Trying to sort out good guys from bad guys

[oldtexan]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/a...8#.UAVdCZEdqxO

This story really brought home to me the difficulty of trying to determine who is a bad guy and who is a good guy in a real-world situation.

Assuming this article is substantially true, an ATF agent was shot and killed because another person misidentified him as a bad guy. From the point of view of a concealed handgun carrier who runs "to the sound of the guns", it should be a reminder of how extremely difficult it is in real life to figure out who to shoot and who not to shoot. From the point of view of someone who is defending himself in a struggle how does he let late-arriving help know that he's the good guy?

I've thought for years that the most important and challenging part of carrying a weapon for protection is not marksmanship or gunhandling, but is being able to make good decisions under extreme stress like in the incident in this story.

So how do we train to improve our decision-making skills?

What are your thoughts?

[polymorpheous]

In this day and age it's best to stay out of it.
Be a good witness.

[glocktogo]

In this day and age it's best to stay out of it.
Be a good witness.

Some of us don't have that luxury. If someone is getting shot, we have a duty to respond as part of our commission. When carrying CCW off duty, I have two badges on me. One in my wallet and one on my belt. If I had to go into a similar situation and have time, I'll try to expose both badges, by tucking the wallet into my belt in the rear with the badge flapped open) and tuck my shirt so the one near my holster is visible as well. Above all else, when engaging a subject I'll be verbalizing who I am and to drop the weapon. Obviously the ATF agent wasn't doing that. If I'm unsure who's who in a scuffle like that, I'll still verbalize and hope that one of them comes out on top. I'll detain or engage the other one as necessary and sort it out later.

I can't say under the circumstances that the NYPD officers did anything wrong. They perceived a threat and defended themselves. Some days the dragon wins.

If I have my family with me, all bets are off. I have a duty to secure their safety first and foremost.

[polymorpheous]

I'm speaking on the civilian side.
The OP did not identify himself as LEO.

Off or on duty LEO...
That is entirely different can of worms which is out of my lane completely.

[Chameleox]

This story really brought home to me the difficulty of trying to determine who is a bad guy and who is a good guy in a real-world situation.

That's really the million dollar question. Lots of people know how to shoot, but the when/who/why to shoot is what's often harder. Put another way, learning to shoot straight and fast is hard, but then learning how to figure out who needs to be shot straight and fast is even harder.

From the point of view of someone who is defending himself in a struggle how does he let late-arriving help know that he's the good guy?

There are a lot of variables to this. The easiest way is to immediately submit to any orders you hear from other responders. Now, there are enough variables in play here where one might not immediately submit to orders from someone else while in the middle of a struggle (gives other guy advantage, intentions of responders, auditory exclusion, etc). Other options that have been mentioned here and elsewhere have been using good guy clothing, like a recognized badge(issued by the state or an agency, not by a crackerjack box) or one of those weird CCW sashes. Have a companion or a witness call you in as a good guy (might help, might not, depending on how swamped or distracted the dispatcher is). Again, lots of options based on variables.

So how do we train to improve our decision-making skills?

Target discrimination drills, hood drills, Simunitions/marking cartridge/airsoft (if you can get them) and scenarios all play a role in developing DFDM ability. Getting this training, in meaningful volume, is hard, even for municipal police departments. There's a reason that the ability to discriminate and shoot, at speed, in close confines, is usually the sole province of shit hot groups of gunfighters.

It boils down to risk versus reward. Polymorpheus's point, while it may have been a bit glib, is valid. Let me explain:
I can wear my badge to the front on a chain, or looped around my support hand. I can wear my police union or SWAT T-shirt, have my wife call me in as an off duty cop with a physical description, and be recognized by most if not all of my 450 person department. Despite all of this, I can still get popped by a new guy with tunnel vision and poor skills, or a CCW carrier. Despite all my preparations and training, shit may still happen, so I weigh my risks of intervening vs the reward. If the fight comes to you, you may not have the time, or the option, to not intervene.

[C4IGrant]

The best decision making skill you can exercise is the one that asks these questions:

1. Am I directly in danger?
2. Are one of my loved ones directly in danger?
3. Can I escape?

After these three questions are answered, then then the next thought in your head needs to be; "I am not the police. I am not the police. I am not the police."


I have the luxury of doing a lot room clearing training (1-4 man). I also get to see a lot of people do this training as well. In the more advanced classes, we use "decision" based targets. Many of them have two people in them and it is your job to figure out which person is the bad guy and shoot them.

From my personal experience with just dealing with paper targets (where there is zero chance of the shooter getting hurt) and no real stress involved, people make the WRONG decision all the time and shoot the good guy.

Coming "late to the party" is generally a disaster waiting to happen and you (as a CCW holder) would be wise to escape VS get into the fight.



C4

[Chameleox]

Coming "late to the party" is generally a disaster waiting to happen and you (as a CCW holder) would be wise to escape VS get into the fight.

That's a real shitty scenario, regardless of who responds. Even for off duty types, you're not as likely to have all your intervention options handy, so it gets even dicier.

As for the rest of your post, Grant, well said.

[C4IGrant]

That's a real shitty scenario, regardless of who responds. Even for off duty types, you're not as likely to have all your intervention options handy, so it gets even dicier.

As for the rest of your post, Grant, well said.

If you read the article, the off duty cop yells "POLICE POLICE" several times and gets no response from the ATF agent.

So what would a CCW holder yell?? "Concerned Citizen! Concerned Citizen!

If "POLICE SHOW ME YOUR HANDS" didn't get a response, what would Joe 6 pack do to get a response??


C4

[Chameleox]

If you read the article, the off duty cop yells "POLICE POLICE" several times and gets no response from the ATF agent.

So what would a CCW holder yell?? "Concerned Citizen! Concerned Citizen!

If "POLICE SHOW ME YOUR HANDS" didn't get a response, what would Joe 6 pack do to get a response??


C4

My point exactly; not disagreeing with you at all.

[oldtexan]

If you read the article, the off duty cop yells "POLICE POLICE" several times and gets no response from the ATF agent.

So what would a CCW holder yell?? "Concerned Citizen! Concerned Citizen!

If "POLICE SHOW ME YOUR HANDS" didn't get a response, what would Joe 6 pack do to get a response??


C4

It's entirely possible that the ATF agent's brain never processed the sound of the arriving LEO yelling "Police! Police!". He may have never even seen the two LEOs either. Because he was in a struggle with the robber over a gun, I think it's likely that all his attention was focused on that struggle.

I draw no conclusions about the rightness or wrongness of anyone's decisions or actions in this scenario. What interests me here is the lessons we can draw about what difficulties we can face in any lethal force encounter and the training challenges to successfully face those difficulties.

I think that dynamic force-on-force training involving progressively challenging scenarios, trained assertive role players, good feedback mechanisms(after action reviews), and run by highly competent instructors, is the key. This kind of training is expensive, it's hard work, and it offers some physical and emotional risks, but IMO it's the best preparation for a real encounter. By the way, I'm not an LEO, just an armed citizen.