A shot to the knee/foot you know is something you could probably justify and should render the assailant unable to cause anyone much harm. Just don't shoot in lethal places, pretty simple.
Nooo. It's far from simple. In fact firearms trainer and championship shooter Ron Avery calls it impossible.
Quote:
“Hitting an arm or a leg on a moving suspect with surgical precision will be virtually impossible,” Avery asserts. “I could probably count on one hand the individuals who can make that kind of shot under the pressure of their life on the line. Expecting that level of performance by police officers on an agency-wide basis is ludicrous.”
Even if it were, you are apparently unaware of the possible damage from being shot in the leg:
Quote:
“Legs tend initially to move slower than arms and to maintain more static positions. However, areas of the lower trunk and upper thigh are rich with vascularity. A suspect who’s hit there can bleed out in seconds if one of the major arteries is severed, so again shooting just to wound may not result in just wounding.
Further, this video demonstrate how quickly a suspect equipped with a knife can cover ground.
Quote:
An officer’s survival instinct may exert an overpowering influence on target selection. “I don’t care how good a shot you are,” says Avery, “if your life is threatened you’re going to go for the surer thing first and worry about your assailant’s life being saved second. If a guy is running at me with a blade, the last thing I’m going to be thinking is ‘I’m going to shoot him in the arm.’” Hence, shooting for center mass may become a psychological default.
A shot to the knee/foot you know is something you could probably justify and should render the assailant unable to cause anyone much harm. Just don't shoot in lethal places, pretty simple.
"pretty simple"? No it's not. It's a guaranteed way to get yourself and possibly others killed. This isn't a video game where you point a cursor, shoot and the enemy drops. In real life you aim for center mass because it is the part of the body that is the biggest, and its that part that is moving the least. It's also the part of the body that is least likely to have a round miss it and possibly hit someone behind the target. Movies and video games have produced a very unrealistic expectation of the realities of firing a gun.
Edit: (Thanks Acey, you posted a far more detailed version of what I was attempting to say.)
Last edited by Roast Beef; 09-18-2016 at 01:24 AM.
A shot to the knee/foot you know is something you could probably justify and should render the assailant unable to cause anyone much harm. Just don't shoot in lethal places, pretty simple.
Spoken like a person who's only exposure to guns is through the lens of Hollywood movies.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to The Yen Man For This Useful Post:
A shot to the knee/foot you know is something you could probably justify and should render the assailant unable to cause anyone much harm. Just don't shoot in lethal places, pretty simple.
Sorry this is going to sound insulting, but this is just plain ignorance of how a fire arm like a pistol works, and its a Hollywood movie fantasy.
Pistols aren't laser pistols with no recoil, there are a billion different factors that affect the accuracy of a pistol shot.
Heart rate, stance, grip, breathing patterns, the recoil of the weapon when fired, sweat in your eyes from stress or exertion, whether you squeeze the trigger or slap it, whether the pistol is clean or not, a cut on your hand. Heck even powering out a fear fart when firing will cause a miss.
This isn't some static target with a leg that's two feet across. Or a target that maybe moves in a predictable pattern.
Pistols aren't the most accurate weapons in the world, anything outside of 10 yards and things can get iffy.
I've shot everything from a .22 pistol to a 9 mil to a magnum to a desert eagle, and frankly I wouldn't trust them all that much in a stressful situation.
On a range its easy, you have time to get into a good stance, you have time to draw in that deep breath, let half of it out and then exhale while you squeeze the trigger. You have time to calm down your heart rate and ensure perfect technique.
But when your dealing with some idiot with a weapon you aim at the largest part of the body that basically blacks out your site and you squeeze the trigger and probably more then once to be sure.
People need to stop watching movies where people are hitting arms or legs or heads or shooting some guy off of a three story building from 100 yards away.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to CaptainCrunch For This Useful Post:
__________________ I am in love with Montana. For other states I have admiration, respect, recognition, even some affection, but with Montana it is love." - John Steinbeck
Only if that thread constantly devolves into a banal "shoot first" argument with YouTube links posted from "MUH GUNS 'MURICA" accounts every 20 posts as well.
A shot to the knee/foot you know is something you could probably justify and should render the assailant unable to cause anyone much harm. Just don't shoot in lethal places, pretty simple.
After a shot to the knee/foot/arm, a subject can still use whatever weapon the have in their hand. Not to mention how difficult it would be to hit a target that small, that is moving, while you're amped up on adrenaline.
Police are trained to shoot center of mass. Presents the largest surface area of the body and plenty of vital areas that would stop an attacker.
EDIT. See a few people beat me to it.
Last edited by llwhiteoutll; 09-18-2016 at 08:50 AM.
I don't have all the details but I speculate that the internal investigation will conclude that the officer failed to follow procedure by not immediately neutralizing the threat with his firearm.
I don't have all the details but I speculate that the internal investigation will conclude that the officer failed to follow procedure by not immediately neutralizing the threat with his firearm.
Hopefully the officers involved can come away with this with no permanent damage. What I find crazy is that
Quote:
Someone struck by a Taser experiences over-stimulation of sensory nerves and motor nerves, resulting in strong involuntary muscle contractions.
I'm by no means a taser expert yet some people are able to be unaffected by it like this guy. If it's a clean shot at the suspect, how is that even possible?
And that video by Acey hits the nail on the head. It is LITERALLY a split second decision when an officer has to decide to use their firearm. Not very simple.
I'm by no means a taser expert yet some people are able to be unaffected by it like this guy. If it's a clean shot at the suspect, how is that even possible?
People, situation, circumstances and luck are all different. Most people jumping out of plane without a 'chute or hit by a 100 km/hr car wouldn't survive. But there is always the fringe case where the usual expected resolution doesn't happen.
I don't think it always works. Don't both darts need to be attached to the body or clothing to comere the circuit? Or they get dislodged somehow.
__________________
But living an honest life - for that you need the truth. That's the other thing I learned that day, that the truth, however shocking or uncomfortable, leads to liberation and dignity. -Ricky Gervais
He is now severely injured because he didn't initially shoot him, but people would be irate if he had shot him prior to attempting the taser. Split second decisions... and the officer loses either way.
I've had bad experiences with police officers; many of my friends have had worse experiences with police officers. I'm far from a police apologist, but if you're charging at an officer, weapon in hand, actively trying to injure or kill them, I'm not going to blame the cop if you end up dead.
I could understand if it was a set of nail clippers, but we're talking about a machete here.
I've had bad experiences with police officers; many of my friends have had worse experiences with police officers. I'm far from a police apologist, but if you're charging at an officer, weapon in hand, actively trying to injure or kill them, I'm not going to blame the cop if you end up dead.
I could understand if it was a set of nail clippers, but we're talking about a machete here.
This is true.
There are plenty of instances to get upset about excessive force and what some would consider downright murder in the case of police, but this would not be one of them had he fired at him initially and killed him. I don't think anyone would have had a problem with it. They have those weapons for a reason. That would be a lot different than officers shooting people as they run away, or are lying on the ground.
There are plenty of instances to get upset about excessive force and what some would consider downright murder in the case of police, but this would not be one of them had he fired at him initially and killed him. I don't think anyone would have had a problem with it. They have those weapons for a reason. That would be a lot different than officers shooting people as they run away, or are lying on the ground.
The weapon was not initially in his hand. So if you just immediately shoot that guy, if there are witnesses to the fact that he did not have a weapon in his hand at the time he was shot the public reaction is going to be somewhat negative. I'm not saying it should be, but that's how it is... the reaction would be somewhere between shooting somebody completely unarmed and shooting somebody waving a gun around.
Well yeah, if there are witnesses to the fact that he did not have a weapon in his hand then of course there is going to be a negative reaction. Shooting unarmed people tends to raise hackles.
A cop shooting a guy who is attacking him with a machete isn't going to be controversial. I know it's fun to say that all those goddamn PC lefties want to sing Kumbaya and persecute our heroes in blue, but it doesn't apply here.
Ahh missed that he drew his weapon after the tasering and struggle my bad. Yeah, it's a touchy subject. In this case, the officer showed great bravery and restraint.
Ahh missed that he drew his weapon after the tasering and struggle my bad. Yeah, it's a touchy subject. In this case, the officer showed great bravery and restraint.
Where was he hiding that gigantic weapon?
I am not blaming the officer here at all. Yet where does one hide a weapon of that size? If the officer had seen the machete prior I think he should have pulled out his firearm first and not the taser!
IF! One would truly have to be there as a witness before making assumptions.
Man attacks cop with a machete, cop shoots man! I got no issues with this at all.
