Guns aren't magic after all

[corplinx]

14 shots fired to bring down naked guy with sword

Some people on this forum post stories about people saving their lifes by using a gun in self-defense, this isn't one of them.

The story I posted a link to (from nydailynews) is just tragic for many reasons.

"She was still alive, she looked at me like she wanted help but at the time I could not do nothing," said the neighbor, who didn't want his name used. "I was just terrified and afraid for her and afraid for my life, too."

Tragic, sad. However, I am not posting this to advocate gun ownership by implying the neighbor may have been able to save the womans life.

The sad thing here is that one of the cops that responded used 14 shots to bring the man down, 2 of which hit her own partner!

One shot hit her partner's leg. Go figure.

I really think American cities need to take guns away from the Barneys. We should really give the meter maids and the patrolmen a stick and their mace. For a call like this, an armed response unit should have been called in.

Cops spend too little time at the gun range practicing to be effective. Not to mention the gun a traffic cop carries is a symbol of authority. The gun transforms a beat cop from a public servant to a frightening authority figure.

Do you think beat cops should be armed? If they are armed, should they be require to hit the gun range and practice regularly and pass skill evaluations based on simulations yearly? Should armed response units be used?

What do you think?

 

[corplinx]

By the way, I realize someone will make a "ban swords" comment pointing out the obvious; however I would like to focus this thread on police.

 

[Zep]

You know my views on guns, Corplinx. So let me say that (a) I agree with your views on this, (b) I have no issues with the police trying to stop such a crim by using an issued weapon, and (c) on the face of the report, they could have used some weapons training of some sort. Although it could have been while they were struggling with the guy...dunno.

Ban swords? Not really. They are dangerous, yes, but they have a lot shorter lethal radius than a gun. Maybe some control (against known lunatics) possibly...

 

[shanek]

This is a very good point. If a police officer, trained in the use of a gun, has difficulty using a police-issue handgun to bring down a suspect, that pokes a gigantic hole in the arguments of many gun control advocates.

 

[Suddenly]

I always liked Hunter S. Thompson's idea from his campaign when he ran for Sheriff of whatever county Aspen is in.

The idea was that no police would be armed with anything more than a tear gas bomb. The idea being that the purpose of police would be to lower the level of violence, not raise it. The guns would be back at the station, and would be brought out readily in case of any violence problem not handled by the first not armed cop.

This way the police never fire the first shot, and if there is less a chance of the bad guy shooting first just because he thinks if he doesn't the cop will shoot first. If someone does shoot an unarmed cop, then the calvary is called and that's where the show of force comes in. I believe Thompson said something on the order of "to bring terrible vengence on anyone stupid enough to commit violence against an unarmed officer." I'm not big on vigilianteism, but he may be being a bit bombastic.

This is only going to work in places that aren't already de facto war zones, of course. Cops shouldn't be sent on suicide missions.

 

[Suddenly]

This is a very good point. If a police officer, trained in the use of a gun, has difficulty using a police-issue handgun to bring down a suspect, that pokes a gigantic hole in the arguments of many gun control advocates.

?
Which argument is that? Anyway....

Sounds the other way around to my ear.

Suggests to me that if a pro can't get it right, what chance does an amateur have?

 

[corplinx]

Suggests to me that if a pro can't get it right, what chance does an amateur have?

Well, I don't want to get between you and shanek on this. I would contend however (from LEO postings on other message boards) that most cops are not "professionals" with guns.

 

[peptoabysmal]

In defense of the cop who shot her partner, the story doesn't say whether or not her partner was following protocol, i.e.; was he where he was supposed to be?

Spend all the hours at a range you want, it won't prepare you for someone lunging at you with a sword. It has a psychological impact, especially if you see someone recently chopped up by the sword holder.

I think the article speaks volumes about the effectiveness of the flak jackets more than anything else in terms of safety. I am all for a well trained police force carrying firearms. It is a necessity in a society which has a second amendment protecting firearm ownership.

As to the question of whether or not meter maids should carry a sidearm, it depends on the location. In L.A., definately. In Idaho, i doubt it would be a necessity.

 

[corplinx]

In defense of the cop who shot her partner, the story doesn't say whether or not her partner was following protocol, i.e.; was he where he was supposed to be?

Usually you don't fire unless you have a clear sight picture of your target. In the case of the cop that goofed, they not only shot their partner in their flak jacket but also in the leg. A leg shot doesnt even sound like aiming. With shots that wild, the cop was a danger to themself, their partner, and the neighbors.

 

[corplinx]

By the way, the cop was using a "hi cap" magazine for those 14 shots. You see how much safer we civillians are since the government told us we can't carry more than 10.

After all, if you are defending yourself from a robber in the middle night, you will have much better control than that cop, right?

 

[peptoabysmal]

Usually you don't fire unless you have a clear sight picture of your target. In the case of the cop that goofed, they not only shot their partner in their flak jacket but also in the leg. A leg shot doesnt even sound like aiming. With shots that wild, the cop was a danger to themself, their partner, and the neighbors.

Good point. Did the officer have a clear line of vision to the other officer? I don't know from the article. That's one thing about news articles that just tick me off. Rarely do they include enough information to make any sort of judgement. Usually you are left with what has gone through the writer's and editor's pshycological filters. Journalistic ethics... bah! Just give me the facts.

 

[The Fool]

This is a very good point. If a police officer, trained in the use of a gun, has difficulty using a police-issue handgun to bring down a suspect, that pokes a gigantic hole in the arguments of many gun control advocates.

Earth to planet Shanek.....anyone receiving?

 

[epepke]

In the US, at least, cops are almost preternaturally poorly trained in using firearms.

I remember reading some bits in the Washington Post about all the handgun "accidents" that happened when the Washington Police went to the Glock. One choice quote "They didn't tell us not to put our finger on the trigger unless we were going to shoot the gun."

I know a fair number of private owners of handguns, and all of them are quite simply apalled at that level of stupidtiy.

When I took pistol lessons at MIT, I noticed that there were bullet holes in the supporting beams, the ceiling, the walls, and even the mats on which one is supposed to rest one's weapons. This kind of thing is pretty close to impossible for anyone poperly trained in the use of firearms to do. The instructor explained that the reason for the holes was that the Boston police, lacking a range of their own, came to the MIT range. They were responsible for the wayward holes.

This experience has led me to the conclusion that the police are generally inferior to private citizens with an interest in sidearms.

 

[corplinx]

I remember reading some bits in the Washington Post about all the handgun "accidents" that happened when the Washington Police went to the Glock. One choice quote "They didn't tell us not to put our finger on the trigger unless we were going to shoot the gun."

That is really sad since one of the basic rules of handgun safety is to not even put your finger in the trigger guard until you are ready to fire.

NYPD has special trigger springs on their glocks to make it harder to pull the trigger because apparently they can't train them to not put their finger on the trigger. The flipside to that is that the heavier trigger makes for less accurate shooting.

 

[Ove]

I always liked Hunter S. Thompson's idea from his campaign when he ran for Sheriff of whatever county Aspen is in.

The idea was that no police would be armed with anything more than a tear gas bomb. The idea being that the purpose of police would be to lower the level of violence, not raise it. The guns would be back at the station, and would be brought out readily in case of any violence problem not handled by the first not armed cop.

This way the police never fire the first shot, and if there is less a chance of the bad guy shooting first just because he thinks if he doesn't the cop will shoot first. If someone does shoot an unarmed cop, then the calvary is called and that's where the show of force comes in. I believe Thompson said something on the order of "to bring terrible vengence on anyone stupid enough to commit violence against an unarmed officer." I'm not big on vigilianteism, but he may be being a bit bombastic.

You know, that is more or less the way it has been working in England, and working fine i might say. Off course you escalate things if the cops are armed allways. It WILL make criminals, or at least the deranged ones, shoot first in order to be safe.

BUT YOU'LL NEVER GET THE GUN NUT LOBBY TO UNDERSTAND THAT so stop wasting your breath.

 

[peptoabysmal]

By the way, the cop was using a "hi cap" magazine for those 14 shots. You see how much safer we civillians are since the government told us we can't carry more than 10.

After all, if you are defending yourself from a robber in the middle night, you will have much better control than that cop, right?

You mean 15, counting the one that's chambered?

You never really know how you will react to a situation until it happens. I've already been tested in other situations, so I am fairly certain I would keep a relatively cool head. Using me as an example is not a fair comparison to the general populace.

This story is an example of why police need not only target practice, but also combat practice at regular intervals.

I see with what you are saying, there have been people who have killed their own loved ones, or come close to it in a moment of panic, but this has nothing to do with an officer who is supposed to be trained to handle combat situations.

FWIW, I don't use a handgun for home defense. I have a 12 ga. full choke with a riot extension that I keep loaded with high base 4B. It has a cycle lock that I leave in the single position, and no shell in the chamber. To fire, I have to turn the cycle lock and cycle a shell into the magazine. Takes away the element of surprise, I suppose, but I have never felt comfortable leaving a round or shell in any chamber of any firearm. Providing the poor bastard made it past my dogs, the surprise would be mostly gone by that time, anyway.

 

[Lyle Beaudoin]

Earth to planet Shanek.....anyone receiving?

I think he's making a case for more firepower.

 

[Ian Osborne]

This is a very good point. If a police officer, trained in the use of a gun, has difficulty using a police-issue handgun to bring down a suspect, that pokes a gigantic hole in the arguments of many gun control advocates.

This made perfect sense to me until I reached The Fool's post. Then I realised I'd misread it, and overlooked the word 'control'...

 

[Zero]

Ummm....how do you 'squeeze off' the entire magazine? I wonder how many more times she pulled the trigger after she ran out of ammo?

Has this moron been suspended yet? Or, hey, better yet, kicked off the force for being apparently ill suited for police work? That sort of panic reaction could have easily killed her partner, and any civilians within range.

 

[Zero]

Also nice to note that the other 12 rounds failed to kill the suspect...wow.