Garland Texas shooting, handgun used

Status
Not open for further replies.
Quote:
Maybe this will make a lot of people, respect Glock handguns and also the .45acp.

Something tells me the officer could have pulled this off with a S&W M10 in .38SPCL. How many times do we have to be reminded that it's not the arrow, it's the indian?

Besides, everybody knows that Glocks suck and .45acp is overrated. Sorry, had to stir the pot.

Huh?

I'm not a Glock fan (simply because I think they're uglier than sin), but I don't get this insinuation that Glock handguns have no respect. I should think that they've more than proven worthy of respect over the last third of a century.
 
The Aurora Colorado shooter was reportedly wearing body armor. All of the national media reported it for days.

Then it came out that he was wearing load bearing equipment designed to carry spare magazines and other equipment on the body.

This came out after the St Louis newspaper contacted the company who sold the equipment to him.

You can't believe anything that you hear in the media after an event like this. They are all in a race to get new "facts" on the air and nothing is checked. The reporters and on air personalities usually don't know anything about the subject they report on.

As for what pistol or what caliber he used, it is completely immaterial. What is material is that he was trained well enough and cool headed enough to do his job under fire. The standard police sidearm of 30 years ago, a four inch barreled Smith and Wesson or Colt revolver in .38 special would have served just as well.

There was a large police presence on site because that is standard procedure for a free speech event like this. In the late 90s the Aryan Nation got a permit to march in the town I worked for. Once the word got out, the NAACP threatened a counter demonstration.

We had all 26 sworn officers on the street, the county had 5 deputies in town and there was a state police selective enforcement team there.

The NAACP never showed and the dozen or so Aryan Nation members put on their robes and nazi uniforms and marched from a member's home 10 blocks up to the street to the courthouse, their leader made a short speech that was heard by his dozen supporters and a whole bunch of cops then they marched back.

It was a non-event, but we were as ready for anything as we could be. I'm sure Garland did the same thing and had a huge police presence on site.
 
Chief, that was sarcasm. Sorry. We don't have a "I'm yanking your chain" emoticon. I carry a 1911 chambered in .45acp myself and while i don't think the Glock design is the best thing since sliced bread, I do think it is more than adequate.
 
These are the facts and everything you've heard on the topic are to be treated with extreme skepticism -

You can't believe anything that you hear in the media after an event like this. They are all in a race to get new "facts" on the air and nothing is checked. The reporters and on air personalities usually don't know anything about the subject they report on.

As for what pistol or what caliber he used, it is completely immaterial. What is material is that he was trained well enough and cool headed enough to do his job under fire. The standard police sidearm of 30 years ago, a four inch barreled Smith and Wesson or Colt revolver in .38 special would have served just as well.

So, most of what has been dished up by the media is BS filling "empty air" to entertain the instant gratification masses.
 
'Hunting in a baited area' is a time proven method of eliminating nuisance animals.
Case in point.
 
PBS, Skokie IL .....

PBS ran a great doc last month on the civil disorders & protests in Skokie IL in the 1970s/1980s. I watched about 80% of it.
The IL Nazis were a real pain in the behind, :mad: .
The PBS documentary may be online or on their World Channel.
 
RustyShackelford said:
Finally, did the first responder not have a carbine or M4? I thought many LE agencies big & small were going with the "active shooter" response. Other cops on the scene had rifles and SMGs but not the cop who shoots the terrorists?

This is an argument I see from those who believe the police force is becoming too "militarized." Fact of the matter is having an AR in the vehicle is the exception, not the norm. Many departments have training courses for AR use at the department level to become certified for one in the patrol vehicle if/when the supply for such becomes available. It was a "shocking" thing for locals around here when they introduced a familiarization course for the AR at the state police academy. AR shooting at 25 yards and 10 rounds is barely a test fire let alone familiarization. But I digress.
 
Fact of the matter is having an AR in the vehicle is the exception, not the norm. Many departments have training courses for AR use at the department level to become certified for one in the patrol vehicle if/when the supply for such becomes available. It was a "shocking" thing for locals around here when they introduced a familiarization course for the AR at the state police academy. AR shooting at 25 yards and 10 rounds is barely a test fire let alone familiarization. But I digress.

Might be the norm where you are but not around here. We started fielding patrol rifles in the late 90s. I think I took my first "patrol rifle course" that was sanctioned by the Illinois Law Enforcement Training and Standards Board in 98 or 99. It wasn't much of a course, more like a high power primer, almost nothing to do with actually fighting with an AR.

I have taught patrol rifle for departments in the area for years. Back around 2010 the DOD's 1033 program changed the distribution of M16s allowing each department one per sworn officer instead of one per so many sworn officers. (don't remember what the ratio was off the top of my head).

You are more likely to find an AR or an M16 in a squad car around here then you are to find a shotgun.

If the Garland officer had one I have no idea why he didn't use it, although I am guessing that there wasn't time. News reports I have read say the Garland officer and the school district security guard were in the squad car when the shooters drove up. The officer and the security guard exited the squad car and the shooters bailed out and opened fire.

No I've already stated that we don't know how reliiable that information is. But if it's true, I am guess that if the officer had a rifle, he had no time to deploy it. It may have been locked in a rack or it may have been in the trunk.

If he had one or not or where it was located isn't really important. He solved the problem with his handgun and that's what counts. When the fight comes to you, you fight with what you have at hand. An old Army term from the 70s and 80s was that when it came it was going to be a; "Come as you are war."
 
In the end it doesn't matter what calibers or guns were used, or who was wearing body armor, or how many shots were fired. It only matters who lived and who died.

Moral of the story? Always be alert, be armed, and be trained.

Even most police agencies have woefully insufficient firearms training/qualification these days. Our pistol qualifications usually stay inside of 20 yards, and never seem to require head shots beyond 7 yards. Even half of our rifle qualifications are conducted on our indoor range (25 yards or less).

I try to make it a habit to conduct a practice session at 100 yards with my pistol on at least a monthly basis. When the shots really matter you don't want to be questioning your ability to put the rounds where they matter.
 
I read a recent media item by the Dallas Morning News.
Reportedly the local LE agencies were aware of the serious threats and demands this high profile event had.
SWAT, DPS, patrol cops etc were all over. :uhoh:
The unarmed guard was with the police officer, they both got out. The security guard, a ex cop, was hit in the ankle. The police officer smoked both terrorists with his Glock 21 .45acp sidearm. He might of used G2 RIP or Extreme Shock USA loads, :D .
Looks like needless expenditure of resources on non-worthwhile event. What they did makes as much sense as stomping on American flag and posting videos of it.:rolleyes:
 
After previous high profile incidents where the "body armor" turned out to be stuff like a black nylon equipment vest with pockets for gear but no kevlar or plates, I am skeptical of initial reports of "body armor". Same with reports of "machineguns".

On topic: the officer had training and experience with his Glock. The terrorists (as far as I have heard) went out and bought AK style rifles. Training and experience with "inferior" equipment trump "superior" equipment with no training, no experience. You can't buy skill, you work for it.
 
I read another update that the officers pistol was a G22 .40 s&w. Nailed first terrorist in the nostril by one account. If i even thought for a fraction of a second they had body armor i too would have gone for head shots.
Gun ranges are gonna be booked solid this weekend fer sure.
 
Practice, train, react.
Im too old to work the street again but back in the 70's a bunch of bank robbers went speeding through the streets, the traffic cop they approached shot out a front tire causing them to lose control and crash.
All that with a 38 Smith.
practice, train, react.
 
I guess these jihadis made the mistake of thinking Texas was France.

This officer is a hero. Anyone who can keep their cool, and make these shots while under fire has my utmost admiration. This is what a REAL hero looks like.

I wonder if his next level politically elected supervisor will claim credit for "getting two terrorists" because he "gave the order".
 
My 22 years on the street (when the "party'' in south Florida was going full blast -1973 to 1995...) taught me that the news media never get it right. At least that went for anything I was personally involved in... I don't mean they didn't spell the names right their facts were so wrong you wondered what planet they were from.

That's why I said I'd like to see a clear, unemotional after action report on the incident. For anyone encountering an opponent in body armor - a head shot isn't your only option. Most armor that I'm familiar with (and I still have that old level three item somewhere in a back closet...) only covers you to your belt buckle. That leaves a lot of tender parts and extremely vulnerable areas to target at close quarters. In my era a patrol rifle was still only a possibility on the street. We used shotguns if we had the time to prepare...

I still think the shooting officer deserves an attaboy for an great piece of work. Since I've already seen the elephant as a cop (and would like to spend the rest of my life away from any form of combat...) I'd avoid that kind of an event like the plague if I had a choice. Thank heavens for all the fine young (and not so young) officers to be found in every community in this country...
 
In the end it doesn't matter what calibers or guns were used, or who was wearing body armor, or how many shots were fired. It only matters who lived and who died.

Moral of the story? Always be alert, be armed, and be trained.


Practice, train, react.
Im too old to work the street again but back in the 70's a bunch of bank robbers went speeding through the streets, the traffic cop they approached shot out a front tire causing them to lose control and crash.
All that with a 38 Smith.
practice, train, react.

I agree but a little luck also helps. Kind of like the bank robbery turned chase and shoot out in Richardson and Plano in '04. No telling how many rounds fired from one city to another (down 75 for a distance), 3 car jackings and no serious injurys.
 
Even most police agencies have woefully insufficient firearms training/qualification these days. Our pistol qualifications usually stay inside of 20 yards, and never seem to require head shots beyond 7 yards. Even half of our rifle qualifications are conducted on our indoor range (25 yards or less).
Ours is very much the same but I suspect that is because CO is bound to the POST standard and are not able to move too far outside of that box. For better or worse...
 
While I have quite a few .38s, and I shoot e'm, and I believe skill is number one, still the most famous encounter with terrorist, that is with Bonny and Clyde, Frank Hammer and his crew didn't use .38s.

They could shoot, they were experienced, and they could bring what they wanted, but they came loaded for bear. Serious bear.

I'm glad that cop didn't have just a .38.

Deaf
 
I can't practice head shots. My stupid government operated outdoor shooting range DOES NOT allow targets that resemble a human body much less a persons head.
I have to go indoors for that and even those a harder and harder to find every day.
 
I can't practice head shots. My stupid government operated outdoor shooting range DOES NOT allow targets that resemble a human body much less a persons head.
I have to go indoors for that and even those a harder and harder to find every day.

Where I live, urban sprawl is pushing away the outdoor ranges slowly but surely. The indoor ranges have been increasing in number due to that.
 
And compare to the Austin shooting a couple of months ago by an officer: head shot, one-handed, off-hand, 100 yards, at night, holding the reins of a horse in the other hand. I still have trouble believing that one.

I heard one report that the perps here wore body armor. Does that mean this officer made head shots?

Should give some support to the value of practicing precision use of the handgun, even if the statistics are that most gunfights are at close range.
Big takeaway here - do NOT start crap with Texas cops. (More well known corollary: Don't mess with Texas.) :D
 
Last edited:
I can't practice head shots. My stupid government operated outdoor shooting range DOES NOT allow targets that resemble a human body much less a persons head.
I have to go indoors for that and even those a harder and harder to find every day.

It's amazing the things the government will waste their time dwelling on while sucking up billions of our tax dollars... :scrutiny:

.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top