Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Robbery Suspect Tracked By GPS and Killed

Posted by Soulskill on from the modern-crime-fighting dept.

New submitter Lew Lorton notes a NY Times story about a thief in New York City who was tracked and located using a GPS device inside a decoy pill bottle he had stolen (along with other pill bottles) from a pharmacy. When police confronted the thief, he raised a gun to shoot at an officer, and was killed "The decoy bottles were introduced last year by the police commissioner at the time, Raymond W. Kelly, who announced that the department would begin to stock pharmacy shelves with decoy bottles of painkillers containing GPS devices. The initiative was in response to a sharp increase of armed and often deadly pharmacy robberies across the state, frequently by people addicted to painkillers. ... The bottles are designed to be weighted and to rattle when shaken, so a thief does not initially realize they do not contain pills. Each of the decoy bottles sits atop a special base, and when the bottle is lifted from the base, it begins to emit a tracking signal."

7 of 450 comments (clear)

  1. Didn't deserve to die... by weave · · Score: 5, Insightful

    OK let's get this out of the way...

    He didn't deserve to die for stealing the pills... ... but soon as he chose to put the life of an officer in danger instead of surrendering, then he did.

    1. Re:Didn't deserve to die... by dcollins · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "police officials said"

      And police never gun down unthreatening people, and never lie about it afterward. Just sayin': you can't have anywhere close to 100% confidence about these cases.

      If I was on a jury I'd need video corroboration before believing anything asserted by police.

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
  2. What a crap of title... by Lisias · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The thief was killed because he raised a gun to an officer, not because he was tracked down by GPS.

    Can we mod a submission as "-1 TROLL"?

    --
    Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
  3. Re:ANOTHER DEAD BODY! SWEET JUSTICE! by spiritplumber · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yeah, if there's one time when lethal force is justified, it's this. Doesn't excuse scumbags tazing grannies, but kudos to this officer for handling a dangerous situation optimally.

    --
    Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
  4. Re:Another casualty of the War on Drugs by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    you would think anyone with a functioning brain would have learned from Prohibition

    Oh, they learned it well. They learned about how many cops they could hire, how big of a buracracy they need, how many prisons are built and staffed, how the power balance turns against the "citizens" (and, amazingly, they even get other "citizens" to cheer them on) and how much easier it is to go after people for other prosecutions once you nail them for a vice.

    The brain malfunction is among the people who don't see this as a War on the People.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  5. Re:ANOTHER DEAD BODY! SWEET JUSTICE! by Firethorn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Do you happen to have a source on Finnish officers shooting 'to incapacitate'? Much less in the leg? Because my self-defense and military training is that a leg shot is both potentially fatal(big arteries there, fast bleedout) and not likely to be incapacitating(if you don't hit the artery they can still fight).

    By my training 'Center of Mass' shots, IE to the chest, is both an easier shot to hit with, is more likely to actually incapacitate, and given prompt medical attention not actually all that more likely to be fatal.

    I shoot to 'stop', not to 'wound' or 'kill'.

    That being said, I'm all for officers using negotiation instead of gunfire were possible. But if that trigger has to be pulled, it needs to be pulled in the most effective manner possible.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
  6. Re:ANOTHER DEAD BODY! SWEET JUSTICE! by EvolutionInAction · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's not that they don't trust the officers with a gun, it's that everybody knows that patrolmen don't have guns. Why spend money to get a gun when you know that you're not at risk of being shot at to start? And then why shoot at an officer who you know won't shoot at you?

    The idea is that it lowers the stakes all around.