Armed Citizen vs. LEO Proficiencies

I remember another case from (I thing) Utah State Police. Two man unit pulls over a Suburban(?- some large SUV), driver comes out shooting. Officers fire something like 32 rounds and don't even hit the vehicle!

It's easy to armchair quarterback the NYPD shooting, but truth is there was no 'good' choice available to the officers; only 'bad' or 'worse.' In such a densely populated area, it would be almost impossible NOT to have innocents injured. I'm actually somewhat suprised no fatalities!

since9 said:

We've mentioned this more than once in this thread, including: "I believe the single-most important factor is that LEOs are taught to wade in and engage, whereas we're taught to disengage when possible. That explains their higher rate of wrongful death shooting more than how much practice they get on the range."

Click to expand...

One of the officers did disengage, the problem was he was shooting wildly while doing it. I am having a hard time with a 1911 jamming, it may have, but I think that is the standard when the suspect that just became swiss cheese does not return fire. IMO he could have been despondent, and committing suicide by cop. IMO they were justified in using deadly force, BUT not justified in shooting wildly as one officer did, the other officer was clearly focused on his target, and the suspect went down quickly once he engaged. I doubt that any of the shots fired by the fleeing officer hit the suspect.

One officer should get a medal, the other desk duty.

The response was not text book perfect for sure.

I have seen plenty of jams in 1911s as with other types/brands stuff happens.

Even if if didn't jam some one who just got done murdering someone starts pointing his firearm is going to get shot.

Waiting for them to fire well get you very dead.


It was an Ohio case I watch the dash cam video a couple of times. The good guys and bad guys both fired many rounds none of them hit anything. Piss poor shooting by both sides.

You want to see a poor hit to miss ratio look at the military thousands of rounds fired per hit.

Firearms Iinstuctor said:

You want to see a poor hit to miss ratio look at the military thousands of rounds fired per hit.

Click to expand...

Easy now.

You wanna talk about lack of training, the military takes top ranking in that department. Sad but true, I used to fire annually on M16 (usually some POS that's been used/abused), but new regs say that I dont fire unless deploying. Since I've been in jobs that dont deploy, I havent shot in over 5 years. And I only have to hit 50% of the time to "qualify". :banghead:

Firearms Iinstuctor said:

The response was not text book perfect for sure.


You want to see a poor hit to miss ratio look at the military thousands of rounds fired per hit.

Click to expand...

I am not sure what your MOS was or if you served, but for myself as a 11bravo and the many years that I have been in we go to the range min 10 times a year for a variety of training. The ammo was never in short supply either. So much so in some of my units the commander would force us to do "burn offs" with what ammo we have left over. Thank goodness, the higher-ranking NCO's in those units used that time for additional training that was not the normal by "the book" training. In most cases, those out of the box moments were better training than the training the commander wanted done. Now I will say many MOS that are not combat related do very little firearms training. Every year we had a very steady 9-10 month on average training to do list. State side I have seen very very accurate fire on targets moving and still paper targets, I have seen people who couldn't hit a damn thing. The very large majority had no problems making their mark when it counted.

As for in actual combat I have seen very accurate fire and some very inaccurate fire, yet the goal has always been to get rounds down range as quickly as possible, but still being accurate. We want to put so much lead down range that the man we are shooting at would rather dig deeper into the ground then return fire on us, so we can move on his/her position to snuff their lights out without taking any casualties on our end. Having a ton of lead going down range on a terrorist is not a bad thing if it keeps us alive and stops them from firing at us. It’s not like COD where out intent is to get a near 100% hit ratio per bullet count, but kill more of them as quickly as possible so they don't get the opportunity to kill us.

I will say there is a time for extremely accurate fire and there is a time to put a wall of lead so big heading towards a terrorists that their only way out of that firefight is a pine box or that nasty stained bed sheet. Getting shot at is never fun and my goal is to stop it ASAP(my first time getting shot at overseas on patrol I pissed myself because of how unnerving it was to have rounds zip pass my skull). If that means peppering a wall behind a target to hold him down or one of those rounds hits the SOB in the head and he was unable to return fire, I consider that a good hit ratio.

A millitary mission is not the same as a law enforcement mission, completely different. It may seem harsh to expect law enforcements officers to be professional in times of stress, but then there are other jobs. My father and some others have said "excuses are like cow dung, they are easy to find but worthless".

Firearms Iinstuctor said:

You want to see a poor hit to miss ratio look at the military thousands of rounds fired per hit.

Click to expand...

The military has this funny thing called "suppressive fire" and that is where most of the rounds go. I might not be shooting directly at you, but so long as I'm shooting you're going to keep your head down and other people are going to get into a better position to try and kill you.

While you seem willing to just give officers a pass for killing/wounding bystanders and make excuses for their poor training and laws that promote them to be reckless with their shots.

WalkingWolf said:

A millitary mission is not the same as a law enforcement mission, completely different. It may seem harsh to expect law enforcements officers to be professional in times of stress, but then there are other jobs. My father and some others have said "excuses are like cow dung, they are easy to find but worthless".

Click to expand...

And cilvilian response is not the same as Law Enforcement response.


Differant dynamics for them all. differant responses and resonsibilties also.

Point is comparing one to the other dosen't really mean a thing.

Firearms Iinstuctor said:

And cilvilian response is not the same as Law Enforcement response.


Differant dynamics for them all. differant responses and resonsibilties also.

Point is comparing one to the other dosen't really mean a thing.

Click to expand...

I highly disagree, a police officer should be held to the same standards if they shoot an innocent bystander. No free pass, do not pass go, and no 200 dollars. The officer or the officers in the NYPD incident were negligent. A badge is NOT a free pass to shoot indiscriminately at least it was not when I wore one.

Also noted it is why the public has trust issues. The police should never be above the law, and they should be held to a higher standard. If not they need to find a different job.

I used to shoot at Seattle Police Range here in Seattle. I was talking with a former officer who trains SPD hopefuls, and he stated, basically: [There are some that I train who have never held a handgun, and some that don't like shooting, who I have trained].

Not comforting. I was a bit shocked that all nine individuals shot in NY were the result of NYPD shots. I seen the video, the officers weren't that far from the man they shot.

WalkingWolf said:

I highly disagree, a police officer should be held to the same standards if they shoot an innocent bystander. No free pass, do not pass go, and no 200 dollars. The officer or the officers in the NYPD incident were negligent. A badge is NOT a free pass to shoot indiscriminately at least it was not when I wore one.

Also noted it is why the public has trust issues. The police should never be above the law, and they should be held to a higher standard. If not they need to find a different job.

Click to expand...

WalkingWolf

Where in any of my statements do I say that they shouldn't be held responsible.


The truth is how a LEO,cilvilian, or the military responds is differant. The liabilty of their mistakes and how they are held responsible is a matter of the state law where the shooting happen. Federal law if a civil rights violation happened and military code if they are military

How those two officers will be held responsible for their miss shots have yet to be determined.


One needs find out how many were acutal shot by whole bullets that missed their target how many of the nine were hit by fragments or flying concrete we know some were. Saying all nine were shot is misleading information spread by the news media.

Firearms Iinstuctor said:

WalkingWolf

Where in any of my statements do I say that they shouldn't be held responsible.


The truth is how a LEO,cilvilian, or the military responds is differant. The liabilty of their mistakes and how they are held responsible is a matter of the state law where the shooting happen. Federal law if a civil rights violation happened and military code if they are military

How those two officers will be held responsible for their miss shots have yet to be determined.


One needs find out how many were acutal shot by whole bullets that missed their target how many of the nine were hit by fragments or flying concrete we know some were. Saying all nine were shot is misleading information spread by the news media.

Click to expand...

Really, so you are claiming that police officers have special powers when it comes to self defense? Could you cite these laws?

About the only difference is police are allowed to shoot a fleeing suspect of a forcible felony. And in the past they had better be dam sure of it. They are allowed for safety to draw in certain circumstances where a citizen cannot. But self defense statutes are the same, whether police or civilian. A civilian has the same rights to self defense AND can use deadly force to prevent death or serious injury on another. Besides the fact that civilians have the common law right to make an arrest when they witness a felony. Police can make arrests for misdemeanors and felonies if they have probable cause. I am really interested in hearing about these special killing powers~do they come with a cape and tights?

WalkingWolf said:

I highly disagree, a police officer should be held to the same standards if they shoot an innocent bystander. No free pass, do not pass go, and no 200 dollars. The officer or the officers in the NYPD incident were negligent. A badge is NOT a free pass to shoot indiscriminately at least it was not when I wore one.

Also noted it is why the public has trust issues. The police should never be above the law, and they should be held to a higher standard. If not they need to find a different job.

Click to expand...

I believe that most of us would agree with you.

My personal thought is that they should be held to a higher standard.

Firearms Iinstuctor said:

*snip*

How those two officers will be held responsible for their miss shots have yet to be determined.

Click to expand...

I'm going to hazard a guess at two weeks of paid 'Administrative Leave' for following 'Departmental Procedures'.

-MH

WalkingWolf said:

Really, so you are claiming that police officers have special powers when it comes to self defense? Could you cite these laws?

About the only difference is police are allowed to shoot a fleeing suspect of a forcible felony. And in the past they had better be dam sure of it. They are allowed for safety to draw in certain circumstances where a citizen cannot. But self defense statutes are the same, whether police or civilian. A civilian has the same rights to self defense AND can use deadly force to prevent death or serious injury on another. Besides the fact that civilians have the common law right to make an arrest when they witness a felony. Police can make arrests for misdemeanors and felonies if they have probable cause. I am really interested in hearing about these special killing powers~do they come with a cape and tights?

Click to expand...

Where in my posts to you see any thing about SPECIAL POWERS FOR SELF DEFENSE or SPECIAL KILLING POWERS.


What I am say is the dynamics of a police officer responding to a crime a whole lot differant then a non LEO responding to crime.

I count 15 posters on this thread not counting me and the consensus appears to be that training is inadequate in most cases and interest in marksmanship by the average policeman is minimal. I have mixed feelings on the topic having shot with many of them for fun and in competition and trained some of them. More than a few in competition were Gosh awful,(those Texas State boys were there for the beer and the party not for the shooting). One thing good shot or bad is that most were pretty level headed in spite of a preponderance of type A personalities and some adrenaline junkies. Some of you guys are coming down pretty hard on them and some are defending them.

I have a feeling by the comments which ones have been to the party, for those who haven't put yourself in their shoes for a second and ask yourself have you ever had to fight for your life, it doesn't have to be a gun situation, fist fights against a superior foe or a greater number or against a knife or club count too. Were you prepared, were you thinking cold hard logically or was it a mish mash with a thousand things going through your mind? Then the aftermath, coming down from the adrenaline high. We all hit the wall differently and it showed in the New York shooting. It shows everytime there is a face to face shooting from 2 or 3 paces or closer and guns get empty but the shooters do not get hit.

In hunting we call that buck fever. I seen it when our man with the gun shows up on the scene and a trail of ejected cartridges behind him as he kept racking the slide on his 45. I seen it with a "buddy", (my shore patrol partner), telling me to just get behind him and follow his lead in case there was trouble. Trouble came and he was nowhere to be found. It's easy to say what you would have should have or could have done in a situation after the fact but temper your comments by the fact that these people were there and didn't have as many facts to judge the situation that we do in hindsight.

I didn't vote in the poll because I could make an argument for each of the choices. What I would really rather have is for this never to happen again but if it does it happens with cool heads and steady shooters on the scene. Can't count on it and the one thing we can count on is if we are ever in that situation you are in the best cases at least 10 minutes from an officer response so you better be the one with the cool head and the steady hand.

Just dos centavos from an old dinosaur

99% of stats you read on the Internet are wrong.

I've known officers who don't give a crap about using their guns or practicing, but they stay proficient because the agency or department requires it. One box of ammo every month after truly good initial training is enough to keep most sufficiently proficient. Some guys might need more, some may need less, but biennial anything is insufficient (I hope you meant semi-annual, every 6 months.)

The real problem is that officers don't get even the training you get doing a occasional IDPA meet. Target acquisition, run n gun, and trigger discipline. But neither do 99+% of non-LE carriers. I have been frightened by the incompetence of most people obtaining a concealed handgun license here. Maybe good enough to shot the bad guy, but probably bad enough to miss them or shoot me. We have failed to prepare city people the way living in a rural setting tends to do. (pardon the generalization, but if you asked virtually anyone on the street here to hold a gun, they wouldn't be able to do so with even a resemblance to a safe and controllable grip.)

Firearms Iinstuctor said:

WalkingWolf

Where in any of my statements do I say that they shouldn't be held responsible.


The truth is how a LEO,civilian, or the military responds is different. The liability of their mistakes and how they are held responsible is a matter of the state law where the shooting happen. Federal law if a civil rights violation happened and military code if they are military

How those two officers will be held responsible for their miss shots have yet to be determined.


One needs find out how many were actual shot by whole bullets that missed their target how many of the nine were hit by fragments or flying concrete we know some were. Saying all nine were shot is misleading information spread by the news media.

Click to expand...

Whole round, bullet fragment or debris is irrelevant to the fact that the cop, whichever one, shot and missed, there by injuring bystanders due to he discharging his firearm without regards to the safety of bystanders in the immediate vicinity. That cop is darn lucky that no bystander was killed by his spray and pray approach to that situation.

OC for ME said:

Whole round, bullet fragment or debris is irrelevant to the fact that the cop, whichever one, shot and missed, there by injuring bystanders due to he discharging his firearm without regards to the safety of bystanders in the immediate vicinity. That cop is darn lucky that no bystander was killed by his spray and pray approach to that situation.

Click to expand...

Yea In a perfect world it is irrelevant.

I am very sure that you have done much better in real life care to share.

WalkingWolf said:

I don't consider 12 pounds that bad, maybe my fingers are stronger. I have a PA63, Russian guns are built with heavy trigger pulls on purpose. I killed a charging pit bull with it. Not one missed shot, NYPD problem is training. One officer lost his cool, and fired indiscriminately while running away, the other officer could be clearly seen hitting his mark, at point blank range.

The officer that probably shot most if not all of the bystanders should have either took aim, or run, but not shooting wild west style while running away. I will be interested if they disclose the ballistic reports, I would be willing to bet that all the bystanders injuries came from one gun.

Click to expand...

oh I totally agree, training is the issue-you can train against a heavy trigger. But if the training isn't there, a heavy trigger is only going to exacerbate the problem.

But if he really was running and gunning, I guess it wouldn't make a difference and inadequate training is the culprit.