4 die in bloodbath in NYC last night.

[SuperKat 0]

Two Auxilary Police Officers died on the scene. These are volunteer police officers that are unarmed, they do not wear a bullet proof vest. They also dress very much like cops do. The only difference is the word "AUXILARY" on their patches and their badges are different from actual cops.

This is a terrible tragedy. Please pray for their families and for the safety of other Auxilary Police Officers.


4 die in bloodbath in NYC.

Thug fatally shoots bartender, murders two auxiliary cops, then is slain by police in street

BY ALISON GENDAR, RICH SCHAPIRO, KERRY BURKE and LEO STANDORA
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITERS


A gunman executed a bartender and shot dead two unarmed auxiliary cops last night in the heart of Greenwich Village before he was killed in a blistering gunfight with plainclothes officers, police said.

More than 50 shots were fired during the bloodbath that erupted at 9:26 p.m. when the gunman walked into De Marco's Pizzeria and Restaurant on W.Houston St. at MacDougal St., police said.

Wearing a fake beard and a gray sweat suit, the gunman shot the bartender 15 times in the back after the bartender gave him a menu and turned away, witnesses told cops.

"He just came in and opened fire," said a 26-year-old waiter from another restaurant. "People here are saying it was some kind of vengeance thing."

Without a word, the gunman then ripped off the fake beard and ran out of the restaurant onto MacDougal St. and over to Bleecker St., which was crowded with tourists and pedestrians near New York University.

"That's when all the O.K. Corral stuff happened," the waiter said.

Police said the gunman fled to Sullivan St. where he cut down the two auxiliary cops - Nicholas Pekearo, 28, and Eugene Marshalik, a 19-year-old NYU student who graduated recently from Manhattan's elite Stuyvesant High School.

"He literally crossed the street with his gun out to kill them in cold blood," Mayor Bloomberg said early today.

"Tonight was a horrible night for the New York Police Department and for our city."

Flight attendant Alan McDonald, 39, of Queens, said he and several friends were only feet away when the madman confronted Pekearo and Marshalik, who had been following him from the pizzeria.

"We thought it was a street fight at first," McDonald said.

The two auxiliary officers wrestled with the gunman, David Garvin, 31, over a black shoulder bag that police sources said was packed with about 100 rounds of ammunition and a .380-caliber Russian handgun.

Both auxiliary cops continued after Garvin even after he started firing, McDonald said.

"They tried to use cars as cover ... but there were rapid shots. I was paralyzed," he said. "It was like something you see on TV."

As Garvin began to run again, about six plainclothes cops intercepted him between Sullivan and MacDougal Sts. and told him to drop his 9-mm. handgun, police said.

The gunman refused and opened fire as terrified pedestrians ran into restaurants, shops and doorways for cover. When it was over Garvin lay dead in the street.

"He was on the ground, facedown. ... He was full of bullet holes and blood was coming out," said witness Jess Sears, 48.

"It must have been a whole magazine, 15 or 20 shots. Within two minutes there were hundreds of cops."

The last time an auxiliary cop was killed in the line of duty was 14 years ago, when Milton Clarke, a 47-year-old father of five, was shot dead in the Bronx. Only seven auxiliary cops have been killed in the history of the NYPD, officials said early today.

At the 6th Precinct stationhouse, where Pekearo and Marshalik were assigned, one cop said, "You would see them and they would cheer you up. Both were very helpful. The community loved them and they loved the community.

"It's a great loss for the department. It's probably the worst day for the precinct since 9/11."

Auxiliary police are unpaid civilian volunteers who aim to deter crime by acting as the "eyes and ears" of the NYPD and providing a uniformed presence.

About 4,600 of them patrol on foot and in marked cars and wear virtually the same uniform as regular officers. Auxiliary cops are equipped with radios, flashlights, handcuffs and nightsticks - but are not allowed to carry guns.

Yesterday's bloodshed marked the fourth time in less than a week that city cops have been forced to fire their guns on duty. It also came just a day after a plainclothes cop was shot in Harlem and a uniformed officer was stabbed in Brooklyn.

Construction worker Meir Roth, 27, was still at the Greenwich Village crime scene a couple of hours after the shootings, trying to get his car, which he had abandoned with the motor running.

"I was at a red light at Bleecker and MacDougal when I heard it," he said. "It started and stopped like three times. I saw people running all over the place. For a couple of seconds I didn't know whether to duck down or run like hell."

Bloomberg and Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly rushed to St. Vincent's Hospital Manhattan, where witnesses recounted seeing paramedics bring in four wounded men. Police said officers from the sixth precinct were also brought to the hospital with minor injuries and are listed in stable condition.

"There was a person on the floor dressed in blue and they were working on him, [pounding] on his chest trying to revive him," said Joe Giaimo, 59, who lives in the area.

"Another cop was pounding on the [patrol] car, going crazy. He really felt helpless and mad. I don't know why he was going nuts. Maybe that was a friend or his partner."

De Marco's pizzeria was opened in 2004 by Margaret Miles, the daughter of Dominic De Marco, the owner of the famed Di Fara Pizza restaurant in Brooklyn.

Witnesses said the slain bartender, Romero Morales, 26, a Mexican immigrant living in Queens with his wife, appeared to recognize Garvin, who cops said lived in the Bronx but hung out in the Village with his girlfriend. Morales' hands began to shake when the gunman walked inside, witnesses said.

Yesterday's violence came a day after two cops were seriously injured in the line of duty.

Plainclothes cop Robert Tejada, 35, was shot twice and seriously injured by a gunman cornered in a Harlem cafe. His attacker, 25-year-old Corey Mickins, was shot and killed by other cops.

Less than two hours later uniformed transit cop Angel Cruz, 22, shot and wounded a deranged man on the Queens-bound platform of the J train at the Broadway Junction station after the man stabbed him in the head with a hunting knife.

What's the most you ever lost in a coin toss, Friendo?

[JohnRich 4]

Of those four, only three of them are tragedies. The fourth; the bad guy with a gun, had his murderous rampage stopped only when he encountered good guys with guns.

[Andy9o8 2]

This kind of story lends itself to two "lessons":

1. The police can't be in all places at all times. If more citizens in the bar & on the street had had guns, this guy might have been stopped before he'd had the chance to do nearly as much damage. So the lesson is that handguns should be easy for law-abiding citizens to own and carry.

2. A rampage that doesn't start doesn't have to be stopped, and a rampage with a knife is likely to be less lethal, or harm fewer people, than a rampage with a gun. If this guy had been in a European country with strict restrictions on guns, the bad guy might not have had any gun in the first place, so when he snapped, he would have had to resort to a less lethal weapon. So the lesson is that guns should be very difficult for anyone to own and for anyone other than police officers to carry in public.

[narcimund 0]

Quote

This kind of story lends itself to two "lessons"

Brilliant.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[kbordson 8]

Quote

This kind of story lends it self to two "lessons":

1. The police can't be in all places at all times. If more citizens in the bar & on the street had had guns, this guy might have been stopped before he'd had the chance to do nearly as much damage. So the lesson is that handguns should be easy for law-abiding citizens to own and carry.

2. If this guy had been in a European country with strict restrictions on guns, the bad guy might not have had any gun in the first place, so when he snapped, he would have had to resort to a less lethal weapon. So the lesson is that handguns should be very difficult for anyone to own and for anyone other than police officers to carry in public.

From what I got out of the story.... even with a "less lethal weapon" he still could have accomplished his goal. He shot the guy in the back. He could have stabbed the guy in the back 15 times... still probably would have been lethal. He might or might not have been able to kill the two other citizen cops....

The other point that isn't mentioned.... was this a legally owned firearm in New York City.... what type of license (ie was it a premise license that he voilated the restrictions on that license? here for details) or did the NY laws in no way stop or even hinder this guy?

Looking at his plans (walking into a restaurant and shooting someone in the back), I don't think he was worried about all the wonderful gun laws to make the world safer.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Quote

This kind of story lends itself to two "lessons"

Brilliant.

What do I get for it?

[willard 0]

Quote

This kind of story lends itself to two "lessons":

1. The police can't be in all places at all times. If more citizens in the bar & on the street had had guns, this guy might have been stopped before he'd had the chance to do nearly as much damage. So the lesson is that handguns should be easy for law-abiding citizens to own and carry.

2. A rampage that doesn't start doesn't have to be stopped, and a rampage with a knife is likely to be less lethal, or harm fewer people, than a rampage with a gun. If this guy had been in a European country with strict restrictions on guns, the bad guy might not have had any gun in the first place, so when he snapped, he would have had to resort to a less lethal weapon. So the lesson is that guns should be very difficult for anyone to own and for anyone other than police officers to carry in public.

This guy was obviously intent on making sure the victim was dead, dead, dead. I question whether he would have been using a knife had not a gun been available. Theres a good chance he would have resorted to some sort of explosive device and ended up killing more than just three people.

The gun was most likely illegally in his possession anyway, he was intent on murder, so what good would more laws have done?

[downwardspiral 0]

Quote

This kind of story lends itself to two "lessons":

1. The police can't be in all places at all times. If more citizens in the bar & on the street had had guns, this guy might have been stopped before he'd had the chance to do nearly as much damage. So the lesson is that handguns should be easy for law-abiding citizens to own and carry.

2. A rampage that doesn't start doesn't have to be stopped, and a rampage with a knife is likely to be less lethal, or harm fewer people, than a rampage with a gun. If this guy had been in a European country with strict restrictions on guns, the bad guy might not have had any gun in the first place, so when he snapped, he would have had to resort to a less lethal weapon. So the lesson is that guns should be very difficult for anyone to own and for anyone other than police officers to carry in public.

As much as I am pro gun (no I'm not a gun nut) I hate to say this but it is my opinion that most americans would be too fearful to get into a tussle whether they are armed or not. Of course that could be because I live in a society where good citizens cannot arm themselves so are perpetually fearful that bad citizens are "carrying."

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[Richards 0]

Quote

Quote

This kind of story lends itself to two "lessons":

1. The police can't be in all places at all times. If more citizens in the bar & on the street had had guns, this guy might have been stopped before he'd had the chance to do nearly as much damage. So the lesson is that handguns should be easy for law-abiding citizens to own and carry.

2. A rampage that doesn't start doesn't have to be stopped, and a rampage with a knife is likely to be less lethal, or harm fewer people, than a rampage with a gun. If this guy had been in a European country with strict restrictions on guns, the bad guy might not have had any gun in the first place, so when he snapped, he would have had to resort to a less lethal weapon. So the lesson is that guns should be very difficult for anyone to own and for anyone other than police officers to carry in public.

I would choose plan 1. I realize there are stats from both sides of this argument that "prove" the other side wrong, so I have to go with my gut feel on this, and be given the option to be able to defend myself.

Handguns are tremendously difficult to get legally here in Canada yet gangs still seem to be able to arm themselves quite adequately.

Do you have a strong preference between 1 or 2?

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

I live in a society where good citizens cannot arm themselves so are perpetually fearful that bad citizens are "carrying."

Wouldn't it be better if the bad citizens were fearful that the good citizens were "carrying"?

[GQ_jumper 4]

Wouldn't it be better if the bad citizens were fearful that the good citizens were "carrying"?

Quote

That's an interesting way of looking at it, but definitely a good question.

My take on it is that a deterrent works just as good if not better, why have a reactive self-defense measure when you could have a pro-active one. If it came to the point where criminals didn't know which potiential "victims" were armed and which weren't then there would be less need to use the firearms.

History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.
--Dwight D. Eisenhower

• Quote

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

If this guy had been in a European country with strict restrictions on guns, the bad guy might not have had any gun in the first place, so when he snapped, he would have had to resort to a less lethal weapon.

Nope.
Laws are for good guys. Bad guys do not care about them.
And I don't think a person who is going to murderl someone would care about violating one more law.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[kbordson 8]

Quote

Quote

If this guy had been in a European country with strict restrictions on guns, the bad guy might not have had any gun in the first place, so when he snapped, he would have had to resort to a less lethal weapon.

Nope.
Laws are for good guys. Bad guys do not care about them.
And I don't think a person who is going to murderl someone would care about violating one more law.

EXACTLY! Especially in this situation. He wasn't trying to get away with it. It wasn't "well-planned" or "thought through" beyond the vengance and killing thing. He wasn't caring about what laws were broke or the consequences.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

This kind of story lends itself to two "lessons":

I think three:

3. Even if you outlaw guns (NY has tough Anti-Gun laws), people who wish to do harm will still get them and use them.

[Andy9o8 2]

Pffft. Go to one of the pedestrian gun threads. This is the highbrow one.

[downwardspiral 0]

HAHAHA You are preaching to the choir brother. That WAS my point! If the weather wasn't so gorram beautiful here in "the OC" I would move somewhere that gives a shit about the constitution.

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Pffft. Go to one of the pedestrian gun threads. This is the highbrow one.

Highbrow as in "No real discussion"

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

Pffft. Go to one of the pedestrian gun threads. This is the highbrow one.

Highbrow as in "No real discussion"

"highbrow" as in a bunch of ego stroking and then finally blaming something so vague and fuzzy that the problem can't be solved directly but the debators can pat themselves on the head for being clever.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

"highbrow" as in a bunch of ego stroking and then finally blaming something so vague and fuzzy that the problem can't be solved directly but the debators can pat themselves on the head for being clever.

When did this place become Congress?

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

My take on it is that a deterrent works just as good if not better, why have a reactive self-defense measure when you could have a pro-active one. If it came to the point where criminals didn't know which potiential "victims" were armed and which weren't then there would be less need to use the firearms.

Exactly. That is the entire philosophy behind the concealed carry laws which have swept the country, and now exist in over 40 states, without any problems. It's a deterrent because the criminals fear attacking an armed citizen, so they either quit the criminal lifestyle, or switch to the less serious property crimes instead. And the crime stats reflect this, with a general downward trend that has crime at the lowest levels in over 30 years.

[Zipp0 1]

Two Words - MOB HIT.

Pizza guy vamoosed with drugs, money, or both, and this was the result.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.