City bus drivers in New York City (unionized) took an average of two months off last year, at full pay. They got paid to not come into work. Why? Because they "claimed" that they were spat upon by upset riders and this is considered an "assault" under the drivers' union contract. When a bus driver is spit upon they are then entitled to take a paid leave of absence. The unions claims that being spat upon causes "psychological trauma" because workers could catch diseases or risk being assaulted again. Bus drivers made up one-third of the transit workers who took time off because of "assaults." Last year, that was 83 drivers, who took an average of 64 paid days off. In one instance, a driver took 191 days of paid leave.
Is it any wonder why we are headed toward disaster? We have allowed these unions to grab local government by the throat and demand entitlements .. and the political hacks who run these governments fold like a map. After all .. the very same unions that demand these absurd work rules are very adept at getting the voters to the polls on election day. You get the picture.
And while we are on the subject of New York City .. here's another asinine occurrence unfolding there. A bill has surfaced in the New York legislature (introduced by two black activists) that would require New York City cops to shoot to wound, rather than shooting to kill. The bill is being called the "minimum force" law and it would amend the state penal codes' "justification" clause, which currently allows officers to kill suspects they believe pose a threat to his life or others. They would be mandated to "shoot a suspect in the arm or the leg." An innocent person is going to die when this absurdity becomes law.......... -- Neal Boortz
The above legislation has the full support of the Bloods and the Crips........... Spider
4 comments:
Shooting to wound almost certainly guarantees that bystanders will be shot, when "wounding" shots go astray. The activists are obviously NOT shooters or even gun owners. They'd understand that shooting center mass does more than knock down the bad guys. It keeps the lead in the body it for which it was intended. Mostly anyway, there will be exceptions.
John Wayne, Gary Cooper and Randolph Scott are dead now, so trick shots are on short supply.
The true intention of these "activists" (see: neighborhood agitators/organizers) in this case is an attempt to ban "any" shooting by police. Of course, they won't put any such restrictions on their brothers and sisters in the hood.
I say let it go through. From what I have seen most police officers don't spend enough time at the range as it is. Shooting to wound should almost guarentee a center of mass shot.....oops, sorry 'bout that.
You're right about the range time Alan. In this case, being proficient with the "tools of your trade" is not considered politically correct in places like NYC. The actual training time, and the quality of the training NYPD officers receive is far from what it should be. Could having the nations #1 anti-gun zealot as mayor have anyhting to do with that? Hmmm...
As for this bill, it's intentions are crystal clear. Even the gorillas proposing it know what they're asking for is impossible in the real world, but it would create lots of "opportunities" (see: lawsuits $$$) for their bros and "sistas" on the streets. They know that in the "heat of battle, and while under fire", no one can "shoot to wound" unless you're on TV. And if the perp dies? A massive lawsuit against the city and the officer involved for not following the guidelines set forth in the bill. It's a guaranteed pay day for the bad guys family and friends, who at that point, are out ordering new Caddy's with 50" rims.
Post a Comment