NJ TRANSIT TRAIN CRASH: Latest | Transit Changes | Video | Photos | NJ TRANSIT | 1010 WINS | WCBS 880 

Kelly: ‘We Were Lucky’ After Attempted Times Square Bombing

NEW YORK (WCBS 880) – It’s been a year since Faisal Shahzad parked his explosives-laden SUV in the heart of the crowded theater district, intending to kill as many people as possible.

LISTEN: WCBS 880’s Rich Lamb reports

But his attempted terrorist attack failed and Shahzad was arrested within two days of the plot and he’s now serving life in prison. Still, Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said the city got lucky.

“Quite frankly, we were lucky a year ago, on May 1. Faisal Shadzad drove right into the middle of Times Square and he wasn’t on anybody’s radar screen,” Kelly said.

On the first anniversary, the police department is doing everything it can to make sure the attempted attack doesn’t happen again.

“I think we get better, we get stronger, but there are no guarantees,” Kelly said.

Kelly said a lot of surveillance video cameras have been added in the year since Shahzad’s attempt and that they’re doing everything they reasonably can to protect the city.

“This is a dangerous world,” he said. “We are always adjusting what we do. We’re always fine-tuning the game plan.”

Is Times Square safer in the year since Faisal Shahzad’s failed bombing? Tell us your thoughts in our comments section below.

More from Rich Lamb
Comments

One Comment

  1. vkmo says:

    Remember Osama’s follower Faisal Shahzad the Times Square Bomber aka F*** S*** bomber? Guess what city he came from in Pakistan? Peshawar aka P***awar

  2. Bell Toller says:

    The police also need to stop making 911 calls for wrong McDonalds orders a priority.

    This is why 911 is a joke.

  3. Gene says:

    New York is a unique place in this instance, I have never been to the city and not seen at least one cop and now you can’t go anywhere and not be on camera. Other areas of the country are different. I think relying on average Americans to provide sevcutity for everyone is not the way because there are end up being dumb people like the guy in Arizona who shot Gaby Giffords.

    1. Nick Konstantin says:

      Gene – If you can trust a police officer with a gun why can’t you trust someone who might be better trained than police officers. The logic is distorted when you arm our soldiers to protect this country and when they leave the service they are no longer responsible to carry a gun. I am not advocating having civilians take over the function of law enforcement but there are thousands of places like office buildings, hospitals, theaters, malls and schools that are vulnerable to attacks such as the one in Mumbai or Beslan. If an attack were to happen, the most you could hope for is that it can be contained. A properly trained and armed civilian who works in one of these places might be able to stop the imminent slaughter. Cameras will help catch a criminal but not prevent the crime.

    2. Nick Konstantin says:

      The guy in Arizona should not have been allowed to have a gun. Keep in mind that average citizens stopped him, not the police. One of the people who restrained him was armed but did not need to resort to his weapon.

  4. billy says:

    Titus, i believe that the idea that people having guns will raise violence is completely untrue. Only the outlaws are gonna be ignoring the laws. I used to live in nyc, now i live in austin. Everyone has guns here, and let me tell ya, theres WAY less crime here. Guns dont kill people, people kill people.

  5. Al says:

    I agree Nick. After all, everyone knows the most effective way to disarm a bomb is to shoot it.

    1. Nick Konstantin says:

      The Time Square attack was a bomb. The next one might be a shooting. In Israel a man used a bulldozer until he was stopped by a civilian with a gun. A gun may not stop every terrorist attack but I am sure it will stop more than a camera.

  6. Titus says:

    Although, your idea seems effective it would cause other issues. Road rage, fights, and altercations will end up in a shoot out and will only add to the violence created by gangs, terrorist, and criminals. I think law enforcement is moving the right direction by installing cameras throughout the city, and gathering intelligence before such heinous acts cost innocent lives.

    1. Nick Konstantin says:

      Titus – If you can trust a police officer with a gun why can’t you trust someone who might be better trained than police officers. The logic is distorted when you arm our soldiers to protect this country and when they leave the service they are no longer responsible to carry a gun. I am not advocating having civilians take over the function of law enforcement but there are thousands of places like office buildings, hospitals, theaters, malls and schools that are vulnerable to attacks such as the one in Mumbai or Beslan. If an attack were to happen, the most you could hope for is that it can be contained. A properly trained and armed civilian who works in one of these places might be able to stop the imminent slaughter. Cameras will help catch a criminal but not prevent the crime. 38 shall issue states have demonstrated that the additional violence you are concerned about does not occur. In fact crime rates have fallen in these states.

    2. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx says:

      name one time a camera has stopped a mayor crime.you cant you moron

  7. Nick Konstantin says:

    Those in power see it as a game. Average people see it as their lives and need to be able to protect themselves. Sooner or later luck is going to run out and It is a matter of time before a Mumbai incident comes to New York. The police can not be everywhere and cameras will only record what happened. Well trained civilians who are allowed to carry guns will be able to save lives. This is a cost effective resource that NYC ignores. It is a dangerous world and the police and military are not the only ones able to protect the people of NYC.

Comments are closed.

More From CBS New York

CAMPAIGN 2016
1010 WINS Special

Listen Live