Posted on 09/02/2026 9:18:58 AM PDT by ConservativeStatement
The mother of the crazed Queens woman who killed a new mom and seriously wounded an elderly dad in a terrifying Times Square stabbing spree is questioning why cops didn’t just “grab” her daughter rather than fatally shoot her when she charged at them with knives.
Pamela Cisneros, 49, stabbed Erin Piacenti, 32, and Tak Kam, 68, Monday afternoon before cell phone video showed her being surrounded by police and threatening to kill them with a large knife in each hand.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
We need more mental institutions even the sidewalks will be cleared.
Democrats hit hardest voter lists decline.
I saw a guard slashed 500 stiches with an exacto knife before he knew what hit him and also an inmate with his throat cut to the bone with a single edged razor blade. the 21-foot rule is for real in knife attacks.
And I question why this ‘Mom’ raised such an evil lunatic daughter and unleashed her upon society.
If ‘Mom’ had been a decent parent, then perhaps her daughter wouldn’t go around stabbing random people and threatening to kill people who try to stop the carnage.
At 21 feet you prefer the killer have a gun aimed at you rather than holding a razor knife?
I don’t.
Your examples of knife wounds in surprise attacks, or any other attack ,do not make them better than a gun, would those surprised victims be better off having a pistol shoved up against their bodies and the magazine emptied into them?
No one has any requirement or obligation to physically fight someone already going after people with a deadly weapon, you simply just need to shoot them and stop the threat.
Hey Pam
I get your grief and I’m sure it will be unfathomable for the rest of your life.
It will always feel like a boulder which, some days you will be able to carry and others will just be to heavy.
The weight will never change.
That said, we should give you an opportunity to show us how it’s done, the next time we run into someone like your daughter.
Sorry for your loss.
A cop is at work and can’t, and doesn’t need to fight everyone that you or I might if we were unarmed and a woman was being attacked, but they do need to be willing to do it when it is called for and appropriate, that is why city cops used to be required to be tall, large, male, and armed with a club, they couldn’t just shoot every person that could be perceived as a threat by a weak cowardly person in the wrong line of work, we wouldn’t have stood for it for one thing.
You don’t have to shoot center of mass with a target this big. You fire in the general direction, and gravity will cause the bullet trajectory to veer towards the center of mass.
the 21-foot rule means you are putting your life in danger if the knives are allowed closer, I prefer holding a social worker in front of me.
Or a near miss may put the bullet in orbit around center mass.
I know what it means and because of the internet it gets posted all the time.
If a bad guy and I get to choose from the knife on the table or the gun on the table, and I get to choose first, then I pick up the gun, if I am to fight unarmed, then I prefer he have a knife instead of a gun, if he is five feet away, then I prefer that he have a knife instead of a gun.
Knives are inferior to guns, if you have to take up mugging unarmed Hell’s Angels walking alone through the alleys, for grocery money, and you get a choice of weapons for your new trade, which do you choose?
That was not in any of the reports I have read.
Maybe back then people wouldnt have stood for it because society back then was quite different than it is today. But I am talking about this specific case where someone already killed someone, hurt another and isnt stopping, and even back then they would have been a great candidate to be shot.
Is someone criticizing this shooting, did I miss a post on the thread?
Guilty.
Shoot it!
So “Mommy of the Year”, why didn’t you have her put in mental facility before this happened because you knew where she was heading.
I kinda thought you were a bit, from your original posts to me. Did I misread somthing? I never sa8d they should always shoot, again under this type of circumstances I have no problem with them or an armed citizen shooting a person doing this. No one should care why at that moment, they just need to be stopped and since they wouldnt they get shot.
See post 10.
Now if you or I had been there we would have had to take her down no matter what, as happens to unarmed guys everyday, at drunken BBQs, in store parking lots, but it isn’t always something that is ideal and doesn’t always pan out for the good guy.
Here is post 10.
“Interestingly, in other countries, including Britain, we do see cops taking them down with knives in their hand.
This woman was too large and dangerous to not shoot if she had the knives in her hand.”
I’m glad she’s dead. She earned it. Otherwise a filthy judge would let her walk free.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.