Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   Three shot, one injured inside New Jersey Police station. If only the police had been armed, this would never have happened   (foxnews.com) divider line 92
    More: News, New Jersey, police stations, stairwell  
•       •       •

12571 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Dec 2012 at 9:04 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-12-28 09:06:57 AM  
20 votes:
Wayne LaPierre has the solution to this problem: Place armed teachers inside every police station.
2012-12-28 09:09:52 AM  
18 votes:
Actually, they did subby:

Three New Jersey police officers were reportedly wounded during a shooting inside the Gloucester Township Police station.
MyFoxPhilly.com reports that the suspected shooter has been shot and killed.


Initial report is that 3 are wounded, and the shooter was shot and killed.

Seems to me that having a bunch of guns around prevented that from being much worse.
2012-12-28 09:08:33 AM  
13 votes:
This happened because they've taken God out of the police stations.
2012-12-28 09:10:51 AM  
11 votes:
The shooter took a cop's gun. Nobody would be able to get a gun from a teacher.
2012-12-28 09:16:18 AM  
5 votes:
Are you all retarded?

"Police said a suspect was under arrest in connection with a domestic violence-related incident when a struggle with officers ensued at around 5:30 a.m. The suspect "obtained a firearm" during the struggle, police sources said. Officers then returned fire, killing the unidentified suspect."

The jerk-off probably managed to yank one of the officers service weapons from a holster.
The cops responded with deadly force and killed the mother farker.
Thankfully there were only injuries to the police and only some asshat is dead.

This is how things are supposed to work.
2012-12-28 09:12:03 AM  
5 votes:

kombat_unit: Your probably pissed the shooter didn't gun down some kids before his suicide by cop. Oh well, maybe you'll get your wish tomorrow.


No, but I am pissed that people don't know the difference between "your" and "you're".
2012-12-28 09:14:30 AM  
4 votes:
No dead good guys, one dead bad guy... seems like it's working as intended.
2012-12-28 09:57:54 AM  
3 votes:

Kiriyama9000: Are you all retarded?

"Police said a suspect was under arrest in connection with a domestic violence-related incident when a struggle with officers ensued at around 5:30 a.m. The suspect "obtained a firearm" during the struggle, police sources said. Officers then returned fire, killing the unidentified suspect."

The jerk-off probably managed to yank one of the officers service weapons from a holster.
The cops responded with deadly force and killed the mother farker.
Thankfully there were only injuries to the police and only some asshat is dead.

This is how things are supposed to work.


In many stations, cops check their service sidearms as they enter... when bad guys go to try to escape, they neither have guns, nor can they get them from the locked boxes at the entrance... what there is is a wall of cops who are well trained, and one unarmed guy, they force him to the floor, do a better job of restraining him (seems pretty obvious that whenever a criminal gets loose enough to fight, that's not how things are supposed to work), and carry on with their day... nobody gets shot, certainly nobody gets killed, and everyone goes on with their day after a minor scuffle... the guy gets an additional couple counts of battery on a peace officer, and the officer who did a shiat job of restraining the suspect in the first place gets reviewed to see if he violated policy in the course of his failure to control the suspect... everyone goes either home or to jail alive... and that's how things are supposed to work.

/mind boggling that you think a criminal getting a cops gun is how things are supposed to work.
2012-12-28 09:21:47 AM  
3 votes:

dittybopper: Seems to me that having a bunch of guns around prevented that from being much worse.


Dancin_In_Anson: Yep. But we can't let that get in the way of a good derpfest!


Click Click D'oh: No dead good guys, one dead bad guy... seems like it's working as intended.


At which point in the past few weeks has any argument been made to keep guns out of the hands of police officers?

You know, continuing to harp on events where trained police officers stopped a shooting doesn't further the argument that you are intending to make. I mean, assuming you aren't just making silly comments to further some twisted agenda because reasonable discussion about a serious problem is beyond your pay grade.

Just think, if the police officers DIDN'T have guns, the person in custody wouldn't have been able to steal a weapon and shoot three people.
2012-12-28 09:11:26 AM  
3 votes:
If the police station was a weapons free zone this would not have happened.
KIA
2012-12-28 09:11:13 AM  
3 votes:
Wow - so these are the guys you think have the ability to protect every citizen from criminals? These are the government agents you think can bring about peace while every other law abiding citizen is disarmed?
2012-12-28 09:09:52 AM  
3 votes:
Maybe the shooter was committing suicide-by-cop?
2012-12-28 12:34:17 PM  
2 votes:

justtray: Incog_Neeto: dittybopper: Actually, they did subby:

Three New Jersey police officers were reportedly wounded during a shooting inside the Gloucester Township Police station.
MyFoxPhilly.com reports that the suspected shooter has been shot and killed.

Initial report is that 3 are wounded, and the shooter was shot and killed.

Seems to me that having a bunch of guns around prevented that from being much worse.

^^This

Except when you realize he used their gun.... Jesus. Stupid is a stupid does.


It's almost as though the gun made the situation more dangerous. Odd. That a lethal weapon capable of killing multiple people in seconds could potentially create additional danger is just so very unexpected.
2012-12-28 10:37:23 AM  
2 votes:

Civil_War2_Time: My friend and aunt was murdered 10 years ago this past week (when some dick took her purse, found only $20 and was so pissed he gut-shot her). IMO, if she had a gun that was reasonably accessable (ankle-holster, etc.), she might still be alive today. YMMV.


If she had a gun in an ankle holster, and the guy who shot her already had his gun out, he would've shot her for reaching for it.
2012-12-28 10:35:08 AM  
2 votes:
If not previously stated, the toll could have been much worse if they did't have guns to protect themselves. And subby is a douche.
2012-12-28 10:22:26 AM  
2 votes:
You know what, honest question here for the "guns are not a part of the problem" crowd. I like facts and numbers and figures and I like to draw conclusions from them. Here's a series of facts I've gleaned from FBI crime stats and Wikipedia tables for other threads since Newtown:

1. The USA is far and away the most heavily armed society in the world. More than 88 guns per 100 citizens. More than 40% of all people in the country between the ages of zero and dead own at least one gun. That last bit isn't "on average", that's actually people who own at least one gun.

2. The OECD member country list is useful for comparing like nations based on their development. Among OECD member countries, only Mexico has more gun crimes per capita than the USA

3. 37/50 states in the USA have "will-issue" laws on the books for concealed carry permits. 2 states are "constitutional carry" and do not even require a permit. One state is technically "shall issue" but operates as "will issue". That means in 40 out 50 states the only people who can't get a concealed carry permit are felons and people who are known to be mentally unstable (which is a small number of people since states are not required to provide that information to the FBI anymore).

4. Only 7 of 50 states ranked 50 (out of 100) or above on Brady Campaign's gun control scorecard. 5 more ranked 25 or above leaving 38 of 50 states scoring 24 or less with the majority scoring between 0 and 10.

How can you, in a country more armed than any other nation, with a vast majority of states allowing unchallenged concealed carry for non-felons, and a vast majority of states having weak or no gun control laws on the books reconcile the argument that the problem is we need more armed citizens when we also lead all developed nations (except the one embroiled in a massive drug war) in gun violence and are way up the list on all countries combined?

I literally cannot even begin to comprehend the argument here. We're already more armed than any other country on earth, with the vast majority of states having extremely loose controls on concealed carry and what you can buy.... yet we lead the developed world in gun violence and the argument is there aren't enough people with guns?

You literally can't own more guns per capita than any other country on earth no matter how many more you add. If we're already the most heavily armed populace on the planet, but also the 10th most dangerous for gun violence.... how is more guns even remotely a justifiable position based on any actual data?
2012-12-28 09:56:24 AM  
2 votes:
sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net
2012-12-28 09:21:07 AM  
2 votes:

dittybopper: Actually, they did subby:

Three New Jersey police officers were reportedly wounded during a shooting inside the Gloucester Township Police station.
MyFoxPhilly.com reports that the suspected shooter has been shot and killed.

Initial report is that 3 are wounded, and the shooter was shot and killed.

Seems to me that having a bunch of guns around prevented that from being much worse.


The entire event demonstrates armed people do not prevent mass shootings. They're responders.
2012-12-28 09:13:15 AM  
2 votes:

dittybopper: Seems to me that having a bunch of guns around prevented that from being much worse.


Seems to me that having a bunch of guns around made the attack possible.
2012-12-28 09:13:03 AM  
2 votes:
Only 3? hmmmm and why didn't they just kill every polioce officer in the building?? oh the shooter was shot and killed..... nice try Farker

images.sodahead.com
2012-12-28 09:11:12 AM  
2 votes:

Fissile: Wayne LaPierre has the solution to this problem: Place armed teachers inside every police station.


Yeah! Then maybe cops would finally LEARN something.
2012-12-28 09:10:43 AM  
2 votes:
He was just trying to get his wanted level up to six stars.
2012-12-28 09:10:09 AM  
2 votes:
Give the cops more guns, and take away their video games.
2012-12-28 09:07:49 AM  
2 votes:
Those cops obviously needed more guns.
2012-12-28 09:07:32 AM  
2 votes:
That does it. We need to give police officers guns. Then everyone would be too scared to shoot them.
2012-12-28 09:06:30 AM  
2 votes:
I'll bet it was one day before one of the cop's retirement, too. Those guys should know better than to show up on their last day.
2012-12-28 09:05:56 AM  
2 votes:
Days since last mass shooting: 0
2012-12-28 03:06:47 PM  
1 votes:

Callous: firefly212: DrewCurtisJr: Callous: Yes, why else do you think these nuts always pick locations that they know are "gun free zones"?

In most of these cases the targets are where they are/were students or where they worked or got fired from. And then you have situations of domestic violence that spills over to work or public places.

If you're going to refute him, hit harder.
1. Colorado has one of the highest CCW/capita rates in the country, the movie theater was not a "gun free zone"

Yes it was. Link

2. Columbine had armed police officer guards, that's pretty much the opposite of "gun free"

The guard was off campus at lunch when they attacked their own school.  They probably knew his habits and planned it that way.  And only the non-present guard was allowed to carry.  Therefore it's a Gun Free Zone.

3. VA Tech had armed police officers on campus, again, the opposite of "gun free" 32 dead, 24 more shot and injured.

And he chained the door shut on his own school to give himself as much killing time as possible before the cops could get in.  The school had renewed it's policy the previous year prohibiting anyone except law enforcement to carry on campus.  So yes it is also Gun Free Zone.

4. Diner in Tulsa, not a gun free zone, again a high ccw/capita rate, didn't stop Jake England and Alan Watts from killing five black guys (they killed them just for being black).

I'm not familiar with particular event.  Only thing I could find via google was a spree shooter at multiple locations, and he was targeting black people.

5. IHOP, Carson City, NV, not a gun free zone, 11 shot, 5 dead, including three National Guard Members, 1 of the dead had a gun on him, one of the shot (lived) had a gun on him.
6. Fort Hood, TX (pretty much the polar opposite of gun free), Maj. Nidal Hassan killed 13 and wounded 29.

Actually the only people allowed to carry firearms are the civilian police on the base.  The soldiers are not allowed to carry, all their weapons are kept in the armo ...


I think the general point, that criminals looking to kill lots of people go on craig's list and vet the places they terrorize before going and killing lots of people, is still bunk.

Criminals looking to kill lots of people go to where lots of people are. Locally. The School they happen to go to, The Restaurant in town, The Military Base they happen to live on...

The "reason" for columbine wasn't convenience of targets, but emotion. Angry kids deciding they'd "show em". That's well documented. It wouldn't make sense for them to go to another school. The school was the ONLY reason they were doing it to begin with.

Aurora is the only one for which I'd really consider the possibility that the shooter planned the attack and the venue because of the access to guns there... but I think it is MUCH more likely that he planned to attack the local movie theater while it was showing one of the most highly anticipated movies of the year during peak movie-going season. Because... again... lots of people. Conveniently located.

The notion that the Fort Hood shooter "chose" Fort Hood because military bases check weapons at the armory is... frankly... the dumbest thing I've heard about this particular debate. And for some reason, a lot of people are saying it.

It's retarded. Don't go full retard.
2012-12-28 01:47:52 PM  
1 votes:

hovsm: So a guy busts into an unarmed school and kills 27. A guy busts into an armed police station and 0 killed.


Except that the second sentence isn't reflective of what actually happened.

He didn't bust in
At least one person is dead
We don't arm police stations

I think the only part you got right was the "[a] guy..."
2012-12-28 01:28:52 PM  
1 votes:

DrewCurtisJr: Callous: Yes, why else do you think these nuts always pick locations that they know are "gun free zones"?

In most of these cases the targets are where they are/were students or where they worked or got fired from. And then you have situations of domestic violence that spills over to work or public places.


If you're going to refute him, hit harder.
1. Colorado has one of the highest CCW/capita rates in the country, the movie theater was not a "gun free zone"
2. Columbine had armed police officer guards, that's pretty much the opposite of "gun free"
3. VA Tech had armed police officers on campus, again, the opposite of "gun free" 32 dead, 24 more shot and injured.
4. Diner in Tulsa, not a gun free zone, again a high ccw/capita rate, didn't stop Jake England and Alan Watts from killing five black guys (they killed them just for being black).
5. IHOP, Carson City, NV, not a gun free zone, 11 shot, 5 dead, including three National Guard Members, 1 of the dead had a gun on him, one of the shot (lived) had a gun on him.
6. Fort Hood, TX (pretty much the polar opposite of gun free), Maj. Nidal Hassan killed 13 and wounded 29.
7. Kirkwood, MO City Hall (four cops on duty in the building), Charles Thornton Killed six and injured 2 more.

Callous, your question is "why else do you think these nuts always pick locations that they know are "gun free zones"? "

My question to you would be... why do you think that nuts pick locations that are gun free zones when the opposite seems to be happening in the reality the rest of us live in?
2012-12-28 12:35:52 PM  
1 votes:

Buffalo77: Fissile: Wayne LaPierre has the solution to this problem: Place armed teachers inside every police station.

It appears from this story that LaPierre has be vindicated. Some one bursting in a room and firing will never be stopped, its what happens after that initial scene when he goes to the next class room or comes walking out into the hall.


Not really. Not even the staunchest gun-control advocates claim that every crazed gunman can be stopped. That was always a straw argument. The argument that armed teachers could somehow stop someone who is already going from room to room firing at people remains weak at best. And that's assuming that teachers would be carrying guns on their person at all times, like police officers do. The fact that we're even considering that is insanity. The "arming the teachers" argument in general is, in reality, implausible and insane.
2012-12-28 12:18:52 PM  
1 votes:

dittybopper: If you make them believe that a particular target is "hardened", then they will pick a weaker target.


Weaker? Weaker than a school full of kids with the possibility that there may be an armed teacher against a person with a semi-automatic rifle being used by a person that fully intends on dying.
2012-12-28 12:03:03 PM  
1 votes:

justtray: KIA: Mike_1962: You have not provided anything to establish that a lack of uncontrolled firearms is the cause.

Actually, I totally did since there are no legal firearms in England and this increase has happened since that time while crime rates have decreased in America as firearms remained legal.

No you did not. America has 40 TIMES the amount of gun crime as the UK. Now go away, I already defeated that argument yesterday. But but 100% increase doesn't mean crap when you're going from 50-100. Even the articles that list those stats admit the cause is due to more aggressive gang related activity, not the gun ban.

Stop parroting talking points you dont understand


You're asking the wrong questions.

Did the gun ban reduce violent crime overall?

newsimg.bbc.co.uk

No, it didn't. Violent crime was going down before the ban, and UK crime followed the same general trend in the US, peaking in the early 1990's, and falling after that.

Did it reduce homicides overall?

2.bp.blogspot.com

No, it didn't.

Did it prevent mass shootings? No, it didn't.

That last one is of particular interest: I've argued with UK citizens before (going back to usenet conversations in the late 1990's) that the handgun ban in the UK didn't help the crime rate drop, and they countered that it was meant to prevent another Dunblane or Hungerford tragedy. The UK seems to have a mass shooting about once per decade, and while it was perhaps a couple of years late, they *STILL* have them on roughly that schedule it seems.

OK, so we've established that the UK handgun ban doesn't lower violent crime or murder rates, and it doesn't prevent mass shootings. So why keep it? You've had it for, what, 16 years now? At what point do you say "OK, we made a mistake. Turns out that taking highly regulated guns away from people *DOESN'T* help, so let's allow them again"?

In other words, why not err on the side of more freedom, rather than less? You tried it, it didn't work, so why keep it?
2012-12-28 11:59:50 AM  
1 votes:

dittybopper: That's going to change your thinking about your chances.


People who go into elementary schools and shoot children before killing their mother and themselves aren't really interested in "their chances" or in "thinking"

Just saying.

Deterrents only work when somebody actually *cares* about consequences.
2012-12-28 11:52:17 AM  
1 votes:

Kiriyama9000: firefly212: Kiriyama9000: Are you all retarded?

"Police said a suspect was under arrest in connection with a domestic violence-related incident when a struggle with officers ensued at around 5:30 a.m. The suspect "obtained a firearm" during the struggle, police sources said. Officers then returned fire, killing the unidentified suspect."

The jerk-off probably managed to yank one of the officers service weapons from a holster.
The cops responded with deadly force and killed the mother farker.
Thankfully there were only injuries to the police and only some asshat is dead.

This is how things are supposed to work.

In many stations, cops check their service sidearms as they enter... when bad guys go to try to escape, they neither have guns, nor can they get them from the locked boxes at the entrance... what there is is a wall of cops who are well trained, and one unarmed guy, they force him to the floor, do a better job of restraining him (seems pretty obvious that whenever a criminal gets loose enough to fight, that's not how things are supposed to work), and carry on with their day... nobody gets shot, certainly nobody gets killed, and everyone goes on with their day after a minor scuffle... the guy gets an additional couple counts of battery on a peace officer, and the officer who did a shiat job of restraining the suspect in the first place gets reviewed to see if he violated policy in the course of his failure to control the suspect... everyone goes either home or to jail alive... and that's how things are supposed to work.

/mind boggling that you think a criminal getting a cops gun is how things are supposed to work.

You misinterpreted what I said and you're making an assumption that the police are infallible. A mistake was made and a criminal managed to get an officer's gun. Other officers responded with deadly force and ended the event with only injuries on their account.


No, I didn't misinterpret what you said, what you said was just mind bogglingly stupid.

What's supposed to happen.
1. You're not supposed to make mistakes in restraining a prisoner.
2. When you do make said mistake, if you had policies (as other departments do) in place preventing firearms from entering the facility, the use of deadly force would be wholly unnecessary.
3. Even if you made the mistake in restraining a prisoner, and your department has no procedures to prevent firearms from entering the facility, your number one farking job is not "get the bad guy," it's "protect your sidearm"... failing to protect your sidearm puts not just you, but every other officer and civilian in the area in an incredible amount of danger.

This shooting, though necessary once the prisoner had a firearm, was not "how things are supposed to work"... it was a series of colossal fark ups on the part of the arresting officer, the department, and the criminal... there were numerous reasonable ways to avoid the officers and the criminals lives being put in danger, and they were farked up at every frickin point, ultimately resulting in a criminal having a firearm in a police station... regardless of what happened after that point, all of the things that led to a point where a frickin custodial prisoner had a firearm is NOT AT ALL HOW THINGS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE. Here on Earth, when cops fark up, departments fark up, and there is a chain of incidents leading to a prisoner having a firearm, there's hell to pay and departmental investigations that look at every aspect of what went wrong, not a friggin cheerleading squad like you blathering about how great everything worked. Bad things don't happen because of one f#ck up, they happen because a series of f@ck ups, usually by several people... the idea that we would cheer about all that went right, when three cops got shot in their own friggin station... and that we'd say that's how it's supposed to be... that's not something any reasonable gun owner, and certainly not any cop, is going to be happy about.
2012-12-28 11:52:01 AM  
1 votes:

dittybopper: Actually, they did subby:

Three New Jersey police officers were reportedly wounded during a shooting inside the Gloucester Township Police station.
MyFoxPhilly.com reports that the suspected shooter has been shot and killed.

Initial report is that 3 are wounded, and the shooter was shot and killed.

Seems to me that having a bunch of guns around prevented that from being much worse.


I finally get the argument from the pro-gun side.

It's OK if a few people get gunned down, as long as a hero with is own gun is there to stop the shooter before things can get "much worse."

Brilliant. I'm going to go buy a handgun today.
2012-12-28 11:46:44 AM  
1 votes:

Click Click D'oh: No dead good guys, one dead bad guy... seems like it's working as intended.


Except the whole point was supposed to be that crazed gunmen -- while crazed -- would still somehow be deterred by "hard targets" where they knew people were armed... at least until you all just moved the goalposts.

So, no.  No it didn't.
2012-12-28 11:44:36 AM  
1 votes:

KIA: Mike_1962: You have not provided anything to establish that a lack of uncontrolled firearms is the cause.

Actually, I totally did since there are no legal firearms in England and this increase has happened since that time while crime rates have decreased in America as firearms remained legal.


No you did not. America has 40 TIMES the amount of gun crime as the UK. Now go away, I already defeated that argument yesterday. But but 100% increase doesn't mean crap when you're going from 50-100. Even the articles that list those stats admit the cause is due to more aggressive gang related activity, not the gun ban.

Stop parroting talking points you dont understand
2012-12-28 11:39:48 AM  
1 votes:

Scerpes: dittybopper: Scerpes: Maybe the best solution would be to put biometric lock boxes in classrooms for those teachers that want to carry.

I don't like that idea either: The gun would have to be in a drawer, where it could be more easily stolen, and it would take a while for it to be employed, perhaps too long: Shooter would probably target the teacher first, so (s)he has to have it ready at a moments notice. One of the reasons why the Supreme Court ruled that DC's law was unconstitutional was that it required that all guns in the home be locked up, and during oral arguments, even the lawyers for DC fumbled by conceding it could take 3 seconds to unlock a gun: They had intended to show it wasn't a significant burden, but ended up proving the opposite. Three seconds is a *LONG* time when you are in a situation like that.

I don't disagree with any of that. At the same time, I understand just what a burden it is to carry either concealed or open day in and day out. I just don't think it's feasible to expect teachers to do that.


You wouldn't *EXPECT* them to do it: It would have to be a completely voluntary program. Those that are motivated enough to get certified for that sort of thing (and it should be a bit more complex then getting a conventional CCW in most states, but not *TOO* much more complex) will take on the burden willfully and carefully.

Those that don't want to take on that burden simply wouldn't.

And while it should be tougher to get, we should *PUBLICIZE* it like we were giving them out like candy on Halloween. The real value of it would be deterrence.
2012-12-28 10:53:38 AM  
1 votes:
While I'm against a mandate for civilians, this is why the development of smart guns that only fire for the owner is so important. Last time I heard, the number one source of a gun when a cop is shot is still his or her own gun. I know the technology exists, but it is still not ready for the field. It has to be relatively fool proof, and reliable enough that when an office draws his weapon, he knows it will fire.

Hell I'd use that technology at home. Since the kids got old enough to get into anything and everything, my guns have been locked up. The odds of me needing to defend my family from a home invasion are simply too low vs. the chance of one of my family getting accidentally shot with one of my guns.
2012-12-28 10:41:42 AM  
1 votes:

Civil_War2_Time: Yes, it IS a stupid simplistic argument.

BUT, this is where the concealed vs. open-view carry situation comes into play.

If the tackled cop had his gun in a holster around his ankle (like my dad's .45 mini), there would likely have been but one person shot...the perp. Although the perp wouldn't have tackled someone trying to get his gun if he didn't know if he even had one on-person (and in a police station).

It's time for cops to stop showing-off their weapons, because they don't need to. Conceal it, and there will be next to no shootings of cops with their own guns...IMO.


1) The suspect is the only one that know's ahead of time that there is going to be some shooting. He has the tremendous tactical advantage of action where I have to rely on reaction to respond. So now you want me to drop to a knee, pull up my pants, pull out a useless sub compact and get into a fight?

2) It's called deterrent. Your gun is in your waistband behind your back and mine is about 2" from the gun hand. Going to draw on me? There is a chance that you might get a shot off but I am going to be returning fire almost immediately after it. Unless you happen to get me in the head I am shooting back.
2012-12-28 10:39:45 AM  
1 votes:

KIA: Coco LaFemme: How many people have died in this country as a result of guns since Newtown? Something like 500+?

About the same number that have died as a result of the flu. Same as always. Did you get your flu shot?


Perhaps. And if we could eradicte the flu, we would. Instead we take steps to reduce the mortality. Hmmm
2012-12-28 10:38:53 AM  
1 votes:
So the only reason this guy got a gun is because the cops were carrying them around a criminal?

If this was the UK the guy would freak out, get beat down, then locked up.

Obviously this would be worse than him getting a gun and shooting three people.
2012-12-28 10:38:16 AM  
1 votes:

publikenemy: After a few years, I think I finally have Fark figured out..

-Cops are hated
-Guns are bad
-Unions are great
-The U.S. sucks...but Obama is great
-The govt. sucks..but it's ok now because of Obama
-Republicans are evil and responsible for everything from killing old people, to killing the arts and global warming
-Religion is bad, and if you are a Christian especially, you are stupid and deserve scorn and hatred..but Obama being a Christian and mentioning God is a-ok
-Cars are bad..unless they're electric
-The rich are evil
-Obama biatches!


I miss anything?



www.allmystery.de
2012-12-28 10:27:48 AM  
1 votes:

Kiriyama9000: liam76: Kiriyama9000: The jerk-off probably managed to yank one of the officers service weapons from a holster.
The cops responded with deadly force and killed the mother farker.
Thankfully there were only injuries to the police and only some asshat is dead.

This is how things are supposed to work
Really?

I am pretty sure whn the police have somebody in custody they, as a rule, shouldn't be able to take police officers weapon from them.
You're making an assumption that every officer is perfect at their job.
You also fail to realize that the officer needs access to their service weapon.
They can do as much as they can to prevent others from gaining access, but it is still a weapon holstered at their side that they need immediate access to should the need arise. Other officers did this and lives were saved because of it.

Where are you going with your logic?


I made no assumption.

You claimed this was how it was supposed to work, I pointed out it was pretty stupid to think that a guy, in custody, grabbing a cops gun is how it is "supposed to work".

it is also pretty stupid to claim their lives were saved by having guns holstered at their side when their lives were put in danger because they couldn't control guns holstered at their side.


What should the officers have done prior to this?
Disarm themselves and then move the guy?

They are armed for a reason.
For this very reason.


The officer should have made sure a person in custody couldn't take their weapon.

The officer who lost their weapon has just shown it isn't safe for them to carry a weapon.
2012-12-28 10:20:23 AM  
1 votes:

Oh you're right sub-tard... I guess even the police shouldn't have guns!!!!



Using a gun grab by an in custody criminal as your call for gun control.... too many lulz.....
2012-12-28 10:14:13 AM  
1 votes:
After a few years, I think I finally have Fark figured out..

-Cops are hated
-Guns are bad
-Unions are great
-The U.S. sucks...but Obama is great
-The govt. sucks..but it's ok now because of Obama
-Republicans are evil and responsible for everything from killing old people, to killing the arts and global warming
-Religion is bad, and if you are a Christian especially, you are stupid and deserve scorn and hatred..but Obama being a Christian and mentioning God is a-ok
-Cars are bad..unless they're electric
-The rich are evil
-Obama biatches!


I miss anything?
2012-12-28 10:09:24 AM  
1 votes:

ghare: Click Click D'oh: No dead good guys, one dead bad guy... seems like it's working as intended.

Cops are civilians?


Cops are civilians. This is what seperates us from a police state.
2012-12-28 10:03:16 AM  
1 votes:
Well, thanks to guns, that is one criminal who will never be brought to justice. Whatever crime he originally committed, we will never know if he was guilty or not, who else was involved, or anything, really. If this was suicide by cop, then who was he protecting by dying? Thanks to guns, instead of, say, pepper spray or tasers, we are left with even larger mysteries and nothing but injustices all round, for which there will be no retributive justice or restorative justice.
2012-12-28 09:56:48 AM  
1 votes:

People_are_Idiots: Uhm, to the cop that had his gun stolen: They make special holsters now to prevent that from happening.

To the cops that attended to him un-cuffed: Next time, try cuffing him until the weapons are secured.

To the cops that got shot: I'm glad it wasn't worse. Hope the cop with the belly wound makes it through to full duty.

To the cops that shot and killed the idiot: Good call. Glad you came out without any fatalities (well, save for the dead idiot).


We just went to those new double retention holsters, they are nice but if someone knows how they work they could still get your gun. They say police station not jail..here those are two different places so this guy could have been coming to turn himself in on the DV warrant, that happens alot. So he might not even have been in cuffs yet if so, definitely not in the front. I don't know of anyone, outside of the jail, that would cuff in the front.

My thought is this all happened when they went to cuff him. Over powered one officer, got his gun, two responded to help. He was gut shot fighting for the gun.

my .02...
2012-12-28 09:56:13 AM  
1 votes:
this wasn't some random crazy walking into and shooting up a police station.  This was someone already arrested getting loose, grabbing a cops gun and then shooting the guys who brought him in.  Still unfortunate, but doesn't count as a mass shooting.
2012-12-28 09:53:16 AM  
1 votes:

bulldg4life: dittybopper: Seems to me that having a bunch of guns around prevented that from being much worse.

Dancin_In_Anson: Yep. But we can't let that get in the way of a good derpfest!

Click Click D'oh: No dead good guys, one dead bad guy... seems like it's working as intended.

At which point in the past few weeks has any argument been made to keep guns out of the hands of police officers?

You know, continuing to harp on events where trained police officers stopped a shooting doesn't further the argument that you are intending to make. I mean, assuming you aren't just making silly comments to further some twisted agenda because reasonable discussion about a serious problem is beyond your pay grade.

Just think, if the police officers DIDN'T have guns, the person in custody wouldn't have been able to steal a weapon and shoot three people.


Nice one. Self-pwned much?
KIA
2012-12-28 09:51:56 AM  
1 votes:

Infernalist: I said 'civilized' world. I'm fairly sure that BURMA is not a country we should be looking up to, son.


Even more hysterical. So you only want to include white folks in your sophisticated analysis of "the way things should work" instead of all of those brown folks who now compose more than 70% of the world.

Do tell me, son, how effective England and Australia have been at protecting said white folks from assault, robbery, daytime burglary, rape, and so on. Wait, before you answer, at least read one scholarly work published well before the Newtown tragedy. Try this one here:

http://www.joyceleemalcolm.com/books/guns_and_violence

On the extremely high likelihood that you're not going to bother to read up on any fact-based analysis, I'll summarize: disarming the law-abiding citizens did nothing other than empower the criminals who now basically do whatever they want.
2012-12-28 09:51:22 AM  
1 votes:

ghare: Click Click D'oh: No dead good guys, one dead bad guy... seems like it's working as intended.

Cops are civilians?


Yes. They aren't military.
2012-12-28 09:44:09 AM  
1 votes:
God, guns and Internet Tough Guys. That shall be our legacy.
2012-12-28 09:39:06 AM  
1 votes:

Infernalist: Dancin_In_Anson: Infernalist: I know, right? It's always funny until it happens to someone you personally give a shiat about.

I don't give a shiat about a criminal who went for a cop's gun and lost.

I know you don't. You see a nameless, faceless loser who got what he deserved. And I pity you for your lack of comprehension.

You don't grasp that this is the last step in what was likely a long line of bad judgement calls and mistakes, judging by what he was hauled in for.

I'm saying he shouldn't have had to have died because some farking retard of a cop left his gun unsecured.


So you don't believe that this person should have been punished for his decision to take that retard of a cop's gun and start shooting at the other officers in the building? Is this entrapment of some kind in your mind? It's all the fault of the gun again, not the person pulling the trigger?


/the idiocy in this thread is much deeper than the previous gun threads recently.
2012-12-28 09:38:10 AM  
1 votes:

Infernalist: You don't grasp that this is the last step in what was likely a long line of bad judgement calls and mistakes, judging by what he was hauled in for.


Sounds to me like he has...sorry...had a bit of history of violent behavior. Anyone that is willing to shoot a cop is more than willing to shoot the likes of you while you're in the process of asking him if he would like a hug.

Infernalist: I'm saying he shouldn't have had to have died because some farking retard of a cop left his gun unsecured.


Where in the article did it say that a cop's firearm was unsecured?

Yes, I'll wait.
2012-12-28 09:37:31 AM  
1 votes:

Kiriyama9000: The talk of giving teachers guns is silly. Having said that, I went to a high school that had two armed police officers on duty at all times. If someone did come in with a gun, they'd have to deal with an armed response. Even if somehow both officers failed to bring down an assailant, isn't that still better than no response at all?


Well, some could argue that it is the same as no response at all...plus two guards on the funeral pyre, plus two guns and two clips (at least) in the shooter's arsenal.

But aside from that...again, how are we, who vote down simple school levies because our kids don't go to the schools in question, going to pay for the positioning of armed guards? Because with the nearly coast-to-coast downsizing of local and county police forces, there aren't going to be enough police to be in every school and enough to patrol. Like I said, the kid from Die Hard 3 knows the scenario: "It's Christmas! You could steal City Hall!" So the guards are either going to have to be hired by the schools, or the locals are going to have to bring more cops back on payroll. Either way, this costs money; money that, in the past decade at the very least, everyone seems reluctant to give.
2012-12-28 09:35:47 AM  
1 votes:

Kiriyama9000: If someone did come in with a gun, they'd have to deal with an armed response.


Yes, armed officers will have a chance to take down a shooter before he does the maximum amount of damage.  However, what is more common - school shootings or fights?  If these armed officers are there, will they not be breaking up fights?  When they break up fights, will the students not have an opportunity to take the handgun from the police, just as the man did in this story?  Finally, do you think having guns in schools will make deaths by guns in schools go down or up?
2012-12-28 09:34:00 AM  
1 votes:

KIA: Infernalist: other methods of non-lethal weaponry

A) You forgot about Nerf guns. Very intimidating in some of the larger models.

B) Billy-clubs. Right. Why not give them a 18th-century man-catcher? Those were non-lethal and had like a nine-foot range rather than the more limited three-foot range of a billy club.

C) If criminals want habanera sauce, they can generally get it without going to the police for it.

D) Tasers aren't necessarily non-lethal and also aren't necessarily effective.


Your snark is noted, I'll have to mentally adjust your scores downward as a result.

Your response shows that you have zero comprehension of how 90% of the civilized world deals with criminals. I have to dub thee 'retarded' and move on.
2012-12-28 09:33:58 AM  
1 votes:
It's time the police step up their game:
www.animereq.com
Leona wouldn't have let this shiat happen.
2012-12-28 09:33:24 AM  
1 votes:

Goodfella: [s1.ibtimes.com image 578x365]

"What we need doing in this country is start training police on the use of firearms and then putting armed police inside police stations!"


You hit the nail on the head sir.
2012-12-28 09:33:16 AM  
1 votes:
did someone armed end it?

/drtfa
KIA
2012-12-28 09:33:05 AM  
1 votes:

Infernalist: You don't grasp that this is the last step in what was likely a long line of bad judgement calls and mistakes, judging by what he was hauled in for.


Well... Bye.
2012-12-28 09:31:26 AM  
1 votes:

Dancin_In_Anson: Infernalist: I know, right? It's always funny until it happens to someone you personally give a shiat about.

I don't give a shiat about a criminal who went for a cop's gun and lost.


I know you don't. You see a nameless, faceless loser who got what he deserved. And I pity you for your lack of comprehension.

You don't grasp that this is the last step in what was likely a long line of bad judgement calls and mistakes, judging by what he was hauled in for.

I'm saying he shouldn't have had to have died because some farking retard of a cop left his gun unsecured.
2012-12-28 09:31:15 AM  
1 votes:

socodog: Kiriyama9000: Are you all retarded?

"Police said a suspect was under arrest in connection with a domestic violence-related incident when a struggle with officers ensued at around 5:30 a.m. The suspect "obtained a firearm" during the struggle, police sources said. Officers then returned fire, killing the unidentified suspect."

The jerk-off probably managed to yank one of the officers service weapons from a holster.
The cops responded with deadly force and killed the mother farker.
Thankfully there were only injuries to the police and only some asshat is dead.

This is how things are supposed to work.

THIS!!! The fark arm-chair anti gun task force is getting derpier by the moment. Subby, your headline is shiatty, inaccurate, and not even a good troll.


So if the cops WEREN'T armed, this would have never happened.
2012-12-28 09:30:28 AM  
1 votes:

imontheinternet: BizarreMan: If the police station was a weapons free zone this would not have happened.

FTFA:  The suspect "obtained a firearm" during the struggle, police sources said.

As mentioned above, I'm sure teachers would be able to protect their firearms much better than trained law enforcement personnel.

The talk of giving teachers guns is silly. Having said that, I went to a high school that had two armed police officers on duty at all times. If someone did come in with a gun, they'd have to deal with an armed response. Even if somehow both officers failed to bring down an assailant, isn't that still better than no response at all?

Not once in my four years in high school did I feel encroached by having officers around, nor did I ever feel that I was in a prison. If I were an elementary school student, I probably thought it would have been awesome to have an officer around. Didn't some of us aspire to be a cop some day at one point or another? Middle school students probably wouldn't care much -- we were all little asses back then.

Put an officer at every school. Give them an office. They are trained and have sworn an oath. Will this be perfect? No. Will this be cheap? No. Will more children be better protected than they are now? YES.

You cannot find and prevent every crazy or mentally sick person from doing crazy things. It is IMPOSSIBLE to predict crazy and even more IMPOSSIBLE to find every potential weapon for said crazy that could be used and destroy them.

Instead, provide an armed response. The only way to deal with deadly force is unfortunately to respond with deadly force.
2012-12-28 09:27:53 AM  
1 votes:

propasaurus: Three people were shot, but only one was injured?


==============

It's called "cop math". It's like when they find a little baggie of stems and seeds on a 19 year old pizza-face and they declare a "major" drug bust "with a street value of $1.2 million".

The shooting inside this cop station means all the cops at this station have just won the cop lottery. Every one will now declare an injury.....flying "shrapnel", loss of hearing, stress, etc.....and retire on a 100% disability pension that will pay six figures, and include a Cadillac health plan. The week after they "retire" they get another municipal/county job that pays at least six figures and the hiring authority will say, "It was such a bargain finding this guy because we don't need to pay his health care!"
2012-12-28 09:26:59 AM  
1 votes:
Did the suspect aquire his own weapon that the cops missed in a search or did he aquire the cops weapon because his hands were cuffed in front of his body.

I thought it was the weapon owners fault when a crime is committed with their firearm? Is the prosecutor filing charges against the weapons owner?
2012-12-28 09:26:45 AM  
1 votes:
The Herp-A-Derp anti-gunners are out in force this morning.

The still havent figured out bad people will still do bad things. Cute.
2012-12-28 09:25:06 AM  
1 votes:

TheTrashcanMan: Certainly doesn't help that the media keeps making all of these shooters into celebs.


I think if you see a shooter and think of him as a "celeb" that's kind of on you, man.
2012-12-28 09:24:06 AM  
1 votes:

Kiriyama9000: The jerk-off probably managed to yank one of the officers service weapons from a holster.
The cops responded with deadly force and killed the mother farker.
Thankfully there were only injuries to the police and only some asshat is dead.

This is how things are supposed to work


Really?

I am pretty sure whn the police have somebody in custody they, as a rule, shouldn't be able to take police officers weapon from them.
2012-12-28 09:22:01 AM  
1 votes:

Chinchillazilla: Days since last mass shooting: 0


Your definition of "mass" confuses me.


/there is gang related gun violence about... every damn day.
//but if its a bunch of white people getting shot, god help us.
2012-12-28 09:21:53 AM  
1 votes:

KIA: Actually, the police were wearing body armor which Feinstein is still trying to make illegal for civilians.


Yeah, think of how much fairer it would have been if the perp had had body armor as well.
2012-12-28 09:19:59 AM  
1 votes:

Vodka Zombie: propasaurus: Three people were shot, but only one was injured?

Hmm...  Maybe two were wearing their vests?


Now it's "too soon" once again.
2012-12-28 09:18:44 AM  
1 votes:

natazha: I thought all you had to do was show the perp that you had a gun and they would run away? That worked 2 million times last year!

Or not. 2 million is five times the number of violent crimes that occurred in the USA last year. If that was what the CC folks stopped, then there must have been 4-6 million violent crimes that were not reported.


Ummm... no. Don't know where those numbers came from, I'm just commenting on the (il)logic of your statement. If someone stopped a violent crime before it was committed, then there was - by definition - no violent crime committed to be reported.

/Logikal thot, how duz it wurk?
2012-12-28 09:18:32 AM  
1 votes:

BizarreMan: If the police station was a weapons free zone this would not have happened.


This is funny and true
2012-12-28 09:17:45 AM  
1 votes:
Two things:

a) I thought the knowledge of guns would dissuade people from attacking...where is that stupid f*cking Facebook post with the sign that says "if this sign was in front of the school, would the attack have happened"?
2) Yes, police officers that are trained and highly regulated were able to take down this criminal
d) The pro gun nitwits (specifically the people that have gone nutso the past couple weeks) seem to forget the above when making their new arguments today
KIA
2012-12-28 09:17:15 AM  
1 votes:

DROxINxTHExWIND: KIA: Wow - so these are the guys you think have the ability to protect every citizen from criminals? These are the government agents you think can bring about peace while every other law abiding citizen is disarmed?

Naw, we'd rather depend on the untrained law abiding citizen. Like the one who got killed here. Lets see:

Untrained civilians: 1 dead
Trained Police: One shot. Two with boo boos.

/check the stats


Actually, the police were wearing body armor which Feinstein is still trying to make illegal for civilians. One got hit below the body armor. It is unclear which one was careless enough to let a perp swipe their gun and how a perp who should have been in handcuffs managed to do that anyway.
2012-12-28 09:16:43 AM  
1 votes:

Click Click D'oh: No dead good guys, one dead bad guy... seems like it's working as intended.


It's cute how grown people still use terms like 'good guys' and 'bad guys' and they're totally serious in their usage, too.
2012-12-28 09:16:32 AM  
1 votes:
It's not that they weren't armed, it's because they took prayer away from police stations.
2012-12-28 09:16:22 AM  
1 votes:

BizarreMan: If the police station was a weapons free zone this would not have happened.


FTFA:  The suspect "obtained a firearm" during the struggle, police sources said.

As mentioned above, I'm sure teachers would be able to protect their firearms much better than trained law enforcement personnel.
2012-12-28 09:15:01 AM  
1 votes:
A gun isn't a force field.
2012-12-28 09:13:58 AM  
1 votes:

KIA: Wow - so these are the guys you think have the ability to protect every citizen from criminals? These are the government agents you think can bring about peace while every other law abiding citizen is disarmed?


Naw, we'd rather depend on the untrained law abiding citizen. Like the one who got killed here. Lets see:

Untrained civilians: 1 dead
Trained Police: One shot. Two with boo boos.

/check the stats
2012-12-28 09:12:48 AM  
1 votes:

dittybopper: Actually, they did subby:

Three New Jersey police officers were reportedly wounded during a shooting inside the Gloucester Township Police station.
MyFoxPhilly.com reports that the suspected shooter has been shot and killed.

Initial report is that 3 are wounded, and the shooter was shot and killed.

Seems to me that having a bunch of guns around prevented that from being much worse.


This. Three shot is a lot different than 26 dead. Hint: It's more difficult to shoot accurately when someone is shooting back at you.
2012-12-28 09:12:11 AM  
1 votes:
I was gonna make a crack about the NRA blaming Grand Theft Auto for this, and how their should be vets walking the halls with guns to prevent these things...but meh, it's Friday...gonna go grab a breakfast taco instead.
2012-12-28 09:11:09 AM  
1 votes:

phaseolus: Maybe the shooter was committing suicide-by-cop?


quite probable
2012-12-28 09:09:52 AM  
1 votes:
Your probably pissed the shooter didn't gun down some kids before his suicide by cop. Oh well, maybe you'll get your wish tomorrow.
2012-12-28 09:09:44 AM  
1 votes:

Oysterman: That does it. We need to give police officers guns. Then everyone would be too scared to shoot them.


From the article, it sounds like one of the cops should have kept better control of his own weapon.
2012-12-28 09:09:30 AM  
1 votes:
I've been saying it for years.  Every police officer should be issued a rocket-propelled grenade launcher and claymores.  When will these libby libs stop treading on us?
2012-12-28 08:56:43 AM  
1 votes:
Three people were shot, but only one was injured?
2012-12-28 08:43:29 AM  
1 votes:
They obviously need Paul Newman in the police station.

i.imgur.com
 
Displayed 92 of 92 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report