About . . . . . . Classes . . . . . . Books . . . . . . Vita . . . . . . . Links. . . . . . Blog

by Peter Moskos

March 18, 2011

"Retiree who yelled 'Gun' has 'annoying habit' of visiting crime scenes"

"He listens to scanners and races to locations where police are called, a source told the New York Post."


Cleanville Tziabatz said...

I don't see how the yelling of the word "gun" was relevant. It is not like police can fire at someone just because someone yells "gun." The policeman still needs to figure out whether there is really a threat and give the man a chance to drop his gun (or hose nozzle as the case may be).

While we seem to be getting more facts, and more true facts, in this police shooting than in most, the one part we haven't heard about is whether the dead policeman yelled "I'm a police" and/or lifted his badge. Are the uniforms in this case really as bad at perceiving verbal cues and badges as Sean Bell or Jonathan Ayers. If the police can't tell an undercover is a popo in a split second then how can a civilian reasonably be expected to?

This should have important policy implications for how undercover police are used. Basically they should not carry. It is safer for them not to carry. safer for the policeman and the regcits. As shown by the Officer Torbit slaying and again here.

This isn't quite as important as the policemen-need-to-stop-shooting-at-moving-cars problem, but it is a problem.

Anonymous said...

According to one account, after the retired cop yelled gun, another police man grabbed the guy by the shoulder. As he pulled him around, the man's rifle apprently raised, and the cop who shot him may have thought he was about to fire.

But here's the big problem I have. The only ID this guy had was a shield around his neck, just like the cops who who Jonathan Ayers in Georgia. If a bunch of cops can't see that and process it quickly in a heated situation, how are civilians supposed to?