Sunday, September 20, 2015

Shooting Article

This article is typical of what passes for news these days.  It's one sentence that insults police and the readers.  It provides almost no context to what happened.  They say that the police fired 84 rounds at  a suspect and missed him 83 times and that the police need to go back to the range.  That may be true, the police may need more training, but from the limited information in this article we can't know if they are well trained or not.

How far away was he? Was he moving or stationary? Was he firing back at them? Were they laying down covering fire as other officers maneuvered to a better position? Did several officers get surprised and all just fire rounds off at once over a period of two or three seconds? A very poorly written article that simply wants to make fun of the police.

Did the reporter talk to any use of force experts?  Do they know how much training these officers have received?  Do they know how much time and money the NYPD spends on police firearms training and how that compares to other agencies?  Are they campaigning for more police training?  This is an anti-police article that provides no enlightenment to the reader; that's what the SGT Says.

No comments: