View Full Version : Hometown Officers Shoot Violent Suspect Armed With Crowbar.
This happened yesterday right down the street from my house.
But what pisses me off is all these people getting on their youtube and bashing the offers, apparently it's so easy to shoot a guy in the leg and that will fix everything. Maybe a little pepper spray or hti him again with the taser that didn't work the first time. Come on! Give me a break!
Forgive me if this is the wrong section for this, but this really pissed me off.
http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/local/los_angeles&id=8515794
To quote my friend Seabas; "....You don't **** with people who have guns."
MONTEREY PARK, Calif. (KABC) -- Smashed windows at a fast-food restaurant in Monterey Park led to a deadly officer-involved shooting on Monday. One witness was able to catch the drama on video.
"I hear the sound of breaking windows, and a few minutes later, about six to 10 gunshots, a man on the floor, dogs barking, pedestrians all over the place, it was a pretty big scene," said witness Alex Soliz, who shot cellphone video of part of the incident.
Authorities responded to a report that a man was breaking windows at Carl's Jr. in the 1200 block of Avenida Cesar Chavez just before 9:30 a.m. Witnesses say the man had come in to Carl's Jr., but left without buying anything. He then came back with a 3-foot lead pipe and broke out all the windows.
"It was just like a loud shatter, like if somebody had literally crashed into the building, and it just happened to be where we looked up, and the glass literally shattered all over us," said witness Jimmy Aragon.
The suspect then walked inside, while workers and customers ran outside. Police arrived and surrounded the building, but investigators say the suspect was refusing their commands, and a Taser didn't stop him, either.
The suspect made a fatal decision as he raised the pipe and seemed to lunge at a police officer. A second officer fired five shots. Seconds after the suspect fell, the first officer fired five more shots.
"He literally brought his arms forward with the object, so it was like the officer was right there, and he was here, so by the time he kind of brought up the object ... the cops reacted to it quick," Aragon said.
The suspect was taken to a local hospital, where he was pronounced dead.
"Not exactly optimal, but at this point, they did what they had to do," said Lt. Eddie Hernandez of the L.A. County Sheriff's Department.
A stray bullet flew into a Tommy's restaurant sign. There was a woman standing underneath the sign, and some of the debris fell on her head. She was taken to a local hospital with minor abrasions, but was expected to be OK.
Workers boarded up the windows at the Carl's Jr. Monday night. It's unknown when the restaurant will reopen.
http://laist.com/2012/01/24/video_captures_police_shooting_killing_man.php
Above is a link a friend sent me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJtGqCIhFp8&feature=related
Above is the link for the whole shooting on youtube (as long as they allow it up).
I have NO LEO experience, but I know how fast things can go wrong. He was too close to the officer with weapon in hand and malicious intent.
Eurodriver
01-24-12, 18:35
I saw this video almost immediately after it was uploaded
My friend who is an EMS said "Those stupid cops, making work harder for us. They could have shot him in the leg"
Scary. Thoughts like that aren't uncommon.
At :42 in to the video he takes a grip with both hands, winds up and appears to start his swing at the officer. The K9 officer took the appropriate action to protect a fellow citizen and police officer from being seriously injured or killed. Good shoot and good looking Mal.
Moose-Knuckle
01-24-12, 18:46
Good on the LEOs, one less oxygen thief tonight.
If I was on the grand jury they would be cleared.
For the ass clowns that are saying the LEOs were in the wrong, let them be attacked by a guy wielding a wrecking bar and let’s compare the results. . .
Have whoever suggests they use less force or shoot for his leg start taking a beating from this upstanding citizen with a crowbar, and then ask them if he'd like them to try some pepper spray or a shoot to the leg. I'm guessing they may escalate the use of force a little quicker...
ForTehNguyen
01-24-12, 19:36
guy was probably on drugs. He just walks in the store and starts breaking stuff with the pipe. Didnt give up at the sight of two guns and a K9. Shot with a tazer didnt do anything unless it didnt penetrate his clothing.
Good on the LEOs, one less oxygen thief tonight.
If I was on the grand jury they would be cleared.
For the ass clowns that are saying the LEOs were in the wrong, let them be attacked by a guy wielding a wrecking bar and let’s compare the results. . .
Dead on, on all points.
pilotguyo540
01-24-12, 19:43
This is clearly a good shoot. Anyone who says otherwise is a damn fool. He wound up and projected his intentions. His failure to make contact with the officer does not change his decision to do harm to the officer.
SeriousStudent
01-24-12, 20:10
I saw this video almost immediately after it was uploaded
My friend who is an EMS said "Those stupid cops, making work harder for us. They could have shot him in the leg"
Scary. Thoughts like that aren't uncommon.
I was a paramedic for a good while, in a pretty violent area. Most of the officer-involved shootings did not make much work for me at all.
The coroner's office, on the other hand, was often bitching and moaning. ;)
I merely uttered the magic phrase "DRT" and went 10-8.
I am glad the officers were not harmed, and hope the injured woman makes a full and complete recovery.
Standard protocol is anyone armed with an object within 21 feet is considered a lethal threat, and force, up to and including the lethal variety, are permitted.
As an EMS provider and former FLEO, clean shoot, no work. I'll echo the sentiment of going 10-8 after making the call. Grab me some coffee or something.
Stay safe out there, brothers.
H
Voodoo_Man
01-24-12, 20:32
Good shoot, stay safe out there.
If anyone is interested, Google the TUELLER DRILL (Sgt. Dennis Tueller). It is a drill I use when training my guys to show just how fast a determined aggressor can cover 21 feet. The officer that fired first, may have had that in mind when he fired those 5 quick shots. You truly have to end the fight right there when you are dealing with those distances.
If anyone is interested, Google the TUELLER DRILL (Sgt. Dennis Tueller). It is a drill I use when training my guys to show just how fast a determined aggressor can cover 21 feet. The officer that fired first, may have had that in mind when he fired those 5 quick shots. You truly have to end the fight right there when you are dealing with those distances.
YES! Exactly. I practiced a similar drill at ITTS' Advanced handgun class which I took in this last October.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXGwEmGGTr8
(This is not me in the video)
ForTehNguyen
01-24-12, 20:49
here is another good video:
Too close - dont underestimate the knife (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9igSoJHEdUo)
CarlosDJackal
01-25-12, 08:58
Couldn't they have shot the crowbar out of his hands? :rolleyes:
Good shooting, Officers!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bY5ioBvrYIg
http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/local/los_angeles&id=8515794
I am utterly astounded by the many comments made by the public in regards to this OIS incident. The suspect chose to initiate the conflict by violently vandalizing the restaurant and terrifying patrons and employees such that they felt compelled to flee for safety and request police intervention. Upon arrival of LE, the suspect willfully failed to obey repeated commands issued by officers, was NOT incapacitated by a Taser hit, then attempted to assault an officer using a deadly weapon, was shot by one officer, yet still did not drop his weapon, thus was shot again by another officer. The evidence justifying the officers actions is unequivocal and clear on the video, yet many members of the public fail to see the truth...
According to published NYPD SOP-9 data (http://www.theppsc.org/Staff_Views/Aveni/OIS.pdf), NYPD hit ratio by officers against perpetrators in 2000 was 12.3% of shots fired and in 2001 13.5% of shots fired. On the other hand, the article states Portland PD hit with 43% of shots fired at adversaries from 1984-1992, while Metro-Dade had hit ratios ranging from 15.4-30% from 1988-1994, and Baltimore reported a 49% average hit ratio from 1989-2002. In the current shooting incident, the officers appeared to hit at a better rate than is typical for LE--citizens should be applauding their results, not criticizing them.
Note in the screen capture below taken after the first K9 officer has fired 5 shots in under 2 sec and right at the moment the second officer begins shooting 5 shots in about 1 sec, the suspect can clearly be seen standing upright, slightly turned and according to witnesses, had not dropped his weapon. The second officer had to make a split second decision--was the suspect going to attack nearby bystanders, turn to continue his attack on officers, or try to escape. The key thing is that he had neither surrendered nor been incapacitated at the start of the second string of fire.
http://pistol-forum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=510&stc=1&d=1327519477
ForTehNguyen
01-25-12, 15:21
the "shoot him in the leg" comments are making me lose brain cells. So you would respond to lethal force/assault with a deadly weapon by shooting someone in the non vitals? Good way to get you and our partner severely injured or even killed. How the heck can you even hit someones moving legs during stress, its not a wide target
I was involved in an incident that was incorrectly reported by the local news paper last year. My Chief told me something that will always stick with me when I read about these incidents. He told me to never read the comments. YOU know what you did and YOU know what really happened. Everything else is just second hand crap.
A perfect example is the audio in this specific incident. They are all but cheering when the TASER is fired and when the shots are fired. As they sit there and watch the aftermath, they start to drum up the "should have shot him in the leg BS". This right here is proof positive that most people have no clue that officers have to make life or death decisions in fractions of a second.
ForTehNguyen
01-25-12, 15:37
man if I rolled up one one of these incidents with several police having guns drawn. I would not stick around, if they have to shoot I am not gonna catch a stray bullet. Beavis and Butthead were pretty dumb to be hanging around especially being in the line of fire of one of the officers.
Moose-Knuckle
01-25-12, 15:57
I was involved in an incident that was incorrectly reported by the local news paper last year. My Chief told me something that will always stick with me when I read about these incidents. He told me to never read the comments. YOU know what you did and YOU know what really happened. Everything else is just second hand crap.
A perfect example is the audio in this specific incident. They are all but cheering when the TASER is fired and when the shots are fired. As they sit there and watch the aftermath, they start to drum up the "should have shot him in the leg BS". This right here is proof positive that most people have no clue that officers have to make life or death decisions in fractions of a second.
I like reading the comments for nothing other than "situational awareness". I look at it as intel gathering of sorts.
I like reading the comments for nothing other than "situational awareness". I look at it as intel gathering of sorts.
Good point but it's not worth boiling my blood pressure over it. I take it too personally sometimes.
My tax dollars are not payin for anyone in any jurisdiction to take a lead pipe in the face.
Finally got a chance to watch the video uninterrupted. Officers did an excellent job.
The comments on youtube and other sites are typical of the idiots we deal with on a daily basis. Put them in the same situation and they'll probably crap themselves.
Cops 1 - Bad Guy 0 = good day.
I think using the taser put that officer in more danger than needed. Had the k9 officer not been there it might have ended differently. Great job to these officers going home that night.
Well, there are three sides to every story.
From the video, the LE response looked pretty weak. However, this may be department policy - especially in CA. Most of veteran cops I know tell me that EO hiring policies have created a situation where the LEOs are encouraged to not go 'hands on' with the BG. Instead, they are required to simply rely on their tools like tasers and OC. Even the use of the baton discouraged. Depending on local policy the force escalation goes pretty much from taser/OC right to the gun. In the old days, burly men with sticks TCB.
The weapon actually looks like a pipe bender for electric conduit tubing. Hardly a serious weapon. However, I fully believe that most LEOs lack the training, attitude and aptitude to deal with this particular problem set, AND, they could quite easily have been following their department's procedure to the letter.
I am not really sure what the deal was with shooting the guy in the face with the taser. He seemed a bit torn on what to to do. I think his instinct told him to hit the guy in the face and his training told him to use the taser. His brain sort of made a compromise.
All the same it looks like the whole situation had a positive outcome - one less asshole.
Moose-Knuckle
01-25-12, 21:54
The weapon actually looks like a pipe bender for electric conduit tubing. Hardly a serious weapon.
So...
If that had been you exiting the eatery with your loved ones and some guy wilding a pipe bender had just smashed out all the windows to the joint would you have not felt that you and or your loved ones where in imminent danger of bodily harm? How about when he took a two handed grip and set up like a batter in the box reading to take a swing?
Lead pipe, tire iron, baseball bat, pipe bender, etc. . .dosen't make a whole hell of a lot of difference to me.
Well, there are three sides to every story.
From the video, the LE response looked pretty weak. However, this may be department policy - especially in CA. Most of veteran cops I know tell me that EO hiring policies have created a situation where the LEOs are encouraged to not go 'hands on' with the BG. Instead, they are required to simply rely on their tools like tasers and OC. Even the use of the baton discouraged. Depending on local policy the force escalation goes pretty much from taser/OC right to the gun. In the old days, burly men with sticks TCB.
The weapon actually looks like a pipe bender for electric conduit tubing. Hardly a serious weapon. However, I fully believe that most LEOs lack the training, attitude and aptitude to deal with this particular problem set, AND, they could quite easily have been following their department's procedure to the letter.
I am not really sure what the deal was with shooting the guy in the face with the taser. He seemed a bit torn on what to to do. I think his instinct told him to hit the guy in the face and his training told him to use the taser. His brain sort of made a compromise.
You dont have a clue.
So...
If that had been you exiting the eatery with your loved ones and some guy wilding a pipe bender ...
Me personally? Well... having been in that exact situation more than a few times, it usually ends up with me beating the living shit out of the guy. But that's just me...
On any given Sunday, most people, including your average lowlife, is not mentally prepared to fight for their life at a moments notice.
You dont have a clue.
And thank you for that insightful analysis. Maybe you could set me straight? Where did I get it wrong?
Me personally? Well... having been in that exact situation more than a few times, it usually ends up with me beating the living shit out of the guy. But that's just me...
On any given Sunday, most people, including your average lowlife, is not mentally prepared to fight for their life at a moments notice.
You are a badass.
And thank you for that insightful analysis. Maybe you could set me straight? Where did I get it wrong?
A weapon is a weapon. That's where you're getting it wrong. Held in a threatening manner and moving toward officers gives the responding LEOs the green light on force. As has been said, I don't give a shit if it's a wrench, crowbar, breaker bar, pipe bender, pipe or whatever. It's a weapon. Besides, the PC world we live in takes out a lot of the steps on the force escalation pyramid. There really isn't a "stomp a new mudhole in his ass" step on a lot of departments' ladder of force...
Regardless, the reality is, unless you or any of us were on scene, we're doing nothing but Monday morning quarterbacking. Not only that, but it doesn't do the folks on the line any good for people on the interwebs (read: us) to be second guessing them.
H
Moose-Knuckle
01-26-12, 02:08
Me personally? Well... having been in that exact situation more than a few times, it usually ends up with me beating the living shit out of the guy. But that's just me...
So. . .
Unarmed, you have confronted on more than one occasion and "beat the living shit out of" attackers who were armed with weapons capable of causing blunt force trauma with the intention of causing you bodily harm and you walked away each time?
If a BG has a pipe bender then I have a handgun, if the BG has a handgun then I have a longarm. I don't fight fair.
If aint cheatin u aint tryin
Me personally? Well... having been in that exact situation more than a few times, it usually ends up with me beating the living shit out of the guy. But that's just me...
On any given Sunday, most people, including your average lowlife, is not mentally prepared to fight for their life at a moments notice.
You apparently dont understand what the proeper force response to an impact weapon is.
A: Firearm.
Carry on.
Voodoo_Man
01-26-12, 07:46
The issue I see here is that people tend to take their personal feelings into consideration when giving an opinion on deadly force used by police. Eg; "well I would have just..." or somesuch nonsense.
Policy is what drives most departments and serious bodily injury or possible death is fairly broad, but it has to be.
I remember when people were in an uproar around here when an officer shot a guy with an iron in his hands on top of the stairs, that was a good shoot.
Thank you gentlemen for your comments and especially thank you to DocGKR for posting that report.
You are a badass.
No kidding, didn't know Chuck Norris had joined the site.
That said, I am not paid to fight fair. I am paid to win. That protects the public and helps me get home to my family. Would I go hands on with a subject carrying something that could smash my head in with one swing? Not when the stakes are my life. It only takes one time and it's over.
The officers did exactly what they should have done. End of story.To have gone "hands on" in this situation would have been stupid.
ForTehNguyen
01-26-12, 10:10
You are a badass.
more like a good way to get himself seriously injured, trying to fight "fair"
CarlosDJackal
01-26-12, 10:12
Well, there are three sides to every story.
From the video, the LE response looked pretty weak. However, this may be department policy - especially in CA. Most of veteran cops I know tell me that EO hiring policies have created a situation where the LEOs are encouraged to not go 'hands on' with the BG. Instead, they are required to simply rely on their tools like tasers and OC. Even the use of the baton discouraged. Depending on local policy the force escalation goes pretty much from taser/OC right to the gun. In the old days, burly men with sticks TCB.
The weapon actually looks like a pipe bender for electric conduit tubing. Hardly a serious weapon. However, I fully believe that most LEOs lack the training, attitude and aptitude to deal with this particular problem set, AND, they could quite easily have been following their department's procedure to the letter.
I am not really sure what the deal was with shooting the guy in the face with the taser. He seemed a bit torn on what to to do. I think his instinct told him to hit the guy in the face and his training told him to use the taser. His brain sort of made a compromise.
All the same it looks like the whole situation had a positive outcome - one less asshole.
And you're a typical Monday Morning Quarterback/Keyboard Commando. Why don't you have a friend of yours hit you on your head with a "pipe bender for electric conduit tubing" and see how many hits it takes before you are unconscious.
Better yet, why don't you find one of those "non-serious weapons", go downtown somewhere, give it to some scumbag and offer him $20 to prevent you from taking it away from him using no weapons and with no holds barred. And see how successful you would be at preventing injury to yourself.
There is a time and place to use the tools; and a time and place to go hands on. Going after someone who is obviously mentally unstable AND armed with a weapon (NOTE: there is not such thing as a non-serious weapon) is not the time to go hands-on. The smartest Martial Artists would use any available item they in such a situation.
Another Keyboard Commando Extraordinaire!! :rolleyes:
CarlosDJackal
01-26-12, 10:20
And thank you for that insightful analysis. Maybe you could set me straight? Where did I get it wrong?
Everything. If you're so good at handling these types of a situation why don't you join your local Law Enforcement Agency and show them how it's done? I'm sure they would love for you to show your "pipe bender disarming techniques". :rolleyes:
And thank you for that insightful analysis. Maybe you could set me straight? Where did I get it wrong?
I think it started when you decided to respond to the thread.
Yeah... that's it.
BTW, finally saw the whole video; that dude was NOT going down and it didn't look like his logic train was part of this world. The title said that the police shot him while on the ground, but I beg to differ. The police appeared to shoot him until he went down. At least from my perspective.
Play stupid games, prepare for the consequences.
You can monday quarterback it all day long. It comes down to the officer dealing with a threat he believed was serious enough to use deadly force.
Good shoot.
Wow... lotta' hate.
Ok, I already said the LEOs most likely did what they were trained to do and what their dept policy was. Yes, it was a good shoot, and CA is one less dirtbag.
That said, in my PROFESSIONAL opinion, it did look like amateur hour. Seriously, please explain shooting the guy in the face with a taser?
Now a question for the critics: could you please give a brief synopsis of your training and qualifications? I teach this stuff, how about you?
Wow... lotta' hate.
Ok, I already said the LEOs most likely did what they were trained to do and what their dept policy was. Yes, it was a good shoot, and CA is one less dirtbag.
That said, in my PROFESSIONAL opinion, it did look like amateur hour. Seriously, please explain shooting the guy in the face with a taser?
Now a question for the critics: could you please give a brief synopsis of your training and qualifications? I teach this stuff, how about you? No hate, just different opinion.
Wow... lotta' hate.
Ok, I already said the LEOs most likely did what they were trained to do and what their dept policy was. Yes, it was a good shoot, and CA is one less dirtbag.
That said, in my PROFESSIONAL opinion, it did look like amateur hour. Seriously, please explain shooting the guy in the face with a taser?
Now a question for the critics: could you please give a brief synopsis of your training and qualifications? I teach this stuff, how about you?
Jerking the trigger on a taser happens just as much as with a firearm. How often do most departments train on the taser/pistol/shotgun/carbine? Not as often as they should, most likely. Shit happens. Epinephrine is pumping, fine motor skills diminish, heart is racing and then we see things like a face shot with a taser. The medical training I have says closer the signal to CNS, quicker the incapacitation. So I don't see anything inherently wrong with the face shot.
As for my training and qualifications: Four years as a Seabee, two years with the Office of Air and Marine for CBP, currently an EMT-T assigned to a county SRT unit, with which I train once or twice a week when I'm not off studying fancy medicine instead of street medicine. Hope I "meet the cut" to weigh in on this...:rolleyes:
H
PS: Ever been in an OIS?
PS: Ever been in an OIS?
I am a soldier. But I was in a gun fight this one time in Iraq...
However, I have a lot LEO friends - local, state, federal. Most of them are some sort of use of force instructor. I train at an MMA gym where you get an even combination of LEOs, military, street fighters, and a few weekend warriors. Most of the guys know I am a Combatives instructor. We talk shop and trade TTPs. On occasion I guest AI at a few large PDs in the area (most depts are very short on qualified instructors). Beyond that I have 25+ years of various martial arts training and A LOT of real world experience. I don't go looking for fights but I don't avoid them either.
Oh ya, I forgot my creds. Marine Corps infantry with multiple deployments to Iraq and currently a LEO. Nothing special or high speed.
I am a soldier. But I was in a gun fight this one time in Iraq...
Been in my share of dustups over there. Nothing to write home about other than to say I'm fine, but you know the deal, brother.
Let me tell you, it's a wee bit different when you got a whole squad/fire team/assault section along for the ride than when it's just you by your lonesome or just you and a partner. Things are tricky and backup is usually a few ticks further away than you'd like. The old saying "when seconds count, the police are minutes away" holds just as true for fellow officers. They can't bend the rules of physics because it's a fellow officer/agent in the shit.
And yes, most agencies or departments are horribly low on qualified and quality instructors. I know this all too well.
Stay safe
H
Judging from the bad video quality, I will say that the high TASER shot was due to the assailant's clothing. Certain jackets tend to slow the probe. I believe a neck shot would not be my choice but I WASN'T THERE. An ass cheek/ thigh shot would be my choice.
The only issue I saw with the incident was that the officer deploying the TASER was looking down while the attacker made his move.
For the record, I am a TASER Instructor, Handgun, Shotgun, Patrol Rifle instructor and a Tactical Shooting Instructor.
I am a soldier. But I was in a gun fight this one time in Iraq...
However, I have a lot LEO friends - local, state, federal. Most of them are some sort of use of force instructor. I train at an MMA gym where you get an even combination of LEOs, military, street fighters, and a few weekend warriors. Most of the guys know I am a Combatives instructor. We talk shop and trade TTPs. On occasion I guest AI at a few large PDs in the area (most depts are very short on qualified instructors). Beyond that I have 25+ years of various martial arts training and A LOT of real world experience. I don't go looking for fights but I don't avoid them either.
Nope. Not even slightly impressed with your "experience", vis-a-vis this particular encounter. Working out at an MMA gym, being a Kung Fu master bullshitter or having a LOT of real world experience means nothing, imo. (WTF is A LOT, and does using caps mean something, there?)
Recommending that police bring "martial arts" to a crowbar fight is douchebaggery, imo. Unless you really, absolutely, have the guy unawares, you run the risk of getting yourself seriously dead/****ed up.
Patrick Aherne
01-26-12, 22:32
Wow... lotta' hate.
Ok, I already said the LEOs most likely did what they were trained to do and what their dept policy was. Yes, it was a good shoot, and CA is one less dirtbag.
That said, in my PROFESSIONAL opinion, it did look like amateur hour. Seriously, please explain shooting the guy in the face with a taser?
Now a question for the critics: could you please give a brief synopsis of your training and qualifications? I teach this stuff, how about you?
There are things in the video I did not like, but under the appropriate constitutional legal standard, Graham v. Conner, the use of force was objectively reasonable to the reasonable officer standard.
Keep digging, you've almost hit bottom.
toasterlocker
01-27-12, 00:15
You apparently dont understand what the proeper force response to an impact weapon is.
A: Firearm.
Carry on.
Exactly what I was going to say. If Armati is to dim-witted to understand this, I'll just say I'm glad he isn't my back up.
Nope. Not even slightly impressed with your "experience", vis-a-vis this particular encounter. Working out at an MMA gym, being a Kung Fu master bullshitter or having a LOT of real world experience means nothing, imo. (WTF is A LOT, and does using caps mean something, there?)
Recommending that police bring "martial arts" to a crowbar fight is douchebaggery, imo. Unless you really, absolutely, have the guy unawares, you run the risk of getting yourself seriously dead/****ed up.
THIS
The only fair fight is the one you win. The officers went home and the bad guy didn't. I score this as a win for the good guys.
H
LowSpeed_HighDrag
01-27-12, 04:28
I think on all accounts it was a good shoot. If I were CC'ing and a man came at me or my family wielding a pipe-bender and attempting to crush their skulls, I would have to escalate the force very quickly. Ive been shooting handguns for years and can not imagine how hard/dangerous it would be to hit someone in the leg, esp someone in an immediate danger zone. I think TV has taught people that any bullet wound is a showstopper, and all good guys can hit anything they want, therefore bad guys should be shot in the leg. Such a scary mentality held by the public, but what isnt these days?
Nope. Not even slightly impressed with your "experience", vis-a-vis this particular encounter.
So do you train military/police in the use of force? How much training in this area do you have yourself?
In Combatives we have a saying "if you think that shit will work, we have an easy way to find out." It is not empty posturing to call a guy out on his technique. There is a safe way to build a scenario, put on the appropriate level of PPE, and run a lab test. When one guy says his kung-fu is better than the other guy's, there is a way to find out.
What I see in the video is the BG being very hesitant at first. He ignores instructions, tries to walk away, and turns his back on the guy with the taser several times. After he got hit in the face with the taser he then looked over his shoulder and saw the cop creeping up on him. He began to take a baseball grip on the pipe, and the K9 shot him. That is what I saw.
I am not saying the shooting is wrong by any stretch of the imagination. The K9 sees the BG getting ready to tee up on his partner and he does a 5 round rhythm drill on him. Ok, fine.
I am only saying that the situation could have been better managed.
From a civilian standpoint, CCW is not really an option for the citizens of CA and a lot of other very populous states. It is an easy thing to say "well, I would just shoot the guy", but most of these Youtube videos seem to happen in parts of the US where there is only very limited CCW (funny how that works).
I know I could not be a cop !
I dont have the ability they do in holding back as long as they do !!!
my hats off to those who do this !!!
and as one of my cop friends said when I was in the FD
you guys can come in to their house flood it take a chainsaw to the roof and walls and throw out everything they own in a pile and they thank you and bring you cookies at the station !
we knock on the door and get a nasty what do you want !!!!!
again hats off to the police and wish they had more power to stop some of these scumbags
Moose-Knuckle
01-27-12, 18:33
120mm, you sir have a mastery of the English launguage that knows no equal, bravo!
Judging from the bad video quality, I will say that the high TASER shot was due to the assailant's clothing. Certain jackets tend to slow the probe. I believe a neck shot would not be my choice but I WASN'T THERE. An ass cheek/ thigh shot would be my choice.
The only issue I saw with the incident was that the officer deploying the TASER was looking down while the attacker made his move.
Agreed on both accounts, I think that the probe did not penetrate through the BG's hoodie and or knit cap.
and as one of my cop friends said when I was in the FD
you guys can come in to their house flood it take a chainsaw to the roof and walls and throw out everything they own in a pile and they thank you and bring you cookies at the station !
we knock on the door and get a nasty what do you want !!!!!
Truth, the background investigator that was assigned to me and conducted my interviews when I was going through the hiring process asked me why I wanted to be a cop, he told me that I should go and be a fire fighter because everyone loved fire fighters and hated cops. LOL!
Recommending that police bring "martial arts" to a crowbar fight is douchebaggery, imo. Unless you really, absolutely, have the guy unawares, you run the risk of getting yourself seriously dead/****ed up.
Not to be antagonistic, but...
Keep in mind that quite a few PD's the world over do not give their officers guns. Now, I am not suggesting we adopt the practice here. America is extraordinarily violent and our criminals have an overwhelming propensity to fight the police. My point is that quite a few LEO's the world over have to manage this exact situation without the use of guns. I have no heartburn with the ultimate outcome, I am only critiquing the lack of training.
Again, keep in mind the BG had is back to the LEO for quite a while. I personally think that he could have exploited this prior to the shooting.
Oh, and to answer your query, the CAPS are used for acronyms and to add emphasis. Does this disturb you in some way?
LowSpeed_HighDrag
01-27-12, 21:52
Not to be antagonistic, but...
Keep in mind that quite a few PD's the world over do not give their officers guns. Now, I am not suggesting we adopt the practice here. America is extraordinarily violent and our criminals have an overwhelming propensity to fight the police. My point is that quite a few LEO's the world over have to manage this exact situation without the use of guns. I have no heartburn with the ultimate outcome, I am only critiquing the lack of training.
Again, keep in mind the BG had is back to the LEO for quite a while. I personally think that he could have exploited this prior to the shooting.
Oh, and to answer your query, the CAPS are used for acronyms and to add emphasis. Does this disturb you in some way?
Ahhh, you are the Tom Brady of monday morning QB's!
"His back was turned, so I woulda wooped ol' boys ASS!"
"Wanna try something with me bro, lets find out how good your kung-fu is!"
"Sure, there is one less bad guy, yay. But come on, I coulda wooped his ass six ways from sunday, and I dont even need a gun. Im a COMBATIVES INSTRUCTOR!"
Well, heres my take on all your noise. AND JUST TO CLARIFY, I am certified Less Lethal Device Instructor, MCMAP Instructor (granted, only Brown Belt), and have been practicing Brazilian Jiu Jitsu for 5 years, 2 under Rodrigo Gracie out of Infinite, 3 at Dojo Americana. If I were to claim that being a MCMAP instructor means I can woop anybodys ass, every Marine would laugh at me, just as Im sure your fellow soldiers are having a chuckle at your expense. If I were to claim that my martial arts training means I can take down anyone with a weapon and intent to do harm, most everyone would laugh at me, just as we are laughing at you. During my Taser course, a gentleman was shot in the back from 7 feet with a Taser. One of the prongs hit him in the upper back, the other hit his loose, untucked shirt in his lower back and didnt make contact because the shirt had enough material to keep the probe from entering skin. He was the unlucky one who got to experience a contact later on haha, I have the video for those who need proof!
What all that tells me is in a situatuion where its a fight for your life and the lives of those around you, and you have exhausted all means of saving his life without totally put yours in risk, you have NO other option than to take a life to save others. Its easy to say you wouldve tackled him when his back was turned, but it wouldve been just as easy for him to turn around before you tackled him and crack you in the skull. Thats the thing about real life, there are far more variable than the "octagon" can bring about. You can practice your theories all day on the mat, but when your theories fail you get to go home, when a Cop fails to tae the proper action, he dies.
Mauser KAR98K
01-27-12, 21:54
here is another good video:
Too close - dont underestimate the knife (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9igSoJHEdUo)
I remember that video all too well.
Well, heres my take on all your noise.
Cool homie, if you're scared just say your say you're scared.
How many street fights have you actually been in? Seriously. I mean the kind of fight where there is no ref, no back up, no tap outs, and you are lucky if someone even calls 911? Honestly, how many?
The gym is a great place to test theory and to work your technique. However, it is still all just theory until you actually have to apply that shit in real time.
I have faced an armed man many times. Yes I am soldier, but on the streets I am pretty much a civilian. At best, the LEO will let me walk because I have military ID.
The fact of the of the matter is, even the most would-be thug MF is pretty much a punk and really not mentally prepared to die "for his shit".
In the video this guy was doing his level best to avoid police. He was ignoring their instructions and trying to walk away. Call me crazy but this might have been a good time to take him down.
.................................................................................................
"If you are not from the suburbs don't pretend to be from the suburbs, because you wouldn't understand the suburbs"
Wow... lotta' hate.
Ok, I already said the LEOs most likely did what they were trained to do and what their dept policy was. Yes, it was a good shoot, and CA is one less dirtbag.
That said, in my PROFESSIONAL opinion, it did look like amateur hour. Seriously, please explain shooting the guy in the face with a taser?
Now a question for the critics: could you please give a brief synopsis of your training and qualifications? I teach this stuff, how about you?
Without a POST certification in UOF, an extensive background in LE UOF, or at a minimum a background in LE, I would have a hard time grading your opinion as "PROFESSIONAL" or "expert". Also, based on your posts, I have a hard time believing that you teach UOF, you may teach martial arts but one does not equate to the other, not in the least.
Without a POST certification in UOF, an extensive background in LE UOF,...
Cool. I guess I should stop working with LEOs and their training programs? Greek Pankration is 3000 years old and the same stuff is still taught in UOF. Who certifies the certifiers? Honestly who is really qualified to train people in UOF? Where should your experience come from - theory or practice?
Cool. I guess I should stop working with LEOs and their training programs? Greek Pankration is 3000 years old and the same stuff is still taught in UOF. Who certifies the certifiers? Honestly who is really qualified to train people in UOF? Where should your experience come from - theory or practice?
The difference is combative techniques versus force and use of force, which based on your posts in this thread show you do not understand the distinction between, and the rationale thereof. Anyone can teach combative techniques, it is the measured application of that force within a legal framework where the distinction lies, and where you lack the qualification to render a professional opinion.
Anyone can teach combative techniques, it is the measured application of that force within a legal framework where the distinction lies, and where you lack the qualification to render a professional opinion.
And what I teach is what will happen when the bad man jumps on your head and how to deal with that problem. I don't teach departmental policy. If departmental policy is getting people killed then that is another issue.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
01-28-12, 00:15
Cool. I guess I should stop working with LEOs and their training programs? Greek Pankration is 3000 years old and the same stuff is still taught in UOF. Who certifies the certifiers? Honestly who is really qualified to train people in UOF? Where should your experience come from - theory or practice?
So, you "instruct" officers in the same way that Wong at the local Chinese Take Out might instruct an off duty officer in the use of chop sticks. Got it.
Well, with that said, Im done with this one. Armati and his no fear, balls to the wall, super man tactics have scared me away frim this thread.
Well, with that said, Im done with this one. Armati and his no fear, balls to the wall, super man tactics have scared me away frim this thread.
Cool. I know Colorado must be a rough hood. "Niggaz be bone thug and shit."
Guys I know ask me to come and work with their guys. I ask for it nothing in return. I don't get paid for it. I work the techniques they ask me to work and run the scenarios they want run.
And what I teach is what will happen when the bad man jumps on your head and how to deal with that problem. I don't teach departmental policy. If departmental policy is getting people killed then that is another issue.
In summation, by your own definition, you are not qualified to render a PROFESSIONAL opinion on the matter at hand.
Thank you.
The mods can close this one now.
In summation, by your own definition, you are not qualified to render a PROFESSIONAL opinion on the matter at hand.
Thank you.
The mods can close this one now.
A professional opinion on tactics, maybe. But on application, absolutely not. Just like at FLETC, they tell you that the physical techniques they teach you are no replacement for other means of resolving the conflict.
The reason we learned hand to hand skills was not to disarm an attacker during an approach, they were taught as "survival techniques" in the event we were ambushed/jumped/the subject resisted when we went to cuff them. They were not the means by which to handle an aggressive and armed subject. They were meant to get us freed up enough to get enough distance to draw our weapon and neutralize the threat.
There is a reason CQD/Combatives/H2H emphasizes that exact point. Your pistol/shotgun/carbine is far more effective at ending the fight than your hands are. Sure, physical techniques are wonderful and cool tough guy shit, but they are not intended to disarm a hostile subject. I said it before and I will say it again, "the only fair fight is the one you win."
As for PD's around the world not arming their police, the one caveat missing is that, even they have armed response units. If an armed subject cannot be convinced to surrender their weapon, the guys with guns get called in. Look at the Brits.
Training the guys who actually go out on patrol is all well and good, but unless you're the one applying it on the street, it means absolutely dick. Armati, you ask how many street fights we've been in. Seriously? Not something to be proud of. How many times in the line of duty have I had to use the hand to hand shit? More than I would have liked. Big difference from getting into some fisticuffs outside a bar or in an alley somewhere. Leave the discussion of UOF to people who know what it's like on the line.
H
A professional opinion on tactics, maybe. But on application, absolutely not. Just like at FLETC, they tell you that the physical techniques they teach you are no replacement for other means of resolving the conflict.
The reason we learned hand to hand skills was not to disarm an attacker during an approach, they were taught as "survival techniques" in the event we were ambushed/jumped/the subject resisted when we went to cuff them. They were not the means by which to handle an aggressive and armed subject. They were meant to get us freed up enough to get enough distance to draw our weapon and neutralize the threat.
There is a reason CQD/Combatives/H2H emphasizes that exact point. Your pistol/shotgun/carbine is far more effective at ending the fight than your hands are. Sure, physical techniques are wonderful and cool tough guy shit, but they are not intended to disarm a hostile subject. I said it before and I will say it again, "the only fair fight is the one you win."
As for PD's around the world not arming their police, the one caveat missing is that, even they have armed response units. If an armed subject cannot be convinced to surrender their weapon, the guys with guns get called in. Look at the Brits.
Training the guys who actually go out on patrol is all well and good, but unless you're the one applying it on the street, it means absolutely dick. Armati, you ask how many street fights we've been in. Seriously? Not something to be proud of. How many times in the line of duty have I had to use the hand to hand shit? More than I would have liked. Big difference from getting into some fisticuffs outside a bar or in an alley somewhere. Leave the discussion of UOF to people who know what it's like on the line.
H
No. Not even "tactics". Tactics implies judgement and that is where the problem is. Movement and mechanics, maybe but then anyone can teach that. Judgement and tactics, no; not qualified at all. I could give a shit about working with guys and gals that can throw a blow, block, or kick. I prefer people who can make the right judgement call and that is what the proper application of UOF is all about.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
01-28-12, 02:08
No. Not even "tactics". Tactics implies judgement and that is where the problem is. Movement and mechanics, maybe but then anyone can teach that. Judgement and tactics, no; not qualified at all. I could give a shit about working with guys and gals that can throw a blow, block, or kick. I prefer people who can make the right judgement call and that is what the proper application of UOF is all about.
But, but, but he grew up in a rough hood! And he's been in A LOT of street fights! And he volunteers his time with local officers, letting them work out their inner fight fantasies on him! Thats not qualified enough for you!!!???!!!
Uh...no. Especially in highly restrictive jurisdictions like much of CA. A LE UOF expert must be able to articulate and demonstrate techniques, rationale, implementation, justification, legality, as well as be certified and experienced in testifying about such in a court setting.
Uh...no. Especially in highly restrictive jurisdictions like much of CA. A LE UOF expert must be able to articulate and demonstrate techniques, rationale, implementation, justification, legality, as well as be certified and experienced in testifying about such in a court setting.
That about sums it up, Dr. Roberts. Armati, you don't know that you don't know. That's dangerous. I've been a law enforcement defensive tactics instructor for over two decades in two different states. I'm currently a staff firearms instructor and defensive tactics instructor at a state police academy. The key word is tactics. Officers are taught a use of force continuum and how to escalate and deescalate force as legally appropriate. Furthermore, coming in this forum and asking how many street fights people have been involved in is silly. Next you're going to ask for the color of the boat house at Hereford. Here's a news flash: Cops who consistently use force to effect arrest or gain compliance are not good cops. I spent my career in the fifth largest city in the U.S. and there were plenty of opportunities to use defensive tactics "on the street". Good cops can figure out how to reduce or avoid using them as often as possible. I'm more impressed with a cop who, while ready to subdue with violence of action, can use officer presence, commands and negotiation to deescalate a volatile situation. There will always be a time and a place for going hands on. If you're finding yourself in that time and place often, then you're doing it wrong. In addition, if you're not a law enforcement officer who's certified by a state governing body to teach defensive and firearms tactics, your opinion is not that of a professional for purposes of this discussion.
Armati, you don't know that you don't know. That's dangerous.
Well, I do know this: if a guy with a pipe gives me his back he is going to take a little nap. I have done it several times before against a guy armed with a pipe, a folding Buck knife, a piece of 1/2" rebar, and a baseball bat. It has been my observation that your average street level 'tough guy' is use to a cowed citizenry. They rely on the fact that most people will not resist them. Like any predator, they are not mentally prepared to have their next meal fight back.
The guy in the video was free to break out all of the windows because he knew no one in Carl's would do anything about it. He walked by the police with a pretty FU attitude.
I can guaran-God-damn-tee you that if there were 6 big vatos sporting gang tattoos eating in a booth, next to one of those windows, home-boy would have either not done shit or would be praying that the police would show up to save his sorry ass.
As I guy in NYC once told me, "See those kids at the end of the block? Do you think they are more scared of the police or my Glock?"
Based on your years in LE, would you generally agree that Street Justice is often more effective than the criminal court?
Of course, shooting the guy ten times is also pretty effective.
I've been a law enforcement defensive tactics instructor for over two decades in two different states.
Then I will defer to your expertise and perhaps take this as a learning point. Could you compare/contrast how defensive tactics/UOF has evolved over the last two decades? What are your thought on the matriculation of BJJ into UOF? Are you familiar in the Gracie Survival Tactics for Military and LE? What are your thoughts on it?
http://gracieacademy.com/military.asp
I'm currently a staff firearms instructor and defensive tactics instructor at a state police academy. The key word is tactics.
I fully understand what you are saying. Years ago some Army units would hire Todd Jarrett to help them get the most out of their M9. If you are issued a Beretta, you might as well get the top Beretta shooter to help you out. As one Army instructor pointed out, "Todd Jarrett might know a lot about how to drive a pistol but he doesn't know shit about tactics."
I am not pretending to tell LEOs how to do their job, make an arrest, or implement departmental policy. I am simply saying that there are, in fact, other ways to skin that particular cat.
Cops who consistently use force to effect arrest or gain compliance are not good cops.
?
So, shooting a guy 10 times is the preferred COA?
I'm more impressed with a cop who, while ready to subdue with violence of action, can use officer presence, commands and negotiation to deescalate a volatile situation.
I would whole heartily agree with you... and that is not what I saw in the video...
In addition, if you're not a law enforcement officer who's certified by a state governing body to teach defensive and firearms tactics, your opinion is not that of a professional for purposes of this discussion.
I am sure you must be aware that departments routinely employ civilian experts from various fields to teach that particular discipline. Civilian race car drivers are used to teach high speed driving. Computer hackers help the police with cyber crimes. And, a lot of the defensive tactics I see look a whole lot like BJJ.
In any event, good talking to you. I would like to keep it at least semi-professional, focus on first hand knowledge, and avoid personal attacks.
Means...check
Opportunity...check
Intent...check
This was not a good shoot.
It was a GREAT shoot.
Important lesson learned...if you choose to attempt non-lethal intervention in a lethal force situation, always have lethal cover.
or
Just use lethal force in the first place. Everybody in blue goes home safe.
ForTehNguyen
01-28-12, 21:15
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/01/ryan-finn/carl-jr-s-shooting-and-the-use-of-force-continuum/
Carl’s Jr. Shooting and the Use of Force Continuum
Posted on January 27, 2012 by Ryan Finn
The internet is on fire following the release of the video of a deadly shooting outside a Carl’s Jr. in East LA. Armchair commandos, Canadian car guys, average Joes, military vets and law enforcement professionals have all had their say. Some agree with the actions of the Monterey Park PD, some think it could have been handled differently. I am not a lawyer. I only played one in college. But I would remind you that in most states a private citizen would be perfectly within their rights to shoot someone attacking them with a conduit bender, without the need to seek alternative methods to deescalate the situation. However, as a peace officer, I’m here to say that Law Enforcement Officials (LEOs) are bound by the use of force continuum. . .
The definitions from each of these sections are taken straight from the National Institute of Justice, and are verbatim what I was taught.
Officer Presence — No force is used. Considered the best way to resolve a situation. The mere presence of a law enforcement officer works to deter crime or diffuse a situation. Officers’ attitudes are professional and nonthreatening.
Verbalization — Force is not-physical. Officers issue calm, nonthreatening commands, such as “Let me see your identification and registration.” Officers may increase their volume and shorten commands in an attempt to gain compliance. Short commands might include “Stop,” or “Don’t move.”
Empty-Hand Control — Officers use bodily force to gain control of a situation. Soft technique. Officers use grabs, holds and joint locks to restrain an individual. Hard technique. Officers use punches and kicks to restrain an individual.
Less-Lethal Methods — Officers use less-lethal technologies to gain control of a situation. Blunt impact. Officers may use a baton or projectile to immobilize a combative person. Chemical. Officers may use chemical sprays or projectiles embedded with chemicals to restrain an individual (e.g., pepper spray). Conducted Energy Devices (CEDs). Officers may use CEDs to immobilize an individual. CEDs discharge a high-voltage, low-amperage jolt of electricity at a distance.
Lethal Force — Officers use lethal weapons to gain control of a situation. Should only be used if a suspect poses a serious threat to the officer or another individual. Officers use deadly weapons such as firearms to stop an individual’s actions.
This is the progression of force that dictates how a LEO should respond to any call, dictated by department policy. Ideally, you start with officer presence and work your way up from there, depending on the situation presented.
Let’s say, for example, that you’re dispatched to a call where a man is in a public area wielding a large blunt object in a threatening manner. The man sees that the cops have arrived, but he just doesn’t give a rat’s ass. Officer presence then goes out the window.
Now we can’t hear what the cops were saying in the video, but I would imagine at some point they utilized verbalization and ordered the man to stop what he was doing and drop his weapon. Obviously that didn’t work either.
At that point you have to adapt to the situation.
Empty hand control would be and should be skipped in this situation. Many have said he should have been “rushed” by the cops or the dog, assuming it’s a bite dog, which would have led to the use of empty hand techniques. In either of these situations there is a high probability that someone in law enforcement would be seriously injured. Blunt force trauma to the head is not what I would call a good time.
We then move along the continuum to less lethal methods.
Utilizing blunt impact (baton) would still leave you open for more unnecessary bodily harm as you would easily be in range of his weapon. You generally have to be pretty close to utilize chemical agents as well; they’re easily affected by environmental factors, such as wind or rain. I’ve seen firsthand that OC does not always affect people as adversely as it’s advertised. So we are left with our Conducted Energy Devices or Tasers.
Oft times Tasers are deployed too readily when other methods could have been used effectively. The Carl Jr shooting’s doesn’t appear to be one of those situations. The officer in the video used the device that would keep the assailant at the furthest distance and hopefully incapacitate him without the need for lethal force. When that didn’t work he attempted to holster his Taser—instead of dropping it and drawing his sidearm.
That’s when the assailant advanced on the officer and we find ourselves at the end of the continuum, lethal force.
The K9 officer fires five shots in order to protect his co-worker and, at least in my estimation, stops the threat. Whether the other officer just felt like he needed to get his shots in; there’s certainly a chance that he fell victim to what’s called “sympathetic fire.” Or there may have been a genuine reason for officer two to fire another five shots. That remains to be seen.
The long and the short of all this: the officer followed the use of force continuum. Lethal force was deployed as a last resort.
In my estimation, this was a justified shooting. The investigation will probably reflect that view. Not because cops are corrupt or the system is rigged, but because a man threatened serious bodily harm or death with a dangerous weapon. For LEOs and CC’ers that’s the gold standard of when we can use deadly force to defend our lives or others with a firearm.
I don't like the wording force continuum bc it's implies you have to try one before you go to the next. I think force options is better bc we play by big boy rules and use our head to determine which force option to use. Good response to the shooting above.
Patrick Aherne
01-28-12, 22:54
Anybody who is using Use of Force Continuum is behind the curve in current UOF application and legal terms.
Anybody who is using Use of Force Continuum is behind the curve in current UOF application and legal terms.
We no longer teach it. We teach Graham v. Connor and Tennessee v. Garner and the how/where/what/why/and when of objective reasonableness.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
01-28-12, 23:20
We no longer teach it. We teach Graham v. Connor and Tennessee v. Garner and the how/where/what/why/and when of objective reasonableness.
Would you mind expanding on this a little bit? Its the first Ive seen of this and Im quite curious.
Would you mind expanding on this a little bit? Its the first Ive seen of this and Im quite curious.
PM sent.
CarlosDJackal
01-30-12, 15:03
We no longer teach it. We teach Graham v. Connor and Tennessee v. Garner and the how/where/what/why/and when of objective reasonableness.
We used both. The Force Continuum was never meant to be a linear or successive process for escalating force. It is meant to identify the categories of levels and the hierarchy as dictated by Case Law. Which level you should go to should be dictated by your particular situation.
Possible suicide by cop perhaps. Only person I feel for is the LEO who had to kill the POS, and be second guessed, and who knows what else depending on variables out of his control. If I lived in the town, he'd get my full support.
I am utterly astounded by the many comments made by the public in regards to this OIS incident. The suspect chose to initiate the conflict by violently vandalizing the restaurant and terrifying patrons and employees such that they felt compelled to flee for safety and request police intervention. Upon arrival of LE, the suspect willfully failed to obey repeated commands issued by officers, was NOT incapacitated by a Taser hit, then attempted to assault an officer using a deadly weapon, was shot by one officer, yet still did not drop his weapon, thus was shot again by another officer. The evidence justifying the officers actions is unequivocal and clear on the video, yet many members of the public fail to see the truth...
Too much comic book style movie violence combined with a false perception that Police are basically payed to sacrifice their personal safety in order to handle everyone with kid gloves.
Anybody who is using Use of Force Continuum is behind the curve in current UOF application and legal terms.
Some of us are stuck teaching agencies at regional academies who seem to have not gotten the word.
Mauser KAR98K
01-31-12, 00:55
Some of us are stuck teaching agencies at regional academies who seem to have not gotten the word.
Is that the "Force of Matrix" I was taught when I was in the academy and law enforcement back in 2003-2005?
I'm rather curious of what is being taught now.
I was involved in an incident that was incorrectly reported by the local news paper last year. My Chief told me something that will always stick with me when I read about these incidents. He told me to never read the comments. YOU know what you did and YOU know what really happened. Everything else is just second hand crap.
A perfect example is the audio in this specific incident. They are all but cheering when the TASER is fired and when the shots are fired. As they sit there and watch the aftermath, they start to drum up the "should have shot him in the leg BS". This right here is proof positive that most people have no clue that officers have to make life or death decisions in fractions of a second.
Your chief is right. I know better and was upset by the comments section on a recent series of articles. I reminded myself not to read the trash. It is easier when you're not personally involved.
Your chief is right. I know better and was upset by the comments section on a recent series of articles. I reminded myself not to read the trash. It is easier when you're not personally involved.
I don't read the comments on some of my own videos, much less something like this where you're 100% guaranteed to see mostly comments so moronic, you can't figure out how such people remember to breath, much less turn their comp on.
Many people feel the LEOs life is less valuable then the perps, and so, will default to the "side" of the perp. Add to that all their knowledge coming from TV shows, and other influences, and a general "fu&% the cops" attitude, reading any comments at such a vid, article etc anyplace but a pro LE location, will cause steam to come out of your ears period.
Question:
What would happen if the perp just kept walking? At some point the police would have had to affect a physical arrest, no?
Question:
What would happen if the perp just kept walking? At some point the police would have had to affect a physical arrest, no?
But he didn't.....
He decided to engage the police officer/s and paid the price. This was an active resistor/assailant not a passive resistor. Apples to oranges here.
ForTehNguyen
02-03-12, 07:45
Question:
What would happen if the perp just kept walking? At some point the police would have had to affect a physical arrest, no?
if he kept walking Im sure the dog wouldve been next after the taser. Since he wanted to batter up, all bets are off now
Question:
What would happen if the perp just kept walking? At some point the police would have had to affect a physical arrest, no?
But that's not what actually happened, and "what if?" is mental masturbation.
CarlosDJackal
02-03-12, 09:46
Question:
What would happen if the perp just kept walking? At some point the police would have had to affect a physical arrest, no?
By the same token, what would have happened had the perp dropped his weapon and followed the Officers' instructions?
You can "what if" this to death but it has nothing to do with reality. It's a simple concept - when the uniformed Officers who are holding the Taser, K-9 and handgun gives you a LAWFUL ORDER, the only way you will walk away from this situation with minimal injury IS IF YOU COMPLY.
COMPLYING IS NOT AN ADMISSION OF GUILT. Guilt is to be determined in a court of law at a later date. It's not that freaking hard!! :rolleyes:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.