San Diego LEO shoots woman and son in Oceanside - Update thread

imported post

Sa45auto wrote:

Thundar wrote:

......Does the police officer in this case get a pass for shooting atpeople that he cannot see?.......

Click to expand...

In this case he could see the threat. It was a 4,000 lb car coming at him and his family.

Click to expand...

No, I can't swallow that. The vehicle is a tool. The driver is the threat. The shooter was not trying to stop the car. He was trying to shoot the driver. He did not try to shoot the tires or any other part of the vehicle to disable it. He shot into a passenger compartment and did not know what possible innocent person was in that passenger compartment. The shooter in firing into that passenger compartment wounded an innocent child. Was the shooter wrong?

I am not sure that the shooter was wrong. When in fear for your life what obligation do you have to see the threat before shooting? (I know the four rules. That is not what we are talking about.)

imported post

If he put all 5 rounds thru the window glass, it seems a bit odd that he clipped Mr. Silva 's knee.

Was he hiding behind his knee, holding it up hi? I doubt that.

If Mrs. Silva really DID move her car into a perpendicular position, in position to ram Officer White n his wife, then I can certainly see how he 'd find a need, an emergency, requiring very swift deadly force to disable the threat.

( I don 't mean if she were in reverse gear,leaving the scene. )

For sure, this will be an interesting case to follow.

David

imported post

Thundar wrote:

Sa45auto wrote:

Thundar wrote:

......Does the police officer in this case get a pass for shooting atpeople that he cannot see?.......

Click to expand...

In this case he could see the threat. It was a 4,000 lb car coming at him and his family.

Click to expand...

No, I can't swallow that. The vehicle is a tool. The driver is the threat. The shooter was not trying to stop the car. He was trying to shoot the driver. He did not try to shoot the tires or any other part of the vehicle to disable it. He shot into a passenger compartment and did not know what possible innocent person was in that passenger compartment. The shooter in firing into that passenger compartment wounded an innocent child. Was the shooter wrong?

I am not sure that the shooter was wrong. When in fear for your life what obligation do you have to see the threat before shooting? (I know the four rules. That is not what we are talking about.)

Click to expand...

WHICH rules ?

imported post

Thundar wrote:

Sa45auto wrote:

Thundar wrote:

......Does the police officer in this case get a pass for shooting atpeople that he cannot see?.......

Click to expand...

In this case he could see the threat. It was a 4,000 lb car coming at him and his family.

Click to expand...

No, I can't swallow that. The vehicle is a tool. The driver is the threat. The shooter was not trying to stop the car. He was trying to shoot the driver. He did not try to shoot the tires or any other part of the vehicle to disable it. He shot into a passenger compartment and did not know what possible innocent person was in that passenger compartment. The shooter in firing into that passenger compartment wounded an innocent child. Was the shooter wrong?

I am not sure that the shooter was wrong. When in fear for your life what obligation do you have to see the threat before shooting? (I know the four rules. That is not what we are talking about.)

Click to expand...

Just as a gun is a tool... you do not shoot the trigger off the gun, right?

You stop the person that is using the tool or "weapon" whatever it might be.

Do we recall the shooting in Alexandria when the kids skipped out on their meal? The cop was shooting at the driver but hit a passenger. It is a dreadful error that happens and is the same in this case. I doubt he felt killing a passenger was going to stop the car from moving.

Studies have shown that most police shoot outs have a very low hit ration. Pray and spray seems to be the norm. You mind is racing and you go back to your training when you cannot concentrate. Unfortunately the police budget for training is to shoot once a year. That is why I shoot one a week on my own.

imported post

OmSigDAVID wrote:

If he put all 5 rounds thru the window glass, it seems a bit odd that he clipped Mr. Silva 's knee.

Was he hiding behind his knee, holding it up hi? I doubt that.

If Mrs. Silva really DID move her car into a perpendicular position, in position to ram Officer White n his wife, then I can certainly see how he 'd find a need, an emergency, requiring very swift deadly force to disable the threat.

( I don 't mean if she were in reverse gear,leaving the scene. )

For sure, this will be an interesting case to follow.

David

Click to expand...

Because of the angle of the windshield, the bullet will drop significantly when it hits. The officer was likely aiming at Ms. Silva's head and/or center-mass. Whenthe bullet hits a glass surface it will continue in the direction that it touches first, so if the angle is like this "/" then a bullet fired straight will divert it's course downward. A windshield also is wrapped around the front of the car, not flat, so when the bullets hit the windshield they were sent off course down and to the left of the shooter. A good estimate would be that a bullet fired toward your neck would actually hit your bicep, and a shot fired at your chest would likely hit your forearm. If the shot was a little off to the left, the bullet would continue at a downward angle into the passenger seats behind you, just about leg level. Imagine that the shooter was standing on the hood (or maybe the bumper) shooting downward, because that is the angle that the shots would be going after hitting the windshield.

It is a common misconception that when a bullet hits glass at this angle "/" it will go up, as if starting to ricochet. That is false. As I was saying earlier, the bullet will slow on the side that touches the glass first and continue on the side that it hasn't hit, changing the angle dramatically downward. See diagram:


It is also important to note that the greater the angle of the windshield, the greater the deflection. If the windshield were at a 90 degree angle and the bullet hit directly perpendicular, the bullet would go straight through, but any change in angle will change the course of the bullet.

For a much better explaination and some great pictures, visit theboxotruth.com's buick o truth

imported post

So I'm curious, and maybe I missed it somewhere, but did it say that the boy was in the front seat? If he was in the back seat then it makes perfect sense that a bullet could pass through the windshield, and deflect downward into his knee. It's still possible to be hit sitting in any other seat, but more likely if the boy is behind the driver.

imported post

expvideo wrote:

OmSigDAVID wrote:

If he put all 5 rounds thru the window glass, it seems a bit odd that he clipped Mr. Silva 's knee.

Was he hiding behind his knee, holding it up hi? I doubt that.

If Mrs. Silva really DID move her car into a perpendicular position, in position to ram Officer White n his wife, then I can certainly see how he 'd find a need, an emergency, requiring very swift deadly force to disable the threat.

( I don 't mean if she were in reverse gear,leaving the scene. )

For sure, this will be an interesting case to follow.

David

Click to expand...

Because of the angle of the windshield, the bullet will drop significantly when it hits. The officer was likely aiming at Ms. Silva's head and/or center-mass. Whenthe bullet hits a glass surface it will continue in the direction that it touches first, so if the angle is like this "/" then a bullet fired straight will divert it's course downward. A windshield also is wrapped around the front of the car, not flat, so when the bullets hit the windshield they were sent off course down and to the left of the shooter. A good estimate would be that a bullet fired toward your neck would actually hit your bicep, and a shot fired at your chest would likely hit your forearm. If the shot was a little off to the left, the bullet would continue at a downward angle into the passenger seats behind you, just about leg level. Imagine that the shooter was standing on the hood (or maybe the bumper) shooting downward, because that is the angle that the shots would be going after hitting the windshield.

It is a common misconception that when a bullet hits glass at this angle "/" it will go up, as if starting to ricochet. That is false. As I was saying earlier, the bullet will slow on the side that touches the glass first and continue on the side that it hasn't hit, changing the angle dramatically downward. See diagram:

It is also important to note that the greater the angle of the windshield, the greater the deflection. If the windshield were at a 90 degree angle and the bullet hit directly perpendicular, the bullet would go straight through, but any change in angle will change the course of the bullet.

For a much better explaination and some great pictures, visit theboxotruth.com's buick o truth

Click to expand...

Thank u !

That is an EXCELLENT explanation, and a terrific diagram !

Didweever find out WHAT he was shooting and the size of its magazine ?

David

imported post

unreconstructed1 wrote:

Sa45auto wrote:

unreconstructed1 wrote:

NBF was an incredible individual and a remarkable leader. and not a bad all around guy if you get past teh lies perpetrated on him in teh years since teh war.

Click to expand...

unreconstructed1I have a question. I have dyslexia and often reverse letters especially when I am typing. I have noticed that you do too (see above highlights one teh -the) Do you have dyslexia too?

Click to expand...

actually, I just cant type. I never learned to type "correctly", as I never could remember the position of the keys without looking. Due to that I have basically developed my own way of typing that is faster than henpecking the key board, but not quite as fast as the normal method.For some reason though, whenever I type the words "the", their", and "they" the "e" and the "h" normally get swapped. the only time I seem to do it is when those two letters are put together with a "T" in front. it sounds a little weird, but it will have to do until (if) I ever learn thecorrect style. My occupation has always been industrial, so I have only had to use dedicated software that requires very little typing. The only time that I ever have to actually use word processing software is when I when I do Southern heritage work, or 2A rights work ( writing letters to editors, flyers for protests, and various other things), I normally use a spellcheck to catch that problem at those times, but on forums, once i get more or less comfortablearound the majority of the members, I normally begin to let it slip, since it is at that time that I begin to write lengthier articles.

Click to expand...

Thank you for the response.

imported post

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Thank u !

That is an EXCELLENT explanation, and a terrific diagram !

Didweever find out WHAT he was shooting and the size of its magazine ?

David

Click to expand...

I don't think we did, but I would bet money it was a .40 glock. Glock because he's a cop and it's quickly becoming the most popular police handgun if it isn't already, and .40 based on the hits he made, in relation to where his car was. A .40 will have less drop than a 9mm after going through a windshield, and more drop than a .45. I think that the reason the shots went a little more to the left was because he was pulling with his thumb or anticipating. Could also be that he didn't have the best positioning on the trigger with his finger (which I would think is the most likely of those reasons). Had he been in less of a panic, the shots would have probably hit the driver's right lung, or at least done some damage to some ribs. Because he was in a situation that required him to act quickly, and was obviously a little panicked, it looks to me as though he jerked the trigger instead of calmly pressing it.

I also think that he would have been more inclined to fire more shots in desparation if he had a 9mm.

Again, these are just speculations on my part, but I think they may have some merit. Then again, for all we know, he could have just been wildly firing in the direction of the car, and the 3/5 hits were just luck.

imported post

Thundar wrote:

Sa45auto wrote:

Thundar wrote:

......Does the police officer in this case get a pass for shooting atpeople that he cannot see?.......

Click to expand...

In this case he could see the threat. It was a 4,000 lb car coming at him and his family.

Click to expand...

No, I can't swallow that. The vehicle is a tool. The driver is the threat. The shooter was not trying to stop the car. He was trying to shoot the driver. He did not try to shoot the tires or any other part of the vehicle to disable it. He shot into a passenger compartment and did not know what possible innocent person was in that passenger compartment. The shooter in firing into that passenger compartment wounded an innocent child. Was the shooter wrong?

I am not sure that the shooter was wrong. When in fear for your life what obligation do you have to see the threat before shooting? (I know the four rules. That is not what we are talking about.)

Click to expand...

We are talking semantics here.

Yes the vehicle is a tool and if that tool is coming at you in a threating manner, it is a tool that youmust stop. Logic dictates that this tool is being driven by a person and so you fire to stop the person directing that tool.

If you are standing in the dark and all you see is a hammer raised and starting to descend toward your head. It is a tool too, and logic dictates that a hand is holding that hammer and so you would fire to stop the hand and thus the tool.

As far as shooting the tires....That doesn't stop a moving car especially in the short distances we have here. As far as shooting at any other part of the car...unless you have a cannon or a grenade launcher, you are pretty much out of luck. We also don't know that he had a clear view of the tires.

As far as the shooting into the passenger compartment injuring an innocent child....The Mother put that child in the passenger compartment and then she put that compartment in harms way by deliberately driving the car, with said child, toward someone she knew had a gun, and she did this in a threating manner.

I don't know what the officer saw but I doubt that he knew the child was there, on the other hand the mother knew that thechild was there and she did what she did anyway.

In short I don't know enough to know if the shooter was wrong or not, but I do know enough to know the mother put her child in harms way more than once.

imported post

OmSigDAVID wrote:

WHICH rules ?

Click to expand...

I think he is referring to the 4 rules of gun safety.

1. Treat every gun as if it is loaded.

2. Never point any gun at anything you don't want to destroy.

3. Keep your finger off the trigger until you ave identified the target.

4. Know your target and what is behind it.



My contention was that he had identified his target as the car and what was driving it.

Thundar was making a point that the car is a tool not a target. In this case I contend that it was both.

imported post

jaredbelch wrote:

So I'm curious, and maybe I missed it somewhere, but did it say that the boy was in the front seat? If he was in the back seat then it makes perfect sense that a bullet could pass through the windshield, and deflect downward into his knee. It's still possible to be hit sitting in any other seat, but more likely if the boy is behind the driver.

Click to expand...

According to news reports the boy was in the front passenger seat.

I don't think we know which bullet hit the boy and what the trajectory of that bullet was. Was it a ricochet?


It could well be that with the force of impact, the child went to the floor of the vehicle, especially if he was not wearing a seat belt, and as he did so his knees went up into the air and into the path of the bullet.

We just don't know.

imported post

expvideo wrote:

Because of the angle of the windshield, the bullet will drop significantly when it hits. The officer was likely aiming at Ms. Silva's head and/or center-mass. Whenthe bullet hits a glass surface it will continue in the direction that it touches first, so if the angle is like this "/" then a bullet fired straight will divert it's course downward. A windshield also is wrapped around the front of the car, not flat, so when the bullets hit the windshield they were sent off course down and to the left of the shooter. A good estimate would be that a bullet fired toward your neck would actually hit your bicep, and a shot fired at your chest would likely hit your forearm. If the shot was a little off to the left, the bullet would continue at a downward angle into the passenger seats behind you, just about leg level. Imagine that the shooter was standing on the hood (or maybe the bumper) shooting downward, because that is the angle that the shots would be going after hitting the windshield.

It is a common misconception that when a bullet hits glass at this angle "/" it will go up, as if starting to ricochet. That is false. As I was saying earlier, the bullet will slow on the side that touches the glass first and continue on the side that it hasn't hit, changing the angle dramatically downward. See diagram:

It is also important to note that the greater the angle of the windshield, the greater the deflection. If the windshield were at a 90 degree angle and the bullet hit directly perpendicular, the bullet would go straight through, but any change in angle will change the course of the bullet.

For a much better explaination and some great pictures, visit theboxotruth.com's buick o truth

Click to expand...

Speaking from personal experience as a Special Forces and police SWAT instructor, there is no way to even guess what a bullet will do when it hits glass.

When I was an Instructor for the Norfolk Police Emergency Response Team, (YES I was with them too :shock we managed to secure a retired city bus to do live fire tests to determine if there was any way to project the point of impact of a rifle round (.308 Winchester Model 700 Varmint Special) fired from ranges between 50 and 200 meters.

We found that shooting through glass at ANY range or glass with ANY angle is a crap shoot.

The ONLY alternative that we could find was to have two Designated Marksmen fire at the target glass from a controlled cadence given over the radio by the ERT Commander, a SPLIT second apart. The first round hits the glass and weakens or shatters it and the second round enters at the same point of impact immediately thereafter.

The second round pierces the weakened glass andmeets substancially less resistance than it would if it were fired at a an intact piece of glass, and USUALLY allowed for surgical removal of the threat.

But once again, IT WAS NEVER A 100% GUARANTEED SURGICAL HIT!

imported post

Sa45auto wrote:

jaredbelch wrote:

So I'm curious, and maybe I missed it somewhere, but did it say that the boy was in the front seat? If he was in the back seat then it makes perfect sense that a bullet could pass through the windshield, and deflect downward into his knee. It's still possible to be hit sitting in any other seat, but more likely if the boy is behind the driver.

Click to expand...

According to news reports the boy was in the front passenger seat.

I don't think we know which bullet hit the boy and what the trajectory of that bullet was. Was it a ricochet?


It could well be that with the force of impact, the child went to the floor of the vehicle, especially if he was not wearing a seat belt, and as he did so his knees went up into the air and into the path of the bullet.

We just don't know.

Click to expand...

Ok Thanks, the article I read didn't say what seat he was in. I'll keep looking. If anyone finds it before me feel free to post it.

Edit: Found It!

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2008/03/28/news/sandiego/a345f0adf8eeafb2882574190074c325.txt
Capt. Tom Aguigui did disclose that investigators found a bullet hole in the front window of the passenger side of Silva's car, where the boy was seated.


http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2008/04/02/news/sandiego/969eb68f172cb6c38825741e00756a52.txt
The claim also states the boy "tried to crouch down" in the front seat of his mother's car when the officer pulled the gun out after an angry exchange with the mother following the traffic incident.

imported post

ODA 226 wrote:

Speaking from personal experience as a Special Forces and police SWAT instructor, there is no way to even guess what a bullet will do when it hits glass.

When I was an Instructor for the Norfolk Police Emergency Response Team, (YES I was with them too :shock: ) we managed to secure a retired city bus to do live fire tests to determine if there was any way to project the point of impact of a rifle round (.308 Winchester Model 700 Varmint Special) fired from ranges between 50 and 200 meters.

We found that shooting through glass at ANY range or glass with ANY angle is a crap shoot.

The ONLY alternative that we could find was to have two Designated Marksmen fire at the target glass from a controlled cadence given over the radio by the ERT Commander, a SPLIT second apart. The first round hits the glass and weakens or shatters it and the second round enters at the same point of impact immediately thereafter.

The second round pierces the weakened glass andmeets substancially less resistance than it would if it were fired at a an intact piece of glass, and USUALLY allowed for surgical removal of the threat.

But once again, IT WAS NEVER A 100% GUARANTEED SURGICAL HIT!

Click to expand...

The problem is that we aren't talking about .308, we're talking about pistol rounds, which are predictable. They have a domed or somewhat flat nose, and so a side of the bullet will be dramatically slowed down over the other side:



But a .308 round is going to have a pointed nose, and therefor will not have a side that slows down, making it's impact far less predictable:



For real, though. Follow the link in my last post to the buick o' truth.


Also, what do you mean "weakens or shatters the glass"? A .308 bullet will penetrate non-ballistic glass. It won't shatter the glass. Windshields don't shatter. Side and rear windows shatter, but windshields don't.


For example:



(image from the buick o' truth link at http://www.theboxotruth.com)

imported post

expvideo wrote:

.......For real, though. Follow the link in my last post to the buick o' truth.

Click to expand...

They have a great forum too.

http://www.theboxotruth.com/newforums/index.php

imported post

expvideo wrote:

Also, what do you mean "weakens or shatters the glass"? A .308 bullet will penetrate non-ballistic glass. It won't shatter the glass. Windshields don't shatter. Side and rear windows shatter, but windshields don't.

Click to expand...

I neglected to say that we tested effects of projectile impact on ALL types of glass, not just the windshield. We also conducted tests on plate glass windows and had the same results. In addition, we tested the effect of shotgun slugs, 9mm, .357 mag pistol rounds and the MP5A2 SMG in all mediums listed above.

We had similar results as shown in your post with pistol rounds but there was NEVER a guarantee of a surgical hit with ANY type of round. It's a very good report you posted BTW!

imported post

Thank you! And thank you for the information you've provided.

imported post

Nicely shown, expvideo!

imported post