View Full Version : Dash Cam Video: Solon, OH Police Shootout
Apricotshot
06-05-13, 06:55
http://www.lawofficer.com/video/news/dash-cam-video-solon-oh-police
Smokes the guy through the windshield.
sandman99and9
06-05-13, 07:11
Good shoot.
S.M.
ClearedHot
06-05-13, 07:39
Gave him a few extra for good measure.
It's good to see the bad guys get what they deser:Dve
montanadave
06-05-13, 08:03
So, did I see that correctly? The one officer was hit on his badge and saved by his vest? Yowzer!
Glad the officers went home that night. And yet another reason I don't think we pay folks near enough to walk up on cars pulled over along dark roads.
Without reading the description you can tell there was a hit to the CNS because that guy went down hard and fast! The Police officer was pretty lucky to get away from this one. Luckily just another gang banger with no firearms training.
Nice shoot.
Making the world a better place one less dirtbag at a time.
Let the air out of that Shit Stain! :D
Good to know the officer is alright.
Boom, Headshot!
Nothing like a well-ventilated bad guy. It is definitely interesting to see the close up effects of a CNS hit. The perp hit the hood immediately, game over.
VooDoo6Actual
06-05-13, 13:52
Outstanding Police work.
Good shoot & DRT.
That officer was far more relaxed & easier on the suspect than I would have been.
My hats off to that LEO.
Good shoot. Glad the good guys made if home safe, albeit with stained undies I bet. Yikes.
Great Shoot and shooting from behind the wheel needs to be incorporated across the board.
Looked as though the cop from Car 2 was the one who really hammered the cockroach. :confused:
Looked as though the cop from Car 2 was the one who really hammered the cockroach. :confused:
Negative...Officer 2 did not get a shot off
Negative...Officer 2 did not get a shot off
Wow. I guess that makes sense since the shooting started the second car 1 pulled up. I guess scumbag just saw the second car and that's what drew his attention and fire to the side.
theblackknight
06-05-13, 15:54
I would love to paypal some $$ to this guy's favorite pub.
Good shoot. Glad the LEO was okay, taking a bullet to the badge- would make poopy pants for most...
Seeing videos like this always makes me think about how fast a shooting can really go down and how quickly one must react in defense to have a good chance at survival.
Gonna go work on my draw times and reaction times at the range this weekend...
So, did I see that correctly? The one officer was hit on his badge and saved by his vest? Yowzer!
Glad the officers went home that night. And yet another reason I don't think we pay folks near enough to walk up on cars pulled over along dark roads.
sucks he got hit
Great outcome.
I noticed some issues tactically speaking.
NeoNeanderthal
06-05-13, 16:44
Officer Davis smoked that ass clown. Talk about shot placement.
Any reasonable person would have no issues with the shooting depicted in the video.
Great outcome.
I noticed some issues tactically speaking.
let the Monday morning qbing begin?
Reality. Shit can go bad really fast on a traffic stop.
Glad none of the good guys were killed. This is why I get a little adrenaline rush every time I stop a vehicle.....you never know who is sitting in that car, or what their intentions are..
PA PATRIOT
06-05-13, 18:10
The officer was very lucky that he was not killed do to tactical errors on his part but Adrenalin will sometimes inhibit a person from thinking ahead to deal with the "what ifs" and allows the mind to center only on a single goal. (Basically Fight or Flight)
Being a L/E and a tactic's trainer it is not criticism to critique a critical incident and learn from its short comings. Its a vital training tool used in police academies all over the country as others can learn from the mistakes we make.
Now on the quick look it appears the main and obvious goal of the officer was to prevent the escape of the subject and this single objective over all others is the reason he closed the distance to point blank as to attempt to pin the drivers door shut so the driver could not fee on foot.
Now earlier the officer was heard stating that there was multiple weapons inside the vehicle but did not state what type or were they were located. Once the chase was on the officer only focused on a single task which was to capture the subject. All other concerns (Weapons/Safety) and tactical training were suppressed most likely from a dump of adrenalin into his system. This is why many times a officer can not recall the facts of a shooting until they had a chance to claim down and allow the body chemistry to return to normal.
With more experience and training the officer may have been better able to handle the influences of his adrenalin dump and made different choices. So in closing I must also offer that the above sounds all fine and dandy but is only based on a bunch of assumptions on my part and the simple explication could be is that the officer had a simple lack of experience or maybe even common sense which lead to what we saw on the video but the only person who really knows the truth is not here.
Finial score,
Good Guys +1
Bad Guy 0
And give God a assist on this one.
SeriousStudent
06-05-13, 18:20
I am so very relieved the officer went home safely.
I hope the lessons are studied and absorbed, to reduce the risk to his fellow officers.
SWATcop556
06-05-13, 18:31
Now earlier the officer was heard stating that there was multiple weapons inside the vehicle but did not state what type or were they were located.
He told his partner that there were numerous "weapons cites" refering to his criminal history compared to his young age. No mention of actual weapons in the vehicle.
PA PATRIOT
06-05-13, 18:38
He told his partner that there were numerous "weapons cites" referring to his criminal history compared to his young age. No mention of actual weapons in the vehicle.
My error, the video/audio was stuttering on my machine.
SWATcop556
06-05-13, 18:44
My error, the video/audio was stuttering on my machine.
No worries. I was just clarifying.
Voodoo_Man
06-05-13, 19:33
I am so very relieved the officer went home safely.
I hope the lessons are studied and absorbed, to reduce the risk to his fellow officers.
+1
Watching it was really painful and several times I started screaming at my monitor.
We desk rookies for some of the stuff he did around here.
The_War_Wagon
06-06-13, 06:04
Don't know if he had his seatbelt on, giving how fast events unfolded and how short the chase was, but he cleared leather amazingly well, from a SEATED position in a cruiser full of console and gear beside him! :eek:
SWATcop556
06-06-13, 07:45
Don't know if he had his seatbelt on, giving how fast events unfolded and how short the chase was, but he cleared leather amazingly well, from a SEATED position in a cruiser full of console and gear beside him! :eek:
If officers are not training to do this then they are behind the curve. Shooting from inside a vehicle in a seated position through glass is eye opening to say the least. It's also pretty wild how a bullet may or may not be affected by auto glass.
Alpha Sierra
06-06-13, 07:51
That officer was far more relaxed & easier on the suspect than I would have been.
Wondering what that means ^
Voodoo_Man
06-06-13, 07:57
Wondering what that means ^
If I'm tracking, there were certain audible and visual cues that would have escalated the contact instantly.
The officer was very lucky that he was not killed do to tactical errors on his part but Adrenalin will sometimes inhibit a person from thinking ahead to deal with the "what ifs" and allows the mind to center only on a single goal. (Basically Fight or Flight)
Being a L/E and a tactic's trainer it is not criticism to critique a critical incident and learn from its short comings. Its a vital training tool used in police academies all over the country as others can learn from the mistakes we make.
Now on the quick look it appears the main and obvious goal of the officer was to prevent the escape of the subject and this single objective over all others is the reason he closed the distance to point blank as to attempt to pin the drivers door shut so the driver could not fee on foot.
Now earlier the officer was heard stating that there was multiple weapons inside the vehicle but did not state what type or were they were located. Once the chase was on the officer only focused on a single task which was to capture the subject. All other concerns (Weapons/Safety) and tactical training were suppressed most likely from a dump of adrenalin into his system. This is why many times a officer can not recall the facts of a shooting until they had a chance to claim down and allow the body chemistry to return to normal.
With more experience and training the officer may have been better able to handle the influences of his adrenalin dump and made different choices. So in closing I must also offer that the above sounds all fine and dandy but is only based on a bunch of assumptions on my part and the simple explication could be is that the officer had a simple lack of experience or maybe even common sense which lead to what we saw on the video but the only person who really knows the truth is not here.
Finial score,
Good Guys +1
Bad Guy 0
And give God a assist on this one.
I don't agree with posting critical incident analysis and aar on an open forum. General impression, sure. But that's about it. All I see coming out of your post is a bunch of non le Monday morning quarterbacks who have never been in a gunfight but "know" what should have been done.
I agree with several of your points and have a couple thoughts of my own but this doesn't seem like the place to have that discussion.
The officer was hit twice, stayed in the fight and won. Sure he fought from an unnecessary position of disadvantage but at least the man had the mindset to win the fight.
The officer was hit twice, stayed in the fight and won. Sure he fought from an unnecessary position of disadvantage but at least the man had the mindset to win the fight.
Absolutely!
If officers are not training to do this then they are behind the curve. Shooting from inside a vehicle in a seated position through glass is eye opening to say the least. It's also pretty wild how a bullet may or may not be affected by auto glass.
Agreed! The effect of shooting from inside a vehicle can be more significant than that of shooting into a vehicle (windshield) since there is a greater distance the bullet must travel after it's trajectory has been shifted. Duty ammo should be used for this kind of training and most pd's can get access to windshields and vehicles (junk yards are a source). While the windshield's geometry and shape are variable, your duty ammo should not be. Hopefully officers have the chance to shoot into and out of multiple vehicles.
Fwiw, a FBI buddy of mine told me that vehicle testing is a big part of FBI bullet selection. He demoed with his pistol both into and out of a vehicle and the results were pretty damn good. Shooting out, the impacts were only slightly off (less than 3 inches at 7 yards compared to my 9 inches off) and in the opposite direction of what you would expect.
But yeah, crucial training. Of course using your vehicle as a weapon is also important to ingrain in the mindset. Nothing gets you inside a bad guys ooda loop quite like running his ass over (assumed deadly force incident)!
The pics looked like the Cop shot a pretty nice bug hole throught he window to where the rounds were about flying free to the asswipe at the end there.
PA PATRIOT
06-06-13, 09:06
I don't agree with posting critical incident analysis and aar on an open forum. General impression, sure. But that's about it. All I see coming out of your post is a bunch of non le Monday morning quarterbacks who have never been in a gunfight but "know" what should have been done.
"All I see coming out of your post is a bunch of non le Monday morning quarterbacks who have never been in a gunfight but "know" what should have been done"
The video/event under discussion was released for the public to view so discussion or critiquing the event is not L/E sensitive and is open to public scrutiny. Other then my remarks of why the officer may have closed the distance to point blank on the subject nothing else has been discussed which gives non L/E's any reason to Monday morning quarterback the event negatively.
Actually my comments about a possible adrenaline dump causing the officer to do things outside his normal tactical training also holds true for a civilian who maybe involved in a gun fight.
The L/E community can not expect restricted discussion on any OIS made public for civilian consumption.
The video/event under discussion was released for the public to view so discussion or critiquing the event is not L/E sensitive and is open to public scrutiny. Other then my remarks of why the officer may have closed the distance to point blank on the subject nothing else has been discussed which gives non L/E's any reason to Monday morning quarterback the event negatively.
Actually my comments about a possible adrenaline dump causing the officer to do things outside his normal tactical training also holds true for a civilian who maybe involved in a gun fight.
The L/E community can not expect restricted discussion on any OIS made public for civilian consumption.
I disagree. Of course there is the issue of opsec and your post did dwell into tactics for a second but that is not my overriding concern. Analyzing an ois by an leo on an open forum can seem like straight up criticism to some non le/mil. While the number of folks like that are in the minority on this forum, they are a loud minority. On other websites, the disrespect flows. Just my opinion, but an ois should never be broken down on an open forum (especially an officer down) Just because a video makes it to the open source doesn't mean you have to break it down and analyze it on an open forum. General impressions and the like are fine. And again, just my opinion.
As for combat mindset, there are great reads out there (I suggest grossman to start with). You're doing no better than anyone else here when you start speculating about "possibilities." Yes, I would agree it is a high probability that he had adrenaline (and norepinephrine and epinephrine) coursing through his system. But having that "dump" is not the whole story (as you state). Experience, visualization, experience, traijing, fitness, etc... all have an effect in how well you can handle those chemicals. Without knowing more about the officer and his experience, I would not start drawing conclusions about his lack of training and experience. You yourself admit that we don't know.
For the record, I agree with several things you stated. I would be interested to know why the officer did what he did. I wasn't there and neither were you. Sometimes it's hard to draw accurate conclusions from a video without backstory and an aar. Again, I just don't believe that it is something dudes on the job should be breaking down on an open forum. The officer won the fight. There will be plenty of opportunity to break down and analyze the incident in an appropriate setting once the necessary information is available.
Not picking a fight with you. I generally tend to agree with you on the forum. I mean no disrespect.
Here is the Wilmington, Ohio shootout from 97. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bl3MgW8y0jo
Hopefully Officer Davis recovers from his injuries and gains full use of his left arm again. There may have been mistakes made prior to the lead flying but he kept a cool head under pressure and delivered well placed shots to the bad guy saving both officer's lives.
http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1362588.1370358443!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_635/dashcam5n-7-web.jpg
Alpha Sierra
06-06-13, 10:22
I don't agree with posting critical incident analysis and aar on an open forum.
Everything police does when a life is taken should be open to public scrutiny. EVERYTHING.
And it doesn't matter whose life was taken or why.
Everything police does when a life is taken should be open to public scrutiny. EVERYTHING.
And it doesn't matter whose life was taken or why.
You completely missed the point. You missed the point by miles so this is possibly a waste of breath but I'll try anyway. Yes, public scrutiny is expected. Also, an unbiased investigation, and thus transparent, must occur. Unless there is a good reason to protect information, it should be available to the open source.
The discussion was regarding leo's on an open forum breaking down and analyzing these videos (with or without sufficient information). Anything concerning opsec should not be discussed in an open forum and everyone is roughly on the same page with that.
My point, and the point of contention, is that leo's should not break down ois's on an open forum even when opsec is not concerned (this is my opinion). This is because I believe there are people waiting on the sidelines to criticize le actions and an leo offering criticism that is constructive to fellow officers/other folks in harms way, can easily come across as negative criticism and open the floodgates. Not so much an issue on this site, although your tone gives me pause, but on many other corners of the web, jackasses are just waiting to pounce on le/mil/psd/etc... Why give them fuel.
My other criticism was that it would be wise to discuss certain elements once more information is available (and not on an open forum). Of course there is plenty that could be discussed just from watching the video but having a more complete aar and interviews could fill in gaps. This is also my opinion.
There are a number of glaring issues in this video but I see no reason to discuss them with you or anyone else on an open forum. All that needs to be said is good job staying in the fight and hopefully lessons will be learned.
So I'm not sure where your comment derives from but if you read my comments a bit more carefully, you'll see tht I wasn't advocating for whatever you thought I was.
Bullet deflection when shooting out of a vehicle windshield can vary from "a few inches" to several feet depending primarily on the angle of the windshield but also on the angle of the gun to the windshield, caliber, bullet construction, and previous windshield damage.
The more vertical the windshield is, the less deflection you will generally see. I've fired rounds (9mm 124gr M882 and 124gr Gold Dot) out of SUV windsheilds and seen no noticeable deflection when engaging a target at the front bumper. I've fired the same rounds out of a sedan with a very sloped windshield and had several feet of upward deflection at the front bumper--- rounds aimed at the bottom of the IPSC target were skimming the top of the head. Bullets fired out of windsheilds will follow the angle of the glass--- ie present their noses flat to the surface of the glass before penetrating out. The more slope, the more the bullet turns and deflects upward.
Since we can't really test all of our windshields before use and the angular deflection increases dramatically with distance (think sight misalignment vs target wobble) the best way to handle shooting outward through a windshield is to fire several rounds through the same area with the idea that the first few rounds break out a damaged zone/hole for your subsequent rounds to pass through.
None of this applies to side or rear vehicle glass because it causes no measurable deflection. The windshield is the only tough glass on non-armored vehicles.
Agreed for the most part. Gold dots have not been the best performers with windshield on my experience. The angle of the gun shouldn't be too much of an issue unless you are very low and/or lateral to the windshield (shooting in). This increases deflection and chances of a skip. I like to test standing from a few distances. The variance shooting in with my ammo isn't too much doing so. The logic is that realistically, I will likely be shooting from this position or hopefully an elevated position (reducing deflection). Of course if funny stuff happens and you are shooting at nasty angles, it is good to keep in mind what to expect.
Shooting out of a vehicle, a 14.5" carbine is great. You can shoot once and then push the barrel through. With a pistol, you can do well by even taking one shot and then putting the gun up to the hole (not pushed in since you will induce a malfunction). It looks like the officer did a good job of putting multiple holes through the gap he created. Good stuff! Invaluable training and you're right, there are so many different vehicles out there, you can not test everyone.
My general strategy shooting out of a vehicle is to punch the hole to shoot out of (best strategy given the deflection properties of shooting out through a windshield) but I am reasonably confident as to the deflection to expect over various ranges so I can hopefully make that first round hit on the day.
As for shooting in, I just plan to shoot a couple inches above my intended target. Different vehicles give different targets of opportunity. Along with your positioning, I think it just comes down to shoot the threat and hopefully condition your mind to shoot a few inches higher through training and visualization.
Anyone have different techniques?
Alpha Sierra
06-06-13, 11:46
The discussion was regarding leo's on an open forum breaking down and analyzing these videos (with or without sufficient information). Anything concerning opsec should not be discussed in an open forum and everyone is roughly on the same page with that.
I know what the discussion is about. I also know what OPSEC means. I served long enough in the .mil, in operational roles, to know exactly what it is and what it is not. And there is no way you or anyone else is going to justify that there is any opsec reason to prevent or avoid the discussion of an incident that happened in public and is on video for all the world to see.
Use of opsec in police matters needs to be strictly limited to ongoing criminal investigations. I find your desire to cloak discussion of this OIS under "opsec" disturbing to say the least. And makes one wonder what else you would like to hide from public view and scrutiny.
My point, and the point of contention, is that leo's should not break down ois's on an open forum even when opsec is not concerned (this is my opinion). This is because I believe there are people waiting on the sidelines to criticize le actions and an leo offering criticism that is constructive to fellow officers/other folks in harms way, can easily come across as negative criticism and open the floodgates. Not so much an issue on this site, although your tone gives me pause,
That's part and parcel of your job, the way I and many others see it. Since you operate in a democratic republic, you'll just have to grow a thicker skin.
I know what the discussion is about. I also know what OPSEC means. I served long enough in the .mil, in operational roles, to know exactly what it is and what it is not. And there is no way you or anyone else is going to justify that there is any opsec reason to prevent or avoid the discussion of an incident that happened in public and is on video for all the world to see.
Use of opsec in police matters needs to be strictly limited to ongoing criminal investigations. I find your desire to cloak discussion of this OIS under "opsec" disturbing to say the least. And makes one wonder what else you would like to hide from public view and scrutiny.
That's part and parcel of your job, the way I and many others see it. Since you operate in a democratic republic, you'll just have to grow a thicker skin.
Figured you were one of those. I am not going to cure your ignorance over a forum so let me just say a few words. In le, opsec is extremely important. Making judgements without any knowledge makes your opinion useless. I can't even begin to explain all of the areas that bad guys would love to know TTP's so that try can counter. If you don't know what you're talking about, sometimes it is best to remain silent.
Take a deep breath and calm down. You have no business being in the discussion on which tactics could have been improved or what kind of an approach would have been more appropriate, etc... The video was made public, that doesn't mean an leo is required to walk you through their tactics.
As I try and disclose, I am going into le and so I don't comment on specific le issues since an academy is just that, academic. But I've been around for a while and opsec violations have gotten friends killed in my past. The issue is very near and dear to me. Whether unnecessarily informing an interpreter on route selection or revealing patrol techniques, violations of opsec result in the good guys dying.
And my comments were to leo's, not to you. Discuss whatever the hell you want to your hearts content. As someone who claims to be mil, I thought you would understand the importance of maintaining secure TTP's for those who go into harms way.
I've read your posts in the past and I am not going to get into it with someone like you. For the record, you're the only one here who believes that le tactics should not fall under opsec. Good luck.
Shooting in I've always tried to get as close and high as possible, either by the windshield pillar or on the actual hood, when shooting from the front to a) get me a better view and less deflection, b) not get run over/crushed between cars, and c) use the vehicle/ground as a backstop.
Since the front seat targets are so close to the glass (@2 feet) I see very, very little deflection even in tiny calipers like 4.6mm and any deflection that I've seen (going into the vehicle) has been a couple of inches at best. Shooting into the vehicle from such extremely short range and on a very confined target I just shoot multiple head shots. If something weird happens deflection wise you still end up with neck/high chest hits.
One very good target area I've found for shooting into a front seat has been through the sheet metal roof. It visually obstructs exact aiming but is generally done from 1-2 feet above the targets head and straight down. The single layer sheet metal doesn't deflect the rounds at all and, most importantly, it keeps all of the rounds contained in the target or ground and completely out of the back seat. Not actually seeing the target sucks but, in effect, it's like sticking your muzzle on a guys hat distance wise. I think this is a very specialized thing for use only when you have to keep the rounds out of the back seat.
The other place where I've seen interesting bullet penetration/deflection is through I pillars and sheet metal. I follow the "P for plenty" rule here too because of the unpredictable internal structures hiding in car sheet metal. Some of them are basically bullet proof for handguns but move an inch in another direction and you get the "hot knife through butter" effect. Sheet metal is way less predictable than windshield glass because you can't "see" what's going on inside.
Good info, hadn't thought about using the roof. Also, I agree on the a, b, c pillers. Those guys have absorbed almost every pistol round I have fired at them and most rifle rounds also.
And I know what you are talking about structures within the sheet metal. Not that it is too practical but the metal that runs along the sides of the car (forgot the name, protects from side impacts) is positioned slightly differently in every vehicle and can stop a pistol round dead without penetration into the vehicle. The strips are usually centered between the bottom of the door panel and the bottom of the window opening and usually takes up 1/3 of that space. Shooting into sheet metal can be iffy in some areas.
Good information, thanks brother.
Glad to help.
The pillars can also throw intact pistol bullets back at you. Between shooting armor and cars at contact distance I've "shot" myself in the forehead twice with 9mm bounce backs.
Good to know. I'll take that into account.
I ha a similar experience when demoing how to flatten a tire through shooting the rim. I always do it at a steep angle now, especially with pistol. Caught some frag to the leg, not fun.
CarlosDJackal
06-06-13, 12:59
Gave him a few extra for good measure.
Keep shooting until the threat has stopped!! Kudos to the Officers.
Although personally, the officer should have pinned that scumbag with the hood of his patrol car. :D
CarlosDJackal
06-06-13, 13:59
Everything police does when a life is taken should be open to public scrutiny. EVERYTHING.
And it doesn't matter whose life was taken or why.
That's just idiotic. Yeah, facts about cases should be made available but not while they are still conducting an active investigation. Police investigations should be available for scrutiny and oversight within reason and to the appropriate level at the appropriate time.
Otherwise, you will see convictions based on public opinions and ASSumptions. How would you like it if you were under investigation and 100% of the jury pool has already formed an opinion based on what has been published by the "unbiased" media? Would you like the anti-gun members of the media to declare your guilt based on the current facts even before you go to trial? Look up cases against "Fatty Arbuckle" and "Annie Oakley" as perfect examples of this. And those cases occurred in the 1930s when most of the news was reported via newspapers.
I hear a lot of nosy busy bees who also think that every piece of evidence and information that Police Investigators obtain should be immediately shared to everyone regardless of the type of case, who the victim is, or who the suspects might be. I call this the HOA Housewife Syndrome - you know the type.
As a matter of good investigating, certain facts are normally withheld from the public in order to assist them in identifying fraudulent arrests as well as glory-seeking morons who want their 15-minutes of fame. Usually these are intimate facts about the victim or the suspect that nobody except either would have known about. You'd be surprised how many times this type of information was used to validate someone claim of guilt or innocence.
Facts of ongoing cases do not and should not be shared with the general public or it can tip the suspects off on how they can avoid arrest and/or conviction. I personally would want to be tried in a court of law, not in the liberal newspapers, tv shows, websites or blogs. :rolleyes:
Alpha Sierra
06-06-13, 14:44
As I try and disclose, I am going into le and so I don't comment on specific le issues since an academy is just that, academic.
Wait, you're not a cop? LOL
Alpha Sierra
06-06-13, 14:47
Never mind
Keep shooting until the threat has stopped!! Kudos to the Officers.
Although personally, the officer should have pinned that scumbag with the hood of his patrol car. :D
Would have made for a much better video :)
Littlelebowski
06-06-13, 15:51
It's more than a little ironic to see cops accuse cops of Monday morning quarterbacking cops :D
The video shown is a great learning tool but what is even better is the fact that the good guys went home. There were mistakes made but lets face it mistakes do get made. This thing went bad real quick and real fast. It went from a traffic stop, to a attempted search straight to a car chase and then into a shooting.
We can all monday morning quarteback this till the cows come home but what needs to be done is to use it as a learning aid. This would be great in a Street Survival Seminar.
This should not be used as a case of us vs them but it does go to show the general population of how what is improperly termed a routine traffic stop go to something else.
Dan
Don't see how it was a routine stop with drug and weapon violations. Get your ass out of the car.
Traffic Stop OPSEC? Makes me want to get out my backwards Eotech and Multicam everything.
Good shoot. The video should not have been released for a couple of years.
Don't see how it was a routine stop with drug and weapon violations. Get your ass out of the car.
Traffic Stop OPSEC? Makes me want to get out my backwards Eotech and Multicam everything.
Routine is the most screwed up word ever to be placed into law enforcement vernacular. There is nothing routine about law enforcement and the thinking routine as a LEO will get you hurt or worse. History is a great predictor but using that expressly will get LEO in trouble real quick. You can not use history as fact that the same is occurring right now.
Dan
Sorry meant "How much have you had to drink? Step out of the vehicle for me." Hadn't even paid the court costs from Feb on the previous handgun. 4 years ago criminal history, 4 months let's call it criminal behavior :D
Alaskapopo
06-06-13, 22:28
Routine is the most screwed up word ever to be placed into law enforcement vernacular. There is nothing routine about law enforcement and the thinking routine as a LEO will get you hurt or worse. History is a great predictor but using that expressly will get LEO in trouble real quick. You can not use history as fact that the same is occurring right now.
Dan
Very true traffic stops are where more officers lose their lives than any other type of call even DV's rank lower.
Pat
Dispatched.
Well done, officer.
Dispatched.
Well done, officer.
Agreed.
This post is going Zimmerman/Martin and AC is getting his hammer warmed up.
Dan
SeriousStudent
06-06-13, 23:27
It would be lovely if this thread stayed on the rails.
Good shoot.
If there's a potential moment of levity in the whole thing, it would be that the perp attempting to flee takes about the longest possible route to end up going straight ahead from where he started.
let the Monday morning qbing begin?
Yep. I'm not denigrating the involved officers, by any means, but it's to be expected.
Constructive criticism is a positive thing in events like this. The stop wasn't the worst by a long shot, but there were some techiniques/tactics that relate to positioning, contact and cover that would have mitigated risk on the initial stop. In my view/experience, at least.
The involved officers will be their own harshest critics in that regard.
Use of opsec in police matters needs to be strictly limited to ongoing criminal investigations. I find your desire to cloak discussion of this OIS under "opsec" disturbing to say the least. And makes one wonder what else you would like to hide from public view and scrutiny.
That's part and parcel of your job, the way I and many others see it. Since you operate in a democratic republic, you'll just have to grow a thicker skin.
Discuss away. I'm all about it.
I firmly believe that the general public are not entitled to information that would assist in the defeating of tactics used by officers in the field. The argument that the info is already out there is irrelevant. None of us,( LEO), will simply hand it over on a silver platter.
Not saying that's what you desire, but your post hints at it. If I'm wrong, fine.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.