JeffT wrote; "I think the fact that one of them lived in the High Rise by definition makes him a local." Jeff, not necessarily... Until last week, i had a black guy from Buffalo living upstairs next door to me in section 8 housing. There was obvious suspicious activity going on there for several years and this same guy was arrested by Officer Ward at least once for drug activity there. Said perp was never on the lease, he would come and go and occasionally bring a crew of peeps with him. He had impregnated the white girl who lived there, she was on the lease. I wonder how much of this goes on around Bradford? Oh BTW, i dont think he was firing into the air if a bullet struck a house. I am also pretty sure the State police had markers on the street where bullets struck the pavement.

I draw a distinction between what I call "gun nuts" and responsible gun owners.

Note Phantom chose to call herself a gun nut, that is why I assumed she was referring to shooting a gun off aimlessly.

I believe JeffT is confused as to what happened here.

I also believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that it was the Bradford Era that identified one of the men as being from Pittsburgh and the other from Buffalo.

And as Citizen points out, just because these out of towners shack up with, or "mate with" our local gals, don't make them locals!

Why is JeffT so bent on blaming this on local shooters instead of out of town shooters?

And who doubts this *may be* drug related?

Maybe JeffT is right about them being cowboys .... This town is more and more like the wild west every day!

Citizen, are you sure those markers aren't marking the bullet casings? The empty shells?

At what point do we decide we actually DO have a gang/drug problem in town?

I agree that we have a problem around here, but when people only know half the facts and claim to know it all only more can go wrong. Witch trials come to mind, profiling, vigilantes, etc.

Citizen, those were casings. Shooting into the air makes even more sense because only one bullet hit anything. Seven rounds would hit a lot more had he been firing at someone.

Stony, I insist it was a resident because we have to face the fact that it's not just an external problem, it's an internal problem as well.

JeffT wrote; "I agree that we have a problem around here, but when people only know half the facts and claim to know it all only more can go wrong. Witch trials come to mind, profiling, vigilantes, etc." Jeff, you seem like you might know more about this than you let on..? Regardless, as long as officials keep mum, there will be people speculating and filling in the blanks. Someone named None-ya most recently forgot what a forum like this is all about- Free speech. All in all, we taxpayers deserve the uncensored truth. I for one am sick of getting the homogenized version when it comes to crime in Bradford. I guess until the wealthy and privileged quit looking at drugs as a status symbol that they can get away with, we will have hypocrites in high places. How can you control drugs on the street but not in the ivory towers? Yes we have problems here Jeff, but they dont necessarily start at the bottom. At the end of the day we deserve the government we get, until enough people get sick enough of it the way it is.

So in the paper today it says that it is the TOP PRIORITY to find the shooter which they believe may still be in the area. And to HELP us all and them find the shooter, they are not saying jack #$%T !!

Sooooo, your TOP priority is to find the guy. But there is no description, no picture, no contact number listed that one might call if they actually see a person resembling the person of interest.

Wow! That seems like super intelligent high minds at work!! Amazing! The concerned citizens I am certain would like to help if they could. But our guys don't want any help. Stand down. They can handle it. They are doing great!! Awesome job, you go Bradford.

Good point Zen. 'Be on the look out for' someone who is... armed and dangerous..? Your safety may be at risk, but we arent giving out a description.

How about the fact (if there are ANY believable facts in this case) that "they" know the guys name, but won't release it! Ask the public to help find the guy, BUT don't divulge his name or a complete description of him! It's does seem very suspicious! We may know the guy or someone may very well be harboring the guy, but without his name released, WHO KNOWS if they are helping or hiding him???!!!! WTF?


This seems a bit odd to me. From the ERA:

“We do not believe that the
incident that caused the initial
altercation was directly related to
narcotics,” Lucco said.


city police are
“doing a great job” and working
closely with the Olean (N.Y.)
and Buffalo city police depart-ments and the Southern Tier
Drug Task Force, New York
state’s drug task force.

Why are two different drug task forces working on this with the Bradford city police if this is not drug related? Something about this seems fishy or disingenuous. Somebody help me out here, what reason possible can be given to not give out the suspects name or exact description, including the description of the car he was driving?

Oh, and on a lighter note.

To help our police department out, even though I'm sure they are very capable and don't need my help .........

If the guy shot at the other guy, in a manor that had absolutely nothing to do with drugs .... AND MISSED his target of only a hundred feet, SEVEN TIMES ..... I'd be looking for the fool at the shotting range!

He must know that missing someone at a hundred feet with seven shots is pretty piss-poor shooting!

He's got to be practicing somewhere! .... Or he at least should be!

I'm going to take another stab at this one!

Maybe somebody from the police department can correct me if I'm wrong.

“We do not believe that the
incident that caused the initial
altercation was directly related to
narcotics,” Lucco said.

So, hypothetically, if you had a situation where a couple a' homies are fighting over "drilling rights" of a fat, nasty, crack-ho, and both gentlemen are gainfully employed in the field of illicit, illegal drug distribution, AND engaged in the same said situation we are talking about here, and none of the three were currently on bath salts, or in the process of shooting crack cocaine, the officer could possibly say something like "We do not believe that the
incident that caused the initial altercation was directly related to narcotics”.

Bangin' a scank-ho, yes, narcotics, no. LOL!

Some days it seems you need a lawyer to read the dam paper to you! Between the "legalese" and the local media that revels in providing "sketchy" or incomplete information, we the people are screwed!

Thanks to BT for the ability to fill in some blanks!

Now there you guys go twisting things again!

Get it straight. We are looking for a male from Buffalo. No description given. One who IS armed, yes, but as they understand it right now, dangerous only to the male from Pittsburgh!


I'm sure the police have already thought to check the waters under, or near all the bridges in town (even the new Chinese nightmare bridge), because this guy more than likely got rid of the (worthless) gun. Since he obviously couldn't hit anything with it, it would have been more of a liability to him to hang onto it!

I'll quote what the doctor said to Captain Kirk in one of the Star Trek movies, the one where calculating Spock inhabits feisty Bones' body:

"Dammit, Jim, where's the logic?"


Seems to be appropriate here.

"Captain, we are on planet Bradford in the McKean galaxy, logic does not apply here"!