Domestic Dispute Leads to Fatal Police Shooting

" I heard there is a ban on aluminum bats in New York City.

You heard wrong. They're not allowed in high school baseball games in NYC. There's not any kind of ban or law against owning or carrying one.

"Didn't any of these cops have a can of mace on them?"

Attempting to use mace against someone with a baseball bat would be a very foolish move. You would almost certainly lose that battle.

Try swinging anything at Newark or Philly cops. They'll riddle you with bullets.

#31- That's in a safe, controlled setting, where someone isn't about to cave your face in with a bat. Or worse.

Macing and tasing a person doesn't always drop them ASAP -- documented incidents prove that. Hell, even shooting a person doesn't stop them right away.

I really don't understand why folks always insist there are "other" ways to handle people wanting--and about to--cause others great serious harm when they themselves have never been in that sort of situation before.

This isn't the movies.

^ --- I've fired firearms, shotguns and rifles, and while they are all pretty cool to shoot things with, I'd rather have other methods considered to subdue a perp before deciding to blow the person away.

What Would MacGyver do?

#5- That would account for about 98% of the people who comment here.

Oh it's one, two, three and you're out at the ol' ball gaaaaaaaaaammmeee!

Justified force. End of line.

Cops should just use flamethrowers instead...

Two questions. Was the assailant Dominican? Did he use a wood or an aluminum bat? I heard there is a ban on aluminum bats in New York City. That by itself would provoke your typical cop.

Didn't any of these cops have a can of mace on them? They can buy a can online if the NYPD doesn't supply them. Some brands have considerable throw distance.

It's not an eye for an eye, Kojak. This wasn't a revenge killing or an execution. It was a police officer defending himself. For instance, a knife is considered to be life-threatening in 21 feet (!!). Tell me how long it takes for you to sprint 21 feet. A second? 2 seconds? That's how much time a cop has to decided whether or not they are going to die or if the assailant is going to die.

A bat, just like any other handheld weapon is life-threatening in 21 feet (or less). A single blow to the head from a good distance away (man's arm length + length of bat) is ABSOLUTELY lethal.

As for the "shoot for the arms or legs" people, that just is not realistic. All people trained in firearms are trained to shoot for "center mass", which is the torso, because this is the largest target on a human and is relatively stable even while in motion. Shooting is the last option, and the instinct is to shoot for center mass. Even a well placed shot (nearly impossible in a situation like this) to the limbs won't necessarily stop a person.

It sucks for the guy who died and his family, but he was attacking a cop with a deadly weapon. There was no other choice.

"The value of life meant nothing to the guy wielding the bat, so why should it mean anything to the cops responding to the domestic dispute call?"

Because we're supposed to live in a civilized society that's not eye for an eye.

The value of life meant nothing to the guy wielding the bat, so why should it mean anything to the cops responding to the domestic dispute call? Quit blaming guns and gun culture and all of the other stupid little things you want to blame, and blame the idiot who was apparently using a bat to abuse someone in his domicile. It kills me how much leeway people want to give violent asshats like this guy. How about giving the police the benefit of the doubt? I'm not that big a fan of NY's "finest" seeing as how they shoot unarmed people, but when someone is armed with a weapon and charges them with the intent to do bodily harm, they have the same right as any of us do in that regard; to preserve our own life by any means necessary.

Correcting my own post, I see in one of the articles that a sergeant was on the scene. .

"tase him...does the NYPD have to shoot everyone???"

In part because they all carry guns but only sergeants have access to tasers. No doubt a taser wasn't available in this case.

But it probably wouldn't have been used anyway, because the guy had a deadly weapon. Some people are barely affected by a taser, why choose to use something that might not work on a guy lunging at you with a baseball bat, when you also have with you something that will work?

#15, you got the point. It is a matter of culture and the value it places on human life. Police in other countries have a little different instructions.

Contrast this with the killing in Greece that provoked massive riots. The kid that was killed was throwing stones at police. Quite imminent threat. The cop shot him dead. Nobody, not even minister of police, attempted to defend the shooting.

There is always another way. It might involve more risk that the suspect will flee, but it will reduce the risk of killing somebody. It really is about the value of life.

not a batty thing at all for the police to do.

This is why we need bat control.

This appears to be a situation where using a taser would actually make sense. However that does not mean that shooting the guy was excessive.

tase him...does the NYPD have to shoot everyone???

"Has anybody thought of taking a few of steps back instead of killing"

damir please. If you want a logical measured response from law enforcement in this country, you should contact the FBI. In America, we shoot first and ask questions later. That's what happens in a gun culture such as ours.

Someone swings a bat at me, I'm shooting.

Why do people always seem to come on here and defend jackasses who wield bats or other weapons towards cops? At the very least these people should be shot for sheer stupidity. Bring a gun to a gun fight, ya morons!

Before anyone starts bleating like a sheep about "How would you feel if this were someone in your family?", let me tell you that if that were someone in my family, I'd be damn glad the cops got rid of them.

Or they should have subdued him and shoved the bat up his ass. Apparently anal invasion is part of the curriculum at the academy...

Why can't they just shoot the guy in the knee caps or the ass? In a situation like this, they shouldve tazed him, bro.

Its a BAT! The police couldve even taken out their batons and fought him off. Kung Fu style

I applaud the cops! Who wants some crazed asshole running around with a bat? If he does it once, he'll do it again.

I'm not a big fan of cops, but they did their job....so what's the problem?

This sounds like a justified shooting. When you come swinging at a cop with a heavy object (chair, bat, etc), the cop will shoot you.

The first thing you learn when you work in public safety is that the most important things on any run are your personal safety and your partner's safety. Everything else is secondary. Assault with a bat can and has proven fatal on enough occasions that it poses a serious risk. What should the cops do? Wait until one of them is being beaten and you then have to worry not just about shooting the guy but also avoiding hitting your partner? Before you go and criticize their actions I'd love to see you try and hit his arm or leg or run away when you're in that position - not as easy as you make it sound.

I am waiting for the armchair cops and ballistics experts to chime in...

Anyone who has never fired a gun should pretty much STFU.

http://gothamist.com/2008/12/09/victim_dies_from_alleged_brooklyn_h.php

from a bat.

I was going to comment that I'm "...waiting for the stupid comments about shooting the arms and legs", but I see someone has already obliged.

#1,

Right, no ones ever died from being hit in the head or chest with a baseball bat. I would just love to know what you would do in that split second, remember your a cop and you don't have the luxury to take a few steps back/"run away".

When you draw and fire your weapon you shoot to STOP not shoot to injure, hope they stop, drop the weapon and survive. You hit the part of the body that is the easiest to hit, its not like TV or the movies, this is real life.

Is "threat to serious injury" a good reason to kill somebody? When somebody is swinging a baseball bat or a chair, a police officer is in imminent danger only in the immediate proximity of the attacker. Has anybody thought of taking a few of steps back instead of killing? If they have to shoot, how about arms or legs?

Life is so cheap.