Saddest thing I've seen in a long time

[MrAl]

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/18/andrea-rebello-hofstra-dead_n_3297994.html

I dont even know what to say about this yet except it's the saddest thing i've seen in a long time.

 

[Pommie]

Unfortunately, there are much worse cases. You wouldn't have wanted to be an electrician after the terror attack in the UK. See here. Basically a totally innocent man executed by UK police.

Mike.

 

[jpanhalt]

I assume most in the UK don't feel one bit safer with that new policy than before.

Similarly, in the US, our Executive Branch (Attorney General) has determined that the President can order the murder of an American on American soil. (NB: He has already ordered the murder of an American on foreign soil.)

That does not make me feel one bit safer from terrorists either. In fact, it makes me wonder whether our Constitution is just words on paper to some very powerful people.

John

 

[MrAl]

Hello,

Well this thread was created because of that poor girl that was killed. Yes there are other problems in the world, but we could start other threads for them. I just felt that she deserved much much better than that, and that there could have been an alternate means of handling the situation. Things must have escalated quickly and one poor aim cost that poor girl her very untimely death.
Did you guys even look at that link? I think if you did you would understand when you see her picture.

 

[jpanhalt]

@MrAI,

Yes, I looked at the link and read that very sad story much earlier this morning. The officer's actions are still under investigation. Could he have taken cover and not fired back? At what point was the young woman hit? At what point was the intruder mortally wounded? What other options were there? Those are questions I hope get addressed.

The link to the other examples is related in the sense that police (including all elements of that term, e.g., National Guard, FBI, etc.) seem to becoming more aggressive for the state's interests and less concerned about protecting ordinary citizens. My thoughts on this matter go back to the shooting of peaceful bystanders by National Guardsmen at Kent State in 1970. That was a iconic example of excessive use of state power and resulted in the Supreme Court deciding that the government could be sued for wrongful death under narrow circumstances. (I don't believe the death of the young woman at Hofstra would fit into that exception.) There are other more recent examples in the news where a very large number of rounds have been fired by police, where wrong apartments have been broken into, where wrongful arrests were made using deadly force, and where bad cops in uniform have murdered citizens. Why does the Social Security Administration need more than a billion rounds of hollow point ammunition?

I suspect the officer in the Hofstra incident is devastated by the outcome. That does not change my impression that our police as a whole are a bit more trigger happy today than in days past as they respond with "overwhelming force" to almost any incident, including the recent incident involving Sutter Hospital in California. In my view, in any standoff, the risk to citizens should weight heavier than the risk to trained police wearing body armor.

John

 

[Mr RB]

... In fact, it makes me wonder whether our Constitution is just words on paper to some very powerful people.
...

Maybe it's time for a new ammendment?

"All men are created equal, UNLESS some poorly trained dickhead bully with a badge thinks there's a tiny whiff of a hint that you might be bad... In which case you have no rights at all."

Or something along those lines.

 

[MrAl]

Hello guys,

Thanks for the informative reply jpanhalt.

Also, it's quite simple really... if there was a real constitution there would be no such thing as "powerful people". "powerful people" means there is no such thing as equal rights.

These days the constitution is just a piece of paper that states how things would be if there was really a constitution

There's so much to it too, and the strange thing is that when ever something bad happens that means it's ok to infringe further on the majority of the people's rights.

Are they right or wrong? It depends on how you look at it i guess, but no matter how you look at it the gov always takes liberties.

Gun control laws getting tougher? They say that most of the people want this so that it is harder for bad guys to get guns.

 

[tvtech]

She was so pretty too...

What a waste I know it has nothing to do with the whole thing....but still. Makes me madder

Regards,
tvtech

 

[steveB]

This is a very sad situation. It is very hard to judge the officer without knowing the details of the scenario and his skill level with a gun. It's clear the girl was in mortal danger no matter what action was taken and the officer probably had about 1 second to make a judgement. Was he taking action to protect himself, or did his one second assessment lead him to conclude that the best odds to save the girl was to fire? We don't know the answer to that very important question. Taking 8 shots seems extreme, but we weren't there.

Here's an observation though. If we could take back the 1 shot that missed the criminal and hit the victim, and keep the 7 shots that hit the criminal and missed the victim, the public opinion might have labeled the officer as "a hero and a crack shot". People would be applauding and news stories would be showing a picture of the officer alongside a movie clip of Dirty Harry taking out the bad guy. The outcome makes all the difference when you don't know the details of what actually transpired.

 

[MrAl]

Hi Steve,

Yes i agree that there are different ways of looking at it. But one question that came up in my mind was why wasnt this situation treated as a hostage situation in the first place? They knew there were three kids in the house being held, and so i would think the first step would be to contact them and initiate some talks with the guy holding them. Maybe it was too hectic to begin with.

But of course i wasnt there so i cant know how the situation unfolded, and how it unfolded is my other question like how did the officer get in the house? Who let him in? Why wasnt there any negotiation from outside the hours? Etc., etc., too many questions and maybe no way to find out i guess. I'd hate to be him though with that hanging over me the rest of my life.

 

[steveB]

I agree. There are many questions to ask here. The situation needs to be analyzed, lessons need to be learned and possibly action need to be taken once the process is over. My first thought is one of sadness for the girl and her family. But, even if there were mistakes made, I feel bad for the officer too. We are all human and we all make mistakes and we are all limited by our reflexes and instincts when we don't have sufficient time to think. I have no doubt this man is in dispair now, and perhaps he will never fully recover, which sometime implies a fate worse than death. He also has a family that is hurting for him too. The tragedy of this extends far and wide.

 

[MrAl]

Hi,

Yes, i think the same, that's why i said, "I would not want to be hiim right now". Time heals wounds but this one will take a long time. I know this first hand because i was in the same situation at one point in time. Luckily the end was much more pleasant, but for a short time i thought someone's especially innocent life was over because of me. There's no other feeling like that in the world. I would have never lived it down. I was lucky and so was the girl who BTW was even much younger.

So thoughts and prayers to both sides of this tragedy.

 

[Mr RB]

I'd like to clarify that my comment about "dickhead bullies with badges" was not aimed at this particular incident or the officer involved, but was a general reply to Jpanhalt's comment about the US constitution (and citizen's rights) which seems to be being flushed down the toilet, worse every year.

 

[MrAl]

Hi,


The problem is that life gets more and more complicated and so it's hard to understand what is good and what isnt. Increased gun control seems like a good idea but we'll have to see what happens down the road. We can only hope that they wont take it too far by infringing on things we all like in the future. My only worry is that with more and more regulation will they eventually get carried away like some other countries? Lets hope not.

They did back up the gun control with gun buy back programs which seem like a very very good idea. Thugs with guns who want to make a quick buck can sell them to the state no questions asked. That should help get many unregistered guns off the street.

 

[Mr RB]

... Increased gun control seems like a good idea but we'll have to see what happens down the road.
...

Tighter gun control is an easy idea to sell to frightened people , that's for sure. As for being "good" that's a very complex issue.

At one end of the scale the people are armed and capable, and can defend themselves from those few "bad" people. At the other end of the scale the people are disarmed and totally defenseless, and rely on authorities to turn up in time and defend them from the bad people. Which end of that scale you prefer depends a lot on your personality type, ie it's an emotional choice many people make, not a very rational one.

The problem as it appears in real life is that if you choose to disarm yourselves and your future generations, the "bad guys" don't seem to make that same choice. So the result of that way of thinking is that the "good guys" become weaker and the "bad guys" become stronger. Hardly a good result.

...
We can only hope that they wont take it too far by infringing on things we all like in the future. My only worry is that with more and more regulation will they eventually get carried away like some other countries? Lets hope not.

And you hit the nail on the head. Once your rights start creeping the process never stops. This is a proven fact, not just a guess or prediction. That one reason is enough for you to fight for your gun rights.

...
They did back up the gun control with gun buy back programs which seem like a very very good idea. Thugs with guns who want to make a quick buck can sell them to the state no questions asked.
...

Well, let's see there. The thug can sell his gun to the buyback for $300, or he can sell it to a real nasty thug illegally for $1500.

 

[MrAl]

Hello MrRB,


Well, the gun buy back they had in Newark pulled in lots of guns off the street. That's a fact not theory. That sounds pretty good to me.

It's true it's hard to say just HOW much the gun laws and the buybacks are helping, but there is NO way that they do not help at all. We wont know how many little girls lives have been saved because of this program and the tighter gun laws. With the gun laws and the buybacks sooner the young woman who this thread is about might still be alive today.

Yes, there is fear that the gov will take it too far, but that's a normal fear in any country. So far they havent taken it too far have they, or did i miss something?

I didnt agree with the food regulation in New York either, but then after reading about it i found it only targeted a food that is known to be bad. Will they do the same with pizza and soda? We all hope not, and i think it would take a lot for that to happen. But yes, unfortunately it is a political game out there we just have to hope they wont win some game points by banning some food we all like, or ever taxing it like has been mentioned at one time for pizza.

 

[Mr RB]

Hello MrRB,
Well, the gun buy back they had in Newark pulled in lots of guns off the street. That's a fact not theory. That sounds pretty good to me.
...

But the logical conclusion is that the good hearted people who dislike guns and have not much use for them are the ones that sold them back. A nasty criminal who is using his gun to mug people every night didn't sell his back. So you get a false feeling of progress.

...
Yes, there is fear that the gov will take it too far, but that's a normal fear in any country. So far they havent taken it too far have they, or did i miss something?

Yep. I live in a country where it was taken too far. They creep it up year by year until you are screwed. Now in Australia the ONLY people with guns are criminals, and a few rare farmers who have to jump through hoops to keep their work guns.

Re the incident in post #1 (and to get back on topic) I'll use an overused phrase; it's not the gun that kills people, it's the man.

If you are serious that disarming would have saved this young woman, are you saying the cop should have not been armed? See it's the same argument. In Britain the majority of cops can't carry guns, and the amount of citizens accidentally shot by cops it virtually zero. Proof that disarmament works.

 

[MrAl]

Hi again MrRB,

Well by your logical conclusion then we should be doing absolutely nothing because buying back the guns didnt get the guns from the right people?
So it sounds like your solution is, "do nothing about anything". Correct me if i am wrong

Sorry to hear about your situation too with the guns.

No i am not saying that the cop should have been unarmed, the bad guy should have had a hard time getting a gun to start to whole thing.
That's great about Britain, i hope it always works out good for them.

 

[Mr RB]

...
Well by your logical conclusion then we should be doing absolutely nothing because buying back the guns didnt get the guns from the right people?
So it sounds like your solution is, "do nothing about anything". Correct me if i am wrong
...

Not at all. But I like solutions that work, not ones that make the problem worse.

Gun laws that stop convicted violent felons buying guns are a great idea. And even better, extremely harsh punishment for convicted violent felons found in posession of a gun. Likewise, extremely harsh penalties for violent gun crime, ie; armed robbery, muggings etc, especially crimes where the criminal shoots someone or tries to.

But none of that requires disarming the "good" people. In fact there's a direct correlation of reduced gun crime in areas where there is a high incidence of gun carrying citizens.

 

[MrAl]

Hello MrRB,

But you said that the gun buy back wasnt working because the wrong people were selling back the guns. So how does that make the problem worse?
We were not talking about disarming at that point.