I don’t get the impression they were exactly going out of their way to find one though.
14 Likes
It sadly doesn’t seem like it. Hell, I’ve seen videos where cops talk people out of guns by putting theirs away, and sitting down near them. Assuming that this was “suicide by cop” (which it certainly sounds like), these cops gave him exactly what he wanted.
Shit, even if the multitool blade was out, I’d bet that two cops could effectively “surround” the guy and wrestle the knife away with minimal risk (assuming use of tonfa/batons to control knife distance/knife arm).
But you know, if what you train in is how to shoot “perps” that’s what you’re going to do in a stress situation.
If you want to watch a video where things end a little better, and show that there are alternatives (and yeah, I get not the same situation, but there are applicable lessons to learn):
17 Likes
8 Likes
That’s not one of the services police officers are supposed to provide.
We need more cops trained in deescalation.
21 Likes
weird eh? You’d think that for a group of people who often have to deal with violent stress situations, there’d be an F of a lot of deescalation training… Actually, you’d assume that would be the primary training, with the “resolve it with potentially fatal violence” taught as a last resort, and one that if you have to resort to it, you’ve already failed your primary duty, but that’s just me woolgathering…
19 Likes
I know you have a point, but I’d still like to see some way of disarming people in situations like this short of killing them. Even if a gun is the only weapon at hand.
And while it’s of course true that shooting someone in the leg or wherever can be fatal, it’s far less likely than, say, shooting them in the heart.
The point is that if you need not to kill them, then the gun option is off the table. Special target shots are difficult, and any shot places bystanders at risk.
In cases like this one where a gun is not the right option, the thought/training has got to be "how to we separate this guy from the knife without killing him (i.e. shooting him/using our guns at all).
And I say all this not as someone who is totally against guns, but as someone who has trained with guns, and owns them. They’re good for one thing, and that’s hitting something with a super high energy chunk of metal. That’s about it. Whether it’s a target or a person, the #1 rule is not to point a gun at anything you do not intend to destroy. So… if the idea is to try to defuse the situation and potentially save this guy/stop the threat, yeah, gun’s off the table. These guys need to learn that just because you have it, doesn’t mean you have to use it.
18 Likes
I get your point, I just disagree with it, and I think this incident is a good illustration of why.
A shot to the knee would have been pretty easy at this range. And if he missed, he or another cop could always go for the second shot.
And there’s multiple officers involved, it would be easy enough to formulate a training routine where one cops goes for the non lethal shot, and a second cop follows up with a lethal shot if necessary.
Here’s an interesting link with a bit more about shooting to wound (not some site I usually go to, but googled):
http://www.forcescience.org/fsnews/40.html
I think we’ll have to agree to disagree on this one. I’m of the mindset that the gun shouldn’t come in to play at all unless it’s a “deadly force required” situation, and am just going to leave it at that.
11 Likes
All fair enough. But taking this specific incident into account, what exactly do you think the cop should have done? For the sake of argument, lets assume that they didn’t have pepper spray. And lets assume that the cops sincerely thought the tool was a knife. You think shooting to kill was reasonable here?
Agreed; there’s never a guarantee that the shot will hit the intended target so any time a weapon is fired, there’s a possibility of collateral damage.
13 Likes
Ding-ding-ding-ding, I agree 100%. Their job is to take the risk. So take the risk, dammit.
17 Likes
There’s a lot of other options long before a gun comes out that the cops didn’t use. For instance, talking for awhile, billy club, thrown objects, calling in backup, backing up one step for every step the person advances.
There are ways to disarm people barehanded. You’d think a cop should be trained how to do that. And should lose their job and pension for treating a gun like it’s a compliance device.
The only reason for a cop to carry a gun is to deal with life threatening situations. I’ve been told this in exactly those words by numerous police officers. Being out of reach of someone who may or may not have a knife is in no way life threatening.
15 Likes
No, you cannae compare like for like regarding the firearm situation i s’pose but a real knife wielding attacker with an intent to harm…
8 Likes
This topic is temporarily closed for 4 hours due to a large number of community flags.
I’ve thoroughly cleaned up this topic, removing unnecessary derailing and general rudeness. Posts attacking other users are going to be eaten. Assume good faith on the part of those posting, or flag them if you believe otherwise.
Thanks.
8 Likes
I’ll miss Dwight
This training exists because quite simply it’s far more difficult (and dangerous for bystanders) to shoot at a limb versus center mass. Even at close range this is hard to pull off - especially with a moving target.
4 Likes
There are 1.1 guns per capita in the US.
Highest in the world.
More than just the cops need disarmed.
3 Likes
