Yesterday definitely merited a return to posting:

[esb]

Around 7:45 p.m., my "partner" and I were leaving an address where we had attempted an initial home visit on her newest case. Nobody was home, and we crossed the - one-way - street and got back into my car, which was a bit tightly parallel parked. I got the front of the car partly out, and we heard popping sounds and saw men running around in the

Comments

[elo_sf]

glad you are safe

[esb]

Thanks, me, too. That is, we were never actually in danger, we just didn't know if we were going to become in danger, if that makes any sense. We didn't know if they were going to come up our block instead of the other one, or, if we drove forward, the guy we saw with the gun would panic if he realized he had witnesses and take a shot at us. So my feeling is a weird combination of "Well, really, nothing happened," and just being a bit freaked because there was at least one guy firing a gun, apparently at people, within about 50 feet of me.

[katzinoire]

OH! I am glad you're ok! They should really protect you guys more. Ouch!

[esb]

Thank you. It was interesting and actually a perfect illustration of the difference between our safety levels and that of police. We are allowed, even directed, to leave any situation that threatens out safety. Cops can't do that. I think this sometimes is forgotten at out field office, probably because we have a particularly obnoxious precinct house that makes it sound like we're asking for a kidney when we so much as bring them an entry order to execute.

That said, I am very glad the Commissioner issued an order a few months ago mandating that managers let us go out in pairs if we felt it was necessary. And that they are lobbying to give us the same protection as cops and TRANSIT WORKERS (?!) and make it a felony to assault one of us. (Personally, I think assault should be a felony no matter who you assault, and if we can't have that I'd consider a special category for cops only. But once you add transit workers, you've opened the floodgates, and I want me some of that consideration, too).

[phillipalden]

I'm just glad you're both okay. Handguns are notoriously inaccurate, mostly good for short range only. A dodging, moving target is very hard to hit with a handgun.

That being said, nobody wants to be around a firefight, what with bullets flying every which way.

But if I were going to shoot someone I'd use an assault rifle. Not that I think about this stuff, but I've been target shooting. Unless the guy is 10 feet away a handgun becomes a very poor choice of weapon.

I wish these guys would switch to swords. At least that way they wouldn't hurt innocent bystanders.

[esb]

Yes, swords would be an improvement, wouldn't they?

It's funny you mentioned how bad handguns are for distance shooting. It occurred to me to wonder if I'd have been less frightened if the guy I saw seemed to be shooting in a directed fashion at one specific person. I think part of my concern was that either he was firing all over the place or someone else had a gun, too, and was shooting. I heard once that innocent bystanders who got hit by bullets were called "mushrooms" - I suppose because they pop up suddenly where the shooter isn't expecting them. I didn't want to be a mushroom! I don't even like mushrooms!

[phillipalden]

Just being around a gun is scary enough. Being around someone who is scared and firing a weapon must have been terrifying.

Sometimes I forget how dangerous some places are because where we live everything is so compartmentalized. Neighborhoods don't blend into one another here, but are divided by freeways and other geographic barriers.