Bystander shot during police gunfight with robbery suspect
Source: Associated Press
Bystander shot during police gunfight with robbery suspect
Updated 4:40 pm, Saturday, May 21, 2016
SPRINGFIELD, Va. (AP) Police say they're looking for an armed robber who exchanged gunfire with an officer, leaving a bystander seriously hurt, in the Washington suburb of Springfield, Virginia.
Fairfax County Police said in a statement the bystander was driving by Saturday and was hit by a bullet apparently fired by the robbery suspect. They called the injury life-threatening.
Police were called shortly after noon to a jewelry store at the Brookfield Plaza shopping center. Police say an officer saw a man exit the store and confronted him.
Police say the suspect fired at the officer, who shot back.
Read more: http://www.chron.com/news/crime/article/Bystander-shot-during-police-gunfight-with-7920047.php
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)meant more bullets in the air. And would you believe one or more of them found an unintended target? Oops!
christx30
(6,241 posts)Maybe if asshat hadn't of robbed jewelry store, everything would have been better.
What should the cops do if an ARMED guy robs a store? Let him go?
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)whose gun they came from. My point was that once the shooting starts, the bullets are too stupid to know only those holding guns.
christx30
(6,241 posts)Not the guy robbing the jewelry store?
Not even a little bit?
840high
(17,196 posts)Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)that's for your amusment, right? I say that cause it don't do s*it for me.
Skittles
(153,147 posts)christx30
(6,241 posts)There's the guy robbing a jewelry store, which is already illegal. And there here's the cop, who was stopping a violent crime, which is his job.
Tell me what law you would have passed that would have made this crime not take place. Use of a firearm in the commission of a crime is already illegal. Making guns impossible to get so criminals wouldn't get their hands on it? How would you do that? Stop cops from stopping violent crimes? We saw how that worked out in Baltimore last year when the police took more of a hands off approach a year ago, and murders shot up a bunch.
Crime will always happen, no matter what. It's humans we're dealing with. As long as someone has something someone else wants, they are going to try to use force it fraud to get it.
Skittles
(153,147 posts)GUN HUMPING CRIMINALS ARE STILL GUN HUMPERS
christx30
(6,241 posts)the Internet screaming about their second amendments. To them, the gun is just a tool they use to take what doesn't belong to them.
They wouldn't comply with any gun laws you pass. They have to be either killed or forced to surrender to arrest, and hopefully not released until they are too old to commit another crime.
atreides1
(16,072 posts)They haven't had time to determine who fired the bullet!
It's like the shooting in Maryland:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/03/14/gunman-who-killed-officer-intended-to-die-police-say.html
At first the police reported that Officer Colson had been shot by the gunman, until an autopsy showed that he was killed by "friendly fire"!
braddy
(3,585 posts)Igel
(35,300 posts)If the account is accurate, he fired the first shot. And hit somebody.
So it's obviously the policeman's fault. If he hadn't shown up, the bystander (or byrider) would have remain unleaded, and necessary wealth redistribution would have occurred.
Can't blame the real victim.
Akicita
(1,196 posts)term robber may have a negative connotation in some circles. And drug dealers should be referred to as undocumented pharmacists.
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)of COURSE I do. Content yourself with that.
ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)If you would only share.
deimos1
(13 posts)Skittles
(153,147 posts)deimos1
(13 posts)Skittles
(153,147 posts)you probably already know the answer
Response to Skittles (Reply #19)
Name removed Message auto-removed