why do Police "have" to shoot to KILL every time ??

a reply to: MasterKaman

You have to understand in a fast moving situation...seconds...you dont really "aim"...you just fire at "center-mass". Anywhere, as many times as necessary to stop the perceived threat.

a reply to: mysterioustranger

Can u not see that a runners assz is just as big as his back ?

a reply to: MasterKaman

Forrest Gump ran just fine after being shot in the buttocks.

And that's relevant, since we're using Hollywood shooting as a reference point in this thread.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
...since we're using Hollywood shooting as a reference point in this thread.

And you guys need to use those bullets where when you are hit by them, you fly through the air 20-30 feet and go through a window or something.

a reply to: ketsuko

What most of u are talking about is killing to protect yourselves. But an officer with blatant superior firepower and backup should only need to Make his Threat stronger. Is the runners assz not big enough for you ? Are u all such bad shots ? Even a single bullet pinging off the sidewalk will make 60% freeze with hands up.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Ok shamrock let's test your theory. You run and I'll shoot near your feet, with promise that the second shot will be in your Assz. Then we use that as our reference point ok ?

originally posted by: MasterKaman
a reply to: ketsuko

Is the runners assz not big enough for you ? Are u all such bad shots ?

Actually, the answer to this is probably "yes".

originally posted by: MasterKaman
Even a single bullet pinging off the sidewalk will make 60% freeze with hands up.

And where exactly - or in who exactly - is that bullet going to end up?

Regardless, shooting to wound is always going to be a very bad idea. Go back to the Coates video. The first shot was by the bad guy and was stopped by the vest. The next set of shots were from the trooper, five of which hit and seriously wounded the bad guy. THEN, and only then, did the attacker fire the shot that struck the officer and resulted in his death. In fact, even after being shot, the officer was still able to move enough to get to the other side of the car before becoming incapacitated.

So, your guy who got shot in the ass is still a deadly threat - except now you've also pissed him off.

People are surprisingly hard to kill. Motivated people are surprisingly hard to stop. Playing silly-buggers with arse-shots only increases the risk to everyone around, including the officer. Go for centre of mass, nothing else.

An earlier poster was absolutely correct that the real issue is how fast people seem to be moving through the continuum of force to reach the "lethal force" stage. Once you get to the stage of shooting someone, however, don't half-ass the job. Pun intended!

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: MasterKaman

Forrest Gump ran just fine after being shot in the buttocks.

And that's relevant, since we're using Hollywood shooting as a reference point in this thread.

Perfect use of logic.

Though those not familiar with fire arms can't understand your point.

a reply to: MasterKaman

I think it's a lack of accountability and a lack of training. Somewhere in their training, they have been lead to believe they are above the law and don't need to think they will be held accountable before shooting a suspect. They believe the law will back them 100%. The blue code of silence should be subject to repercussions and there should be a system where honest police officers can anomalously give statements against police who abuse their authority.

You would think with all eyes focused on police shootings lately, these police officers would "think" before reacting. Unfortunately, with some police officers, it still hasn't sunk in.

originally posted by: occrest

why do Police "have" to shoot to KILL every time ??

Dead men can't sue

But their families can

originally posted by: MasterKaman
a reply to: Shamrock6

Ok shamrock let's test your theory. You run and I'll shoot near your feet, with promise that the second shot will be in your Assz. Then we use that as our reference point ok ?

Been there, done that. Won that one. What else ya got?

originally posted by: johnwick

Though those not familiar with fire arms can't understand your point.

You can certainly tell who has been taught any rules of firearms safety. Seriously, shooting into the ground near the aggressor's feet?

In the UK, some ranges won't let you shoot after heavy rainfall if there are puddles of water between you and the target, because of the risk of ricochet if you ND (I follow the theory that there's no such thing as an Accidental Discharge, only ever a Negligent Discharge) before the firearm is brought level with the target. That's in a strictly controlled environment with a massive berm to capture stray rounds. Bouncing bullets off solid surfaces in a populated area as a warning shot? Absolutely ridiculous.

Gee, I don't know....

According to a release from the Bowling Green post, the trooper was traveling northbound on I-75 near State Rt. 582 around 12:30 Saturday night.

As the trooper passed another vehicle, a firearm was discharged, striking the patrol car in the left front quarter panel. The vehicle was rendered disabled.

The suspect vehicle proceeded to accelerate at a high rate of speed, and tried to exit at SR 582. The suspect lost control of the vehicle, and struck a concrete barrier on the exit ramp. The ramp is currently closed for construction.

link

a reply to: [post=19703691]WeRpeons[/post

The first piece of sensible thoughts in this thread full of macho trainee killers ! Please ALL understand there are TWO psychological Stages an officer should (and usually does) go thru (1) the THREAT and minor use of weapons, such as shots around feet. Then if that doesn't work, or the crim draws his own gun, only THEN (2) should an officer fire in a more life endangering way. If the crim dies, too bad, he deserved it. But all too often I've seen vids where the police blow the heads off almost immediately and unnecessarily. In Britain I can only think of 2 examples when "anti-terrorist" police (inspired by America of course) ran onto a metro train and shot the wrong person. But the chief clamped down on that type of over-enthusiasm. We have extra trained Armed Response Units always ready to go when called in. But most English crooks would give up at the sight of them. The bigger danger nowadays is immigrants from countries that are used to civil wars and kill and run.

a reply to: MasterKamanYou clearly have no experience in the field of firearms use, especially under stress. The ability to put well placed shots into non vital areas that are smaller and mobile [ legs, arms, etc ] is extremely limited, and the use of a firearm under these conditions is warranted by the adversarial ability to kill you. This is not a time to test your fine motor skills. The application of lethal or deadly force is just that, it is used to end a deadly attack on yourself or others. The sooner that is accomplished, the better. Decades of research into the matter exists, why not try and expand your outlook on this matter before delving into matters that can only expose your limited knowledge?

Yay another person from the UK pretending to know something about guns because they watch movies... these threads are always fun.

It's called "deadly force", not "wounding force" or "scaring force."

Police officers have different levels of force. Their hands, baton (if they carry one), pepper spray (if they carry it), and taser are all incremental levels of force that are used to subdue a person in a situation that doesn't warrant deadly force.

As soon as the situation escalates to a point where deadly force is justified, it's time for bullets to hit vital organs to stop the threat. When a gun is used, it should be used when the threat justifies killing the attacker. Period.

Since you suggest shooting in the leg, you've apparently never heard of the femoral artery. You also seemingly have no clue what happens when a bullet hits a living thing... if you shoot someone in the ass, the bullet can still kill or paralyze them.

If an officer shoots to wound someone, he's admitting is that he didn't have justification for using deadly force. If he actually stood before a grand jury and said "well, I didn't think the situation warranted a shot to the chest but I figured I'd shoot him in the leg to stop him", that officer would be guilty of attempted murder because he shot someone with the foreknowledge that they didn't present a legitimate threat.

Just because you don't understand why it's done a certain way, doesn't mean it's not perfectly logical. Wrongful shootings aside, a firearm should never be used unless killing is justified.

originally posted by: MasterKaman
a reply to: mysterioustranger

Can u not see that a runners assz is just as big as his back ?

I'm not sure if this was in jest, but shooting someone in the butt? As a non-lethal option, not really. Think about it, depending on angle you've got the femoral artery, intestines, lower spine, genitals. If you shoot someone in the butt with a 45ACP and paint the wall behind them with upper and lower intestines, feces, urine, hip and/or pelvic bone, genital bits, and arteries I think you'll realize thats not a real non-lethal shot.

originally posted by: MasterKaman

originally posted by: Reallyfolks


>> Basics of shooting, always aim center mass.

Indicative of PANIC lack of thought, LACK of skill, and LACK of training. in a war ok, on the streets mostly not ok.

Ever been to a gun training class?, military, police academy? Two out of three here, family in the othet, that is the training, to say lack of training is funny, just the opposite. Lack of skill or thought? Won't go into details but those two statements show lack of understanding or reasoning. You should really actually understand what you are talking about.

originally posted by: MasterKaman

The first piece of sensible thoughts in this thread full of macho trainee killers !

You mean a thread full of people who have a clue what they're talking about?

Police have tools they employ in situations where there isn't an immediate threat of death... their sidearm is not one of those tools.

[post=19703760]Shamrock6[/post

>>Been there, done that. Won that one. What else ya got?

** so u already got an extra hole in your assz, and u use that for talking out of ? Haha couldn't resist . Actually I was picked up in Alabama once and "escorted to the county line" apparently I "looked dangerous" even tho they couldn't say why. Anyway Britain is a much safer place to get arrested, not much chance of getting killed by police. In fact they won't even rough handle if you are cooperative. But SO MANY American vids I see paranoid "citizens" standing there shrieking abuse about their rights, that I'm not surprised the LEO tasers them (or worse). Remember police are HUMANS and nobody wants another shrieking in your face.