JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Messages
3,753
Reactions
650
This has to be just about the stupidest proposed law I've ever heard of.

[ Via: New York Post ]
City cops are livid over a legislative proposal that could handcuff the brave officers involved in life-and-death confrontations every day — requiring them to shoot gun-wielding suspects in the arm or leg rather than shoot to kill, The Post has learned.
The “minimum force” bill, which surfaced in the Assembly last week, seeks to amend the state penal codes’ “justification” clause that allows an officer the right to kill a thug if he feels his life or someone else’s is in imminent danger.
The bill — drafted in the wake of Sean Bell’s controversial police shooting death — would force officers to use their weapons “with the intent to stop, rather than kill” a suspect. They would be mandated to “shoot a suspect in the arm or the leg.”
. . . This could be the stupidest law ever. — G
 
Whoops missed. Hit him in the chest. The department should have a bigger ammo budget for practice....

It'll never go anywhere.

This has to be just about the stupidest proposed law I've ever heard of.

[ Via: New York Post ]
City cops are livid over a legislative proposal that could handcuff the brave officers involved in life-and-death confrontations every day — requiring them to shoot gun-wielding suspects in the arm or leg rather than shoot to kill, The Post has learned.
The "minimum force" bill, which surfaced in the Assembly last week, seeks to amend the state penal codes' "justification" clause that allows an officer the right to kill a thug if he feels his life or someone else's is in imminent danger.
The bill — drafted in the wake of Sean Bell's controversial police shooting death — would force officers to use their weapons "with the intent to stop, rather than kill" a suspect. They would be mandated to "shoot a suspect in the arm or the leg."
. . . This could be the stupidest law ever. — G
 
This has to be just about the stupidest proposed law I've ever heard of.

[ Via: New York Post ]
City cops are livid over a legislative proposal that could handcuff the brave officers involved in life-and-death confrontations every day — requiring them to shoot gun-wielding suspects in the arm or leg rather than shoot to kill, The Post has learned.
The “minimum force” bill, which surfaced in the Assembly last week, seeks to amend the state penal codes’ “justification” clause that allows an officer the right to kill a thug if he feels his life or someone else’s is in imminent danger.
The bill — drafted in the wake of Sean Bell’s controversial police shooting death — would force officers to use their weapons “with the intent to stop, rather than kill” a suspect. They would be mandated to “shoot a suspect in the arm or the leg.”
. . . This could be the stupidest law ever. — G

Somebody has been watching waaaaay to many cowboy and Indian movies.
Um, good shot Kemo Sabe............
 
Could the head be considered a limb? I'm not sure but that would be my argument. I'd just get a big enough weapon to knock limbs off one at a time. If you lived it wouldn't be easy to be a repeat offender:s0155:
 
This has to be just about the stupidest proposed law I've ever heard of.

[ Via: New York Post ]
City cops are livid over a legislative proposal that could handcuff the brave officers involved in life-and-death confrontations every day — requiring them to shoot gun-wielding suspects in the arm or leg rather than shoot to kill, The Post has learned.
The “minimum force” bill, which surfaced in the Assembly last week, seeks to amend the state penal codes’ “justification” clause that allows an officer the right to kill a thug if he feels his life or someone else’s is in imminent danger.
The bill — drafted in the wake of Sean Bell’s controversial police shooting death — would force officers to use their weapons “with the intent to stop, rather than kill” a suspect. They would be mandated to “shoot a suspect in the arm or the leg.”
. . . This could be the stupidest law ever. — G

In a case where a firearm is to be used to stop or prevent a real threat or imminent danger of death by anyone a person should shoot to stop the danger as quickly as possible. Never to wound or scare, but to "STOP" the threat and that is the only justified time to use a firearm. ie; keyword= stop the threat before they can kill you or someone else. The threat is stopped when they are on the ground and no longer pose a danger. If they have a weapon they continue to pose a threat until they stop moving.
Any dept that pushes a wounding policy will lose all intelligent officers to other depts. I have seen stupid, but that one takes the cake. :-\/\ Those that stay will eventually be lost to a 6 man team that carries their casket.
 
If it's a non lethal threat, then they shoot them with a 12ga bean bag round.

If the bad guy warrants a real bullet, the cops should always train for center body mass. Duh?

Most times you hear about a shootout, it's 50 rounds fired from 3 cop's glocks, and the bad guy was hit 9 times. They don't have time to aim for a limb, with a running, ducking, gunfight.
 

Upcoming Events

Rifle Mechanics
Sweet Home, OR
Oregon Arms Collectors May 2024 Gun Show
Portland, OR
Handgun Self Defense Fundamentals
Sweet Home, OR
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top