I wasn't there and can't judge what was going through his mind in the split second that he had to make a decision.

[retired]

Jarhead,

quote:

---

Originally posted by jarhead6073:

quote:

---

He contended that Barnes then proceeded onto Edward L. Grant Highway, where he eventually stopped and, with his back to Jerome, raised one hand, indicating surrender

---

Not knowing what this area of Edward L. Grant Highway looks like it is hard to judge what the officers options were. But on what sounds like a substantial road there may not have been any useful cover around. And given that he was only 15 feet away, there isn't much of a chance that reaching cover was any more feasible than reaching the suspect.

Though I'm not sure why the officer would rush the suspect rather than shoot first. But I wasn't there and can't judge what was going through his mind in the split second that he had to make a decision.

---

I know what police training dictates.

[jarhead6073]

quote:

---

Originally posted by retired:
Jarhead,

quote:

---

Originally posted by jarhead6073:

quote:

---

He contended that Barnes then proceeded onto Edward L. Grant Highway, where he eventually stopped and, with his back to Jerome, raised one hand, indicating surrender

---

Not knowing what this area of Edward L. Grant Highway looks like it is hard to judge what the officers options were. But on what sounds like a substantial road there may not have been any useful cover around. And given that he was only 15 feet away, there isn't much of a chance that reaching cover was any more feasible than reaching the suspect.

Though I'm not sure why the officer would rush the suspect rather than shoot first. But I wasn't there and can't judge what was going through his mind in the split second that he had to make a decision.

---

I know what police training dictates.

---

What any training dictates in theory always hinges on circumstances in reality. If there is no cover there is no cover regardless of what training tells you.

[SGT Dave]

quote:

---

I know what police training dictates.

---

"Dictates"?

Or "recommends"?

I've never worked for an agency that DICTATED what you must do during a critical incident, and training only prepares one for similar incidents-BUT EVEN THEN isn't a "locked in stone" response.

Generally the officer's training may end up being called into play of course, but to claim it is "be all and end all" without any flexibility for a specific incident would be unwise.

ANY agency that has went so far as DICTATING an officer must take cover if it's available without shooting has unneccasarily handicapped their officers.

I preach cover as much as the next guy, but he didn't and it still ended with the officer living.

[Joseph]

I'm always amazed by people who have to sit and think about something for a week that a policeman has to make his judgment in a spit second. Something like Monday Morning Quarterback of a football game.

[jwelch]

We really need to follow the advice of the Calibre Press Guys..and Gals. We (the Police) need to start lawsuits against people as well....

[3/4s]

quote:

---

Originally posted by SGT Dave:

quote:

---

I know what police training dictates.

---

"Dictates"?

Or "recommends"?

Interesting


I've never worked for an agency that DICTATED what you must do during a critical incident, and training only prepares one for similar incidents-BUT EVEN THEN isn't a "locked in stone" response.

Dictation is for secretaries

Generally the officer's training may end up being called into play of course, but to claim it is "be all and end all" without any flexibility for a specific incident would be unwise.

[b]We taught whatever got the job done as long as it`s within policy. From reading the article, the officer was well within policy. The Bronx is notoriously anti cop including the p.o.s. D.A. so the award doesn`t surprise me.[b/]

ANY agency that has went so far as DICTATING an officer must take cover if it's available without shooting has unneccasarily handicapped their officers.

Yep, especially since 15 feet is well within the safety zone where charging someone may be a viable option. The officer may have decided he might have been close enough to disarm the mutt and realized too late he had to shoot.

I preach cover as much as the next guy, but he didn't and it still ended with the officer living.

---

Amen to that. Poor tactics? Maybe but I`ll let the subscribers to the Psychic Hotline tell us what the officer was thinking

[retired]

Sgt. Dave,

quote:

---

Originally posted by SGT Dave:

quote:

---

I know what police training dictates.

---

"Dictates"?

Or "recommends"?

I've never worked for an agency that DICTATED what you must do during a critical incident, and training only prepares one for similar incidents-BUT EVEN THEN isn't a "locked in stone" response.

Generally the officer's training may end up being called into play of course, but to claim it is "be all and end all" without any flexibility for a specific incident would be unwise.

ANY agency that has went so far as DICTATING an officer must take cover if it's available without shooting has unneccasarily handicapped their officers.

I preach cover as much as the next guy, but he didn't and it still ended with the officer living.

---

Okay, recommends, prescribes, sets, etc, dictates was a poor choice.

I think I clearly started out with I wasn't attmpting to second guess the officer. I clearly said I wasn't sorry for the suspect, and was just curious why the officer took the action he did without seeing cover first.

Anything else I can say to appease you Sgt. Dave?

[Sparky]

retired,

All due respect, and I do not intend this as a flame in any way.. but...

You aren't privy to the content of ALL police training. No one is.

In the instant case, none of us are privy to THIS OFFICER'S training, which is the only thing that is important for the sake of discussing his tactics in this incident.

I have been trained that aggressing or advancing on target IS tactically viable in certain situations. The various "whys" and "wherefores" would be too numerous to renumerate here, but I know from my own personal experience that it is taught in certain circumstances.

Why this particular guy did it in this particular instance? I could only *guess* that whatever it was that he did, or did not do, he most likely felt was his best option at the time.

[retired]

Sparky,

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sparky:
retired,

All due respect, and I do not intend this as a flame in any way.. but...

You aren't privy to the content of ALL police training. No one is.

In the instant case, none of us are privy to THIS OFFICER'S training, which is the only thing that is important for the sake of discussing his tactics in this incident.

I have been trained that aggressing or advancing on target IS tactically viable in certain situations. The various "whys" and "wherefores" would be too numerous to renumerate here, but I know from my own personal experience that it is taught in certain circumstances.

Why this particular guy did it in this particular instance? I could only *guess* that whatever it was that he did, or did not do, he most likely felt was his best option at the time.

---

I believe that I said I wasn' trying to second guess him, just curious. I didn't condemn nor criticize him for his actions.

[Glockarmorer]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sparky:
I have been trained that aggressing or advancing on target IS tactically viable in certain situations. The various "whys" and "wherefores" would be too numerous to renumerate here, but I know from my own personal experience that it is taught in certain circumstances.

---

Without getting into the middle of the ****ing contest, I will also say that my agency conducts shooting-on-the-move training that includes firing while advancing on the target.

quote:

---

Barnes sustained a single gunshot wound to the back. The bullet pierced his spinal cord. He is paraplegic and suffers from multiple psychological ailments, including depression and bipolar disorder. Evidence established that he is a danger to himself when his psychological condition becomes acute, and that he has been hospitalized 14 times in such instances. He has resided in a nursing home since 2000.

---

Also, I'd just like to say to this... Good! I hope it HURTS!