I suppose this sort of dumbass stunt could only take place in New York City . . .
As part of an ad campaign ... NYC-based marketing firm Thinkmodo decided to see what New Yorkers would do if they happened to stumbled onto a crime in progress — namely, a murder.
The agency set up a camera inside a nondescript New York City elevator, and filmed the reactions of unsuspecting marks as they encountered a man strangling another man to death with an extension cord.
Not surprisingly, many passers-by chose to bolt rather than take any immediate action, though some tried to help ...
There's more at the link.
I'm glad they didn't try to do that in the city where I live, or in most of the southern and central USA. If a lot of folks round here walked in on what looked like a murder in progress, there would indeed be a death - that of the perpetrator, who'd be ventilated by several bullet holes without further ado! I suppose they figured that in New York City, none of the good guys would be armed anyway, thanks to that city's draconian firearms restrictions - and any armed bad guys would be more likely to nod, wink, and tell them to carry on.
Peter
4 comments:
Peter,
I was thinking the same thing. Years ago in Nashville, I had just turned onto the road past the Student Athletic Center at Vanderbilt when I saw, about 150 yards ahead of me, a car slow down and eject a young male who tumbled into the gutter and lay still. To all appearances, someone had ejected a dead body. My first thought was to call an ambulance, put out a description on the assailant's car, accelerate and catch up to it, and quite likely add some aftermarket ventilation to it.
Fortunately (for them) my cop radar went off and I looked up on the hill to the right and saw some students with what appeared to be a videocam. So I screeched to a halt beside the purported victim in the gutter (who was getting to his feet), told him I was an off-duty police officer, and demanded to know what was going on. The very surprised young man said he was part of a student film project.
I then explained as calmly as I could that some kind of liaison with the campus and Metro Police would have been nice because if I had been any closer when the incident happened, his film might have had a much more exciting (if painful) scene. I almost could see the light bulb come on over his head. He had the grace to be apologetic so I marked it up to the cluelessness of youth.
Getting back to the New York experiment, I was greatly encouraged by the (too few) scenes of citizens intervening. God bless the one courageous older woman flailing away at the "killer" with her bag. Did you notice that none of the intervenors appeared to be young people? Hmmmmm.
Someone should have thrown a 20 oz container of Coka Cola at the bad guys.
Oh wait that'd got THEM arrested for possession of an oversized (16+ oz) soft drink container.
However if she'd have been carrying 10- 16 oz containers that's ok. Isn't that like possession a high capacity magazine?
Thanks Liberal Mayor Bloomberg. We know your heart is in the right place. On the left side of your chest.
Frankly, that sort of stunt strikes me as distinctly stupid regardless of what the gun laws are in the area. That fire extinguisher could just as easily and lethally been used as a blunt weapon. I think it does demonstrate a general tendency of avoidance; which (in my humble opinion) is hardly confined to New York. It is, however, and no credit to my generation here, varied by age with older people more likely to go on the offence.
In that situation if I was the victim I'd prefer blunt force supported (ideally, but not necessarily) by the threat of a firearm rather than immediate ventilation of the aggressor...that whole rule about what is beyond the target?
Yeah, I think it was dumb even in NYC. I mean, after all, I may not carry a gun while I'm there, but every time I've been there before, I have been wearing steel toed boots. And I think my first instinct would have been to kick the "bad guy" in the head.
Post a Comment