Talk:North Hollywood shootout

Type of rifle borrowed by police from gun store

I haven't found a good cite regarding the type of rifle the police retrieved from the gun store, but to the best of my knowledge, they were AR-15s, semi-automatic "civilian" versions of the M-16 full-auto military rifle. M-16s are rare among civilians, cost around $20,000 each as of this writing, and are not typically sitting around in quantity on your average gun store shelf. WeedWhacker 20:08, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No legally used full-auto weapons used in crime?

I'd like to see a reference for the following statement, "to date there has been no recorded commission of a crime with a legally-registered fully automatic firearm by the legal owner - a few stolen weapons have been used by criminals." I won't edit it, but it seems like something that should have a reference. - johndodd

I distinctly remember that one of the robbers was armed with a g3 or hk91 clone, anybody have images of this incident that can confirm this? - nitrogensixteen

Heh. I was actually involved in this shootout. I can confirm this 100%. It was a G3A4. - LAPD85

Suspects? Gunmen?

I'm not too sure about all the references to Phillips and Matasareanu as 'suspects' and 'gunmen' - 'suspects' seems inappropriate since their guilt is not disputed, and 'the two gunmen' ignores the fact that the officers who returned fire were also gunmen, in the strictest sense. TheMadBaron 10:13, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How about "perpetrators" or "criminals"? "Scrote", "slag", "toe rag", "skaghead", "skell", "scumbag" and "mutt" are probably not appropriate for Wikipedia :) However, I believe "suspects" is still appropriate, as it is common usage in law enforcement reports and articles. See this article discussing another infamous modern-day shootout (FBI 1986 Miami shootout): http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs7.htm GMan552

It is common usage. but it's also very lazy usage. I much prefer 'perps' or 'crims', but I can't help thinking that there's a better way to phrase this for the context.

I had a quick look at the article you've linked to, and I don't think it's quite the same thing.... the article establishes from the ouset that the criminals involved in the shootout are, indeed, merely suspects with regard to robberies commited earlier.... their guilt, with regard ro the robberies, at least, may be safely assumed, but is not firmly established at the time of the shootout, which justifies the use of the term thereafter.TheMadBaron 11:21, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point, but the point I was trying to make was that the FBI report on the Miami shootings (in italics in the linked page) uses the term "suspects", despite the report being written after the shootout, where their guilt was more than proven.

In my latest edit of the North Hollywood article, I've tried to use the criminals' last names as much as possible. GMan552

Edits

I made a few edits to recent changes, but we still have an article which now appears to contradict itself in claiming that the criminals' weapons were obtained both legally and illegally....

"Phillips and Matasareanu had previously been arrested in 1996 for armed robbery, but legally fought and successfully won for their assault rifles to be returned to them."

"Opponents of gun control counter that since the weapons had been obtained illegally, the incident did not indicate that criminal use of registered fully automatic firearms was a problem; to date there has been no recorded commission of a crime other than suicide with a legally registered fully automatic firearm by the legal owner--a few have been used following their theft"

Please clarify, or cite sources.

The judges gave them their guns back so they could pay their crimes. - LAPD85

Somebody should add two bits of information:

The two suspects were stopped that morning by police; guns were found in the trunk; they were let go.
The mother of the guy who did not get medical attention in time sued the city; this resulted in a mistrial in 2000

AxelBoldt 03:25, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

I walked this area today. The map supplied places the second assailant's death southwest of Archwood and Hinds Ave. According to the CNN video it is actually half a block east of that location, at the center of this map: http://maps.google.com/maps?q=North+Hollywood,+CA&t=k&ll=34.192041,-118.390721&spn=0.001706,0.003012&t=h

An odd thing happened when I stopped to ponder where the first assailant shot himself. I stood there feeling the weight of the event, the courage of the police. There is simply NO cover there for the cops to use, even Archwood was deathtrap for officers trying to persue; a walled in space offering nothing to hide behind. Then I heard a cooing, and on the fence next to me a pidgeon was staring at me. I cooed back, mockingly, and the bloody thing launched itself and landed on my head. I sat there dumbfounded as a car drove slowly by. I simply pointed at it in that everyday gesture of "hey, there is a pidgeon on my head".

Officers, thank you for your fine service. -corp

---

Bullets shot through cement

Can bullets really go through cement walls? Could somebody confirm this? Ravenstorm 00:57, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on the weapons used, and how thick the wall is. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02ECJ2Lt0cU and the 2nd and 1st video demonstrate. An M2 machinegun sends bullets through a cement wall, and sideways through steel office furniture. An m16 can't get through the cement wall in a single bullet.

Contradiction in Civilians wounded

Early: The shootout resulted in the wounding of twenty people (twelve police officers and eight civilians)

Later: During the shootout, a total of twelve officers and two civilians were wounded

I mean, I guess some civilians could technically have been shot after the shootout, but that would be under very strange circumstances.

I'm guessing the lower number is true. One of the gunmen hit a hostage in the bank, and then trapped the hostages in the bank so they wouldn't get hurt. Later, Larry shot at a chopper with a reporter. There was no other mention of civilians being hurt, though it's possible they were caught in crossfire. However, the cops had the area surrounded before the gunmen got away from the bank.

Ah, I'll just change the article myself to reflect what the article says. A random CNN article I found only mentions one civilian... 70.66.9.162 10:37, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

B&B store sued & closed?

I'm just curious as to why the store that helped end the conflict was sued and closed down. Really, why would a business that helped bring down the suspects be punished in return??? Did they have any part in providing the suspects assault rifles?

Also, did the store have a choice to begin with? I thought that police and authority have the right to commandeer property in case of emergencies like the North Hollywood shootout.

Can someone clarify that in the article, or write a new one? I'm curious on the rationale behind this, thanks.