May 8, 2008
NYPD Releases Details on Police Gunfire
The NY Times looks at NYPD firearms use between 1996 and 2006, finding that though cops are using their guns less these days, "when they do fire, even at an armed suspect, there is often no one returning fire at the officers. Officers hit their targets roughly 34 percent of the time."
The NYPD only recently released the information, which the New York Civil Liberties Union says "raises serious questions about police shooting practices and about the lack of racial diversity in the NYPD’s leadership," given that "During the last two years the NYPD reported the race of those shot by police, nearly 90 percent of the people shot at by officers were black or Latino."
NYPD spokesman Paul Browne said, "The data shows that the New York City Police Department is the most restrained in the country" (the city's cops hit their targets 34% of the time, while, per the Times, the stats for Los Angeles cops was 29% last year).
Still, the NYCLU says in spite of the complexity of shootings, "But what is clear is when you look at police shootings over time, and you look at other police practices over time, that race emerges as a very big issue. And the police department has got to simply confront that."
You can view 11 years of NYPD Firearms Discharge Reports here, and the NY Times has some interesting graphics (example, left) illustrating the trends.
| 
"During the last two years the NYPD reported the race of those shot by police, nearly 90 percent of the people shot at by officers were black or Latino."
And why don't you compare that with crime statistics, ass.
*"when they do fire, even at an armed suspect, there is often no one returning fire at the officers.*
well when you're unarmed, often you can't return fire... maybe a fist or "the finger"...
sorry jen... ;)
ooops... i read that wrong... now i'm the tard!
;)
Hey NYPD, BULLETS KILL - two-thirds of them going where they weren't supposed to go is unacceptable. This is the most compelling evidence I've seen that the NYPD as an organization can be reckless. I'm not buying the "we're a few points above dismal" argument when it comes to the use of deadly force.
"when they do fire, even at an armed suspect, there is often no one returning fire at the officers."
Personally, I don't think I'd wait to get shot at before I started shooting at an armed suspect. If I'm doing my job, and a suspect wants to keep me from ever seeing my family again, I'm not waiting until he or she pulls the trigger.
90% no shit. If the perps were not described as black or hispanic 95% of the time I guess that figure would drop.
JReed: While I agree with your conclusion, your argument doesn't make sense. If a suspect is not firing or returning any fire, then they are not really 'wanting to keep me you from ever seeing your family again', are they?
NYPD needs to start firing and missing more white people.
this seems like a no-win situation though. People are enraged when cops shoot and kill a suspect. People are apparently enraged when cops shoot and miss their target.
In protest, I'm going to sit in a highly trafficked aisle in my office so nobody can get to their cubes.
Politburo: It would appear you consider 'suspects' to be an entirely normal acting person, maybe someone you'd like to take to the pub and have a beer with. Many of these firearm discharges appear to be in places like East NY and the Bronx and at night. This is also where a majority of violent crime is committed.
Cases like sean bell are rare. Which is why it is a little confusing that all the officers were let off with barely a slap on the wrist. If the average shots fired per incident is around 4, why was one of the officers shooting so much? It's obvious he wasn't clearly identifying what he was shooting at. That is going against basic principles that the police departments operate with.
GM: It would appear that you are assuming and putting words in my mouth.
BMMDan - 1) I think that's going to be my strategy now at work as well.
2) The problem with them missing their target so very much of the time is that it most likely means that they just aren't very good shots.
Where was the Rev when this was going on?
http://gothamist.com/tags/Herman%20Yan
I can't wait for the armchair Rambos to jump on that 34% figure. Like they could do any better in similar circumstances. In fact, that's actually pretty good compared to Rambo. How many thousands of rounds did he run through his fully automatic weapons to kill a handful of people?
A lot of folks seem to think that hitting a moving target, let alone a stationary one, while under duress is just oh so easy.
I'd be willing to bet that these same folks have never ever picked up or shot a firearm before either.
do flaming spitballs count as shooting a firearm?
A cop with bad aim is no good in the field. Put 'em in desk jobs or use them for sandbags.