Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Citizens' Police Academy, Officer involved shooting experiment, very enlightening

  1. #1
    Regular Member paramedic70002's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Franklin, VA, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,448

    Citizens' Police Academy, Officer involved shooting experiment, very enlightening

    http://www.policeone.com/officer-sho...-OIS-hot-seat/

    A good counterpoint to all the negative police shootings we've seen recently.


    After their encounters, “all the students report seeing a gun or seeing a gun actually fired at them, which prompted them to shoot,” Goard says. “Yet in the videos, they see themselves using deadly force on people with wallets, cell phones, drills, and unarmed.” One student described a role-player as threateningly pointing an automatic rifle; in reality the “suspect” pointed aggressively with his arm.
    "Each worker carried his sword strapped to his side." Nehemiah 4:18

    Guns Save Lives. Paramedics Save Lives. But...
    Paramedics With Guns Scare People!

  2. #2
    Regular Member Brimstone Baritone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Leeds, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    786
    Quote Originally Posted by paramedic70002 View Post
    http://www.policeone.com/officer-sho...-OIS-hot-seat/

    A good counterpoint to all the negative police shootings we've seen recently.
    I wish my local departments had that kind of funding and interest in public relations.

    Don't get me wrong I know it's a total PR stunt, but imagine how much fun it would be!

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    I don't understand the point. Are they trying to say that police officers are really as untrained as the citizens doing the role playing? Or, that the Heroes in Blue who face antagonized people with a higher frequency are really just jumpy non-heroes?

  4. #4
    Regular Member Brimstone Baritone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Leeds, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    786
    :rolleyes

    It's supposed to give you a sense of the split second decisions the officers have to make and have to live with. It's also a fun little exercise in how poor the brain is at constructing memory in stressful situations.

    Mostly it's good PR for the department, because it's supposed to generate understanding and empathy instead of the usual indifference to outright hostility the officers usually get from the general public.


    But screw all that. I said earlier want to do it because it sounds fun.

  5. #5
    Regular Member HandyHamlet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Terra, Sol
    Posts
    2,779
    We’re only 35 miles from where the BART shooting occurred, so we’re very familiar with how police actions can get distorted.
    So I guess Oscar Grant, unarmed and subdued, didn't get shot in the back point blank and killed by a cop after all. We are just a bunch of big meanies.

    Destroying Myths & Discovering Cold Facts
    with The Force Science Research Center
    That's quite a fancy name for bullsh*t. Ya'll feel free to drink the kool-aid and tell me how you feel. I mean how it tastes.



    That "simulation" is BS too. Who the hell wouldn't shoot when some a-hole lets loose with an airhorn AND a blank pistol right behind your head?

    “When the scenario is at its highest peak, a safety officer standing directly behind them activates an air horn or fires several blank rounds at the floor from a .38 handgun.”
    Shoot, wet yourself, and punch the **** in the head if you are lucky enough to recover from the heart attack.

    Quote Originally Posted by paramedic70002 View Post
    A good counterpoint to all the negative police shootings we've seen recently.
    If by "good counterpoint" you mean total unabashed propaganda well then I agree with you. It's not the cop's' fault they shot that unarmed guy 147 times. The guy pointed a fro pick at them. And they were started by the safety officer when he let the air horn fly.
    Last edited by HandyHamlet; 06-13-2011 at 12:53 AM.
    "Don't interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties."
    Abraham Lincoln

    "Some time ago, a bunch of lefties defied the law by dancing at the Jefferson Memorial, resulting in their arrests. Last week, a bunch of them pulled the same stunt and - using patented Lefist techniques - provoked the Park Police into having to use force to arrest them."
    Alexcabbie

  6. #6
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by mcdonalk View Post
    :rolleyes

    It's supposed to give you a sense of the split second decisions the officers have to make and have to live with. It's also a fun little exercise in how poor the brain is at constructing memory in stressful situations.

    Mostly it's good PR for the department, because it's supposed to generate understanding and empathy instead of the usual indifference to outright hostility the officers usually get from the general public.


    But screw all that. I said earlier want to do it because it sounds fun.
    Well, yes. But, what is the point of having untrained, unfamiliar people do it? So what if it is a split second decision under stress?

    As an exaggerated analogy, put a bunch of people in flight simulators and have them go through what the pilot of Flight 1549 did (Miracle on the Hudson). Of course, they'll all stall the aircraft, or touch down too fast, or forget to pull the nose up. Then put a bunch of trained pilots on the simulator and see how many of them get it right.

    I expect someone trained and familiar to come up with the right answer. That's the whole point of training!

    This business of awe-ing the untrained is pointless. Rather than impress them with how "difficult" it is, and "how easy it is to make a mistake", they should be trained.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    Using civilians from California in such a test is HARDLY using an "unbiased" body of subjects.

    You gotta understand, the majority of citizens in CA are bed-wetting propaganda-gobbling anti-2A sheeple, who consider the idea that ANY citizen might actually have the ability to make ANY decisions concerning their own lives to be a THREAT, let lone someone with an actual weapon...

    These people have been brainwashed for DECADES to perceive ANY sort of situation that even remotely appears to be threatening or even questionable to be scary, dangerous and deadly. They believe it. And like most bed-wetting "liberals", when given the authorisation to use deadly force, they inevitably over-react, escalate, and pull the trigger with wreckless abandon.

    These kinds of people hate guns so much because they KNOW in their heart of hearts that if THEY carried a gun, THEY would be the ones causing blood in the streets, shooting people over parking spots, and drilling the soccer coach because he made a bad call against their little darlings.

    And this test PROVES that anti-gunners are, in fact, nothing more than sociopaths, projecting their own inner demons onto the rest of society...

    If their "test group" had been comprised of CalGuns members, I'd wager their scores would be an order of magnitude better than what the average Academy graduate makes...
    Last edited by Dreamer; 06-13-2011 at 01:28 AM.
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  8. #8
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855
    Quote Originally Posted by HandyHamlet View Post
    So I guess Oscar Grant, unarmed and subdued, didn't get shot in the back point blank and killed by a cop after all. We are just a bunch of big meanies.



    That's quite a fancy name for bullsh*t. Ya'll feel free to drink the kool-aid and tell me how you feel. I mean how it tastes.



    That "simulation" is BS too. Who the hell wouldn't shoot when some a-hole lets loose with an airhorn AND a blank pistol right behind your head?



    Shoot, wet yourself, and punch the **** in the head if you are lucky enough to recover from the heart attack.



    If by "good counterpoint" you mean total unabashed propaganda well then I agree with you. It's not the cop's' fault they shot that unarmed guy 147 times. The guy pointed a fro pick at them. And they were started by the safety officer when he let the air horn fly.
    I think they got the idea from the "Re-education" camps of the Khmer Rouge during the Killing Fields. It works better if you watch it with rose colored glasses. The only reason they shot that guy 147 times was because they ran out of ammo. When you are kill crazy, it's a bitch to only have 147 rounds.
    "For any man who sheds his blood with me this day shall be my brother...And gentlemen now abed shall think themselves accursed, they were not here, and hold their manhoods cheap whilst any speaks who fought with us on Crispin's day." Henry V

  9. #9
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855
    Another article from the same site> More ******** from the SS:


    Make assessments, not assumptions, on patrol stops
    Unless we have foreknowledge of the occupants or the pedestrians we interact with, every stop must be considered an ‘unknown risk’ until it is investigated further
    The traffic stop is something officers do across this country every day, and yet we are still unable to find a line of attack to defeat the number of officers lost from performing this essential function. Is it because of our tactics, which have become so commonplace that even the average citizen could mimic our actions? Is it our inability to read the warning signs by failing to assess the vehicle, occupants, location, actions, or dialog? Is it because we have become so complacent due to the frequency in which we execute this function?

    Perhaps it is all of the above or none of them. One thing is certain, we are losing officers at an alarming rate and unless we begin to rethink why we do what we do, we will continue to add names to the wall.

    Make Assessments, Not Assumptions
    There is no such thing as a “low risk” stop. Let’s face it, unless we have foreknowledge of the occupants or the pedestrians we interact with, every stop must be considered an ‘unknown risk’ until it is investigated further. So we must first do an assessment. What drew our attention to the vehicle, occupants, or even pedestrian? Was it for some minor infraction, suspicious activity, or a felony in-progress? Based on our assessment we must then formulate a strategy that is consistent with the assessment.

    In our minds we may be stopping the driver of a vehicle for running a red-light, when in reality they may be fleeing the scene of an armed robbery they just committed. Our assessment is inconsistent with the realities of the situation. See? No such thing as a “low risk” stop. Let’s remain on guard until we have had the chance to either confirm our initial assessment or the circumstances rise to an advanced level—“elevated risk” or “high risk” — but never “low risk.”

    Circumstances that may rise to the level of an elevated risk may be:

    • Computer hits on the plate/vehicle, owner, or occupants
    • Suspicious vehicles, occupied or not
    • Suspicious persons, multiple occupants, tinted windows, erratic driving/behavior
    • Any other situation that’s causes the officer to feel something is afoot

    If, based on our assessment, we determine that this situation goes beyond unknown and into the realm of elevated, then shouldn’t our tactics rise to a higher level of vigilance?

    >>>>Instead of doing a traditional standard approach, perhaps we execute a “blindside” walkup on the passenger side. If the vehicle has tinted windows tell the driver to either roll down the windows (day), or extinguish his lights and turn on his dome-light (night). Maybe we do not approach at all but ask the driver to exit (walk-back) with paperwork in hand and conduct our interview back by our cruiser to maintain a tactical advantage. Whichever tactic we choose to perform, it should be in order to keep the driver/occupant/pedestrian off balance and confused so that they are forced to react to us instead of us reacting to them. >>>>>>>(Yeah, let's make sure we keep the subjects off balance or they may think they have rights.)

    Making Felony Stops
    If, based on our assessment, we determine that there is likelihood that we or others will be assaulted, injured, or killed, then the situation has risen to a “high risk” stop and a felony stop should be conducted. The manner in which you conduct a felony stop may vary depending on where you work in the country, however generally speaking we want to have a coordinated plan to extricate the occupants from a vehicle. Whether that means calling them out one by one and placing them on the ground, or calling them all the way back to our cruisers, we want to have a systematic approach that maximizes officer control and safety.

    Under stress, officers will resort to what they know — this can be a good thing or bad thing, depending on the degree and caliber of training. In either case, we need to remain fluid and flexible in our application of the process and not get tied down by dogma. Suspects may not be able to put their hands-up, they might not be able to exit the vehicle. The primary officer may not always be in the best position to order suspects out, suspects may not comply with all of your commands. As long as officers are maintaining their areas of responsibility, the suspects are complying to the best of their ability and the situation is contained, the outcome is likely to be successful. Don’t get caught inside the box and watch for falling into repetitive commands that are not productive (feed-back loop). Remain flexible and always have a plan B in place if things start turning south.

    Make it Home, Every Shift>>>>>(if you have to gun down a subject or two, acceptable casualties...)>>>>>

    When conducting a traffic stop or pedestrian encounter, the assessment is not only critical, it should be on-going. Don’t make false assumptions based on previous experiences. Each encounter is unique and must be given its due diligence in regards to assessing the circumstances and the players involved. If the circumstances merit back-up, then ask for it and ask early. Most offenders who have either assaulted or killed police officers knew or believed the officer was alone at the time of the assault. Make sure we are backing each other up and using sound tactics that provide us the best tactical advantage and positioning.

    Remember, we lose almost twice as many officers each year to accidental assaults than felonious assaults, partially due to our positioning and awareness. We may not be able to eliminate officer casualties, but maybe, by properly assessing what we are truly facing, using proper tactics and positioning we will be better prepared in our response.
    "For any man who sheds his blood with me this day shall be my brother...And gentlemen now abed shall think themselves accursed, they were not here, and hold their manhoods cheap whilst any speaks who fought with us on Crispin's day." Henry V

  10. #10
    Regular Member thx997303's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Lehi, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,716
    Seems to me that a quick gesture and gunfire in my ear may suggest the need to shoot.

    Omit the airhorn and gunfire and see what happens.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •