Bad guys, police and armed citizens

Status
Not open for further replies.

mercop

Member.
Joined
Jan 12, 2003
Messages
663
Location
The hills of PA
Recently I read a study conducted by the Force Science Institute Research Center titled Violent Encounters, A study of felonious assaults on our nations Law Enforcement Officers. The study showed the glaring differences in mindset and training between law enforcement and the criminals they face. The point on this article it to discuss the implications this has in regards to the armed citizen.

During the study 40 incidents were studied out of 800 that were considered. Interviews were conducted with 43 felons and 50 police officers. The scenes of the shootings were also visited.

Not surprisingly the handgun was the weapon of choice for the bad guy and all but one was obtained illegally on the street or from a robbery. Only one of the felons claimed to have actually selected a particular firearm believing it would be more destructive. Most said they used whatever was available at the time they needed it.

Some of the bad guys began carrying a firearm as young as nine years old and 17 was the average age at which they began to carry a firearm all the time. This is frightening since we know how unpredictable even non-violent juveniles can be. They also realize that they are protected under the juvenile justice system.

Approximately half of felons interviewed claimed to have some type of formal firearms training, primarily from the military. The one statistic that blew me away was that on average bad guys reported practicing about 23 times a years in informal settings like back yards or drug areas. This type of constant informal training, which I doubt, is seldom conducted with the goal of shooting tiny little groups in a piece of paper, in very unstructured environments can obviously lead to a “thinking outside the box” mentality. The average police officer in the US qualifies 2.5 times a year. If you are an armed citizen, have you ever qualified? How often do you draw from concealment and engage live/moving targets? The officers who practiced the most off duty did so in the form of competitive shooting. You have to ask yourself how much of that transfers to shooting to save your life.

Over half of those interviewed had participated in live gunplay prior to engaging a police officer. That means that half of them had previously been inoculated to being shot at or shooting at another person. Ten of the felons had been involved in five or more live firefights. Have you participated in any use of force in the form of Simmuntions or airsoft? Only eight of the 50 police officers had been previously involved in shootings. I have to imagine that number would dwindle even more for legally armed citizens.

Across the board like most of us, the bad guys carry their guns in the waistband with the groin and small of the back being almost tied in way of preference. Amazingly 40% claimed to carry back up guns. None of them reported using a holster, which leads me to believe they will need only more preparatory movement to access their firearm.

Approximately 60% of all offenders including the street combat veterans claimed to be point shooters in that they focused on the target. They seemed more willing to shoot at the available target and were not focused on center mass. The concentrated on shooting their victim to the ground and once that was achieved had no problem walking up and executing them.

In the shootings investigated the bad guys put rounds on target a staggering 70% of the time with only a 40% hit rate for the police. Even though it is not discussed at length in the article it is interesting to note that the majority of time police are involved in a shooting the initial contact is made by the officer. At some time during the contact furtive movement on the part of the suspect often initiates the shooting. Obviously even the most lackadaisical officer realizes the danger of any contact. Police are loosing gunfight even though they initiate contact. The armed citizen is even further behind the power curve since it is usually the criminal who initiates contact.

Even though I know that many folks seem to know exactly how they will respond to a deadly threat, more than half of trained police officers failed to use deadly force when it would have been justified.

Existing every day in an environment where violence from fistfights to shootings are the norm the felons expect to be killed and will not hesitate to fire first. They have learned to survive by hitting while their victim is thinking about it.

Here I only covered some of the high points. What is more important is what it means to police officers and our focus here, the armed citizen. The key to survival is constant, unpredictable training in chaotic environments. Constant means that training cannot depend on just live range time and a choreographed routine. Unpredictable means that what you do in a training session not always be based on what you have in mind and must encompass open hand combatives and the introduction of not only firearms but edged and impact weapons. The chaotic environment is the hard part. For many staying away from these places is what keeps us from getting locked up that would result in us being prohibited from purchasing or carrying a gun. When you do find yourself in a chaotic environment focus on scanning for possible threats without getting tunnel vision.

In my opinion one of the best training investments you can make is a quality airsoft and Blue Gun. Make the focus of your training responding to furtive movement within seven yards. Putting rounds on target and using every possible aide at your disposal such as open hand skills, light, sound, movement, angles and physical barriers. Learn what your natural responses are and train into them. Come violent or don’t come at all.
 
I hate airsoft.

One of few "gun" laws I'd support is banning airsoft guns from those people and places from which real guns are banned. Dangerous nuisance.
 
Bare hands and non-lethal weapons.

A toy gun is not a "force," nor is holding and shooting it at a gaming opponent holdling another toy gun any sort of realistic simulation of combat or confrontation. It's a game, like paintball and touch football.
 
Can you tell me about your background so I understand what what you base your opinions on. So airsoft and Simmunitions is of no legitimate training benefit?
 
You can assume for this discussion's sake that I am a retired professor of botany and theater critic. I'm not going to compare combatives training backgrounds in an internet forum. For one thing, I can't (no, it's not some secret agent thing; far more prosaic). It's easier to assume for this discussion's sake that yours is superior.

But I will relate that I have engaged in combat. And for whatever reason rooted in my peculiar personality, I tend to get offended (I do not offend easily) not by any attempt to simulate combat, but by efforts to sell the "combat experience" via games to children and immature adults.

Playing with toy guns for fun bears little resemblance to combat, with or without firearms, any more than football bears much resemblance to unarmed combat. Sure there's competition. Theres competition in tiddly winks, too.
 
A toy gun is not a "force," nor is holding and shooting it at a gaming opponent holdling another toy gun any sort of realistic simulation of combat or confrontation. It's a game, like paintball and touch football.

So what do you suggest people use to simulate engagements with firearms? Blanks? MILES? Wax bullets propelled by primers?

Have you ever done any force on force training? If so when and who conducted it? What did you use as an engagement simulator?

But I will relate that I have engaged in combat.

When and where? If you engaged in combat as a member of the US armed forces in the last 25 years you used MILES, perhaps Simunitions or maybe even the old SCOPES system of tactical engagement simulation. Are you saying that there is no value in that?

Playing with toy guns for fun bears little resemblance to combat, with or without firearms, any more than football bears much resemblance to unarmed combat. Sure there's competition. Theres competition in tiddly winks, too.

There is a big difference between properly planned, resourced and conducted force on force training and playing any kind of game. I doubt you'd find any legitimate trainer who would disagree with you that games don't simulate combat. However, some of the tools that gamers use can be used as training aids in properly conducted force on force training.
 
I'd like to see airsoft banned entirely. There is a general culture of unsafe behavior that runs deep in that "sport". Some of their guns are potentially lethal at close range. Instead of disallowing their use, they instead make up special rules designed to allow an unsafe gun on the field. Even official fields have wildly varying safety rules, such as rules allowing adjults to "assume risk" by wearing inadequate face and eye protection. It is NOTHING like paintball. The two sports should never be grouped together.

That being said, live fire simulations or practice handling guns does come in handy. I actually have practiced with a paintball pistol that has the same grip angle as a 1911. Why? The reasons are two-fold: one, it gets you used to instinctively drawing and pointing a gun at the target without the risks associated with a real firearm, and, two, that thing is damn heavy; it's at least twice as heavy as a real firearm, which helps you build the wrist strength necessary for controlling a firearm's recoil. If you get to where you can sling that brick around like it's nothing, you'll have no problems delivering accurate repeat shots. I don't even really use the thing for paintball. It's more of a training tool. I could tell a big difference the last time I was at the range. I was sharper, and my control was far better.
 
Ideally, live fire exercises and blank rounds can accustom personnel to, familiarize them with, and train them to perform combat maneuvers -- our own Army does this. This helps such persons more effectively to carry out combat orders or instructions in such an environment.

However, I would submit that for individuals, as opposed to Army formations, nothing other than actual combat itself is anything like actual combat. In fact, I would submit that unarmed combat is closer to armed combat than any simulated armed combat can be to actual armed combat.

That's an opinion without much logical reasoning behind it, I readily concede. But it is founded on practical experience.
 
Ideally, live fire exercises and blank rounds can accustom personnel to, familiarize them with, and train them to perform combat maneuvers -- our own Army does this.

Our own Army is much more advanced then that. MILES (Multiple Integrated Laser Engagement System) was fielded in the early 80s. It allows instant feedback of hits or misses and replaces older systems of umpires assessing casualties and early attempts like SCOPES which gave every Soldier a 4x scope without any cross hairs and an helmet cover with a black number on it. The soldier called out the number of the "enemy" he just shot and an umpire assessed that soldier as a casualty. Not very real.

MILES allows real time assessment of casualties from just about every direct fire weapon in the inventory. The eye safe laser activates a sensor on the soldier or vehicle and it indicates an immediate hit. The computers in the sensor array can tell what kind of weapon the target was engaged with making it impossible to kill an M1A2 Abrams with an M4 or M16, only appropriate weapons can kill appropriate targets. It also has the advantage of being able to utilize the maximum effective range of the weapon it is built for. You can "kill" an enemy soldier at 460 meters with a MILES equipped M16. MILES also requires blanks or in the case of larger weapons, a small charge that simulates the firing signature of the weapon before the laser will fire. It has the disadvantage of being expensive and since it requires blanks which are unsafe at close range, it's not really good for CQB training.

Another system that is used is Simunitions. Simunitions uses actual weapons with a special barrel and ammunition. It's good for close range only and it requires protective equipment. It's also very expensive.

All of these systems have their drawbacks. Since they aren't lethal, you sometimes see what we used to call MILES courage or people acting in ways they wouldn't in a real fight because they know there is no real danger. That's where proper planning and execution of the training event comes in.

Things have come a long way from the days when maneuver was practiced with blanks. It's now possible to conduct very realistic force on force training. Don't knock it till you've tried it.
 
to add on to what jeff has said......

there is a saying prevelant in the SEAL teams ive heard a few times.....

the only diffrence in there training is that they dont kill the enemy in training.

one can take that with a grain of salt but it says something about mentality.
 
I hate airsoft.

One of few "gun" laws I'd support is banning airsoft guns from those people and places from which real guns are banned. Dangerous nuisance.

and

I'd like to see airsoft banned entirely.

Huh?!?! I don't know of a single death ever caused by airsoft. It amazes me how people who are so pro 2a can jump on a ban-wagon (HAH, see what I did there?) for something that is used safely and legitamitely by so many people.

Back to original point. I play paintball all the time, I have no doubt that it would help me significantly if I was in a real gun fight. Not saying it is the same at all, but there are similarities.
 
I play paintball all the time, I have no doubt that it would help me significantly if I was in a real gun fight.

Playing games isn't the same as training. You can use a paintball gun in training, but you most likely have learned bad things playing games.
 
I've trained W/ miles & I've been in combat they aren't even close.

Miles can be cheated(two sticks tapped on the miles box like drum sticks and your M-16A2 is now full auto) Even NTC loses a whole lot in the translation ( like when they evacuate all the real patients from your field hospital a few minutes before they simulate an NBC attack thus giving the whole unit time to at least donn MOPP level two)

The two times I got into an SD situation on the street it just happend and it happened damn fast.

The best training I ever had was working W/ juvinile offenders in a crisis treatment center, the first time you get clocked in the head W/ a dinner plate cause you weren't paying attention you WILL learn situational awareness.

but to really be effective it's got to be "If you screw up you are REALLY going to get hurt " real.

Those BGs didn't get that good in a shoot house
 
Airsoft guns are a just good way to train by oneself or force on force.

Title:Intuitive Decisionmaking
Journal: Police: The Law Enforcement Magazine Volume:29 Issue:3 Dated:March 2005 Pages:62 to 64

In order for an officer to react appropriately and safely in an armed conflict, he/she must immediately be able to recognize patterns found in real contacts with subjects. The reactions of an officer are maximized when the learning arenas of seeing, hearing, and doing are combined. However, in the past firearms training was a linear exercise where marksmanship skills were tested and practiced creating a reasonably skilled, but stress-free shooter. In a fast-evolving, crisis-filled situation, an officer must recognize the pattern of the event without conscious thought and take an immediate course of action. The force-on-force training scenario program attempts to create realistic situations, so that an officer undergoing training can recognize a pattern of behavior on the part of the offender. The scenario must be well-scripted and contain role players who will not lose control. Within these training scenarios, paintball, simunitions and the alternative Airsoft guns (gas-operated guns that work and feel just like real firearms) can be utilized. In conclusion, conducting quality force-on-force training develops naturalistic decisionmaking officers using their personal experience to make decisions in a field setting.

Title:Airsoft Simulation Instructor Course
Journal:Law and Order Volume:51 Issue:6 Dated:June 2003 Pages:93 to 96

This article describes and discusses the features and benefits of conducting firearms training with Airsoft replica firearms, which fire 0.2-0.5 gram 6mm plastic BB's at between 200-450 feet per second.

The BB's hurt when they contact the body (less than paintballs), but they do not injure. They can be fired at point-blank range with minimal injury potential, and they are accurate at any realistic engagement distance. Minimal protection is required, and the recommended face protection is completely clear, making the training much more realistic. The penalty for taking a hit typically ranges from a blood blister to a few layers of broken skin. The most significant advantage of Airsoft technology is that training can be done in agencies' real deployment environments. No specialized shoot houses or other facilities are necessary. The Massachusetts Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors and Armorers Association just released its Airsoft Simulation Instructor Certification course. It is a 1-day course that is offered nationwide. Learning objectives are specific skills the simulation designer wants to develop in his/her officers. Students are taken through simulation designs meant to impart simple, single learning objectives (such as hitting a moving human at close distances); then students/instructors learn to develop a simulation design for incorporating a couple of basic tactical skills as learning objectives, such as verbalizing, moving to cover, and possibly shooting; finally, students are taken through a simulation design for a complex situation that requires proper judgment by the officer/role player. During the last and longest part of the day, each instructor/student runs a simulation, choosing safety officers and role-players from among other instructor/students. This is done to ensure that each student/instructor is capable of managing a safe simulation.
 
There's one aspect of the thing that is not being talked about or considered. All sorts of training aside.

In the original study, they are interviewing felons. By nature not a very honest or reliable group of beings. All of what they say to anyone in authority should be taken with a few grains of salt.

But, here's the wild card. Mentality.

The cop on the beat, or the ccw armed citizen is not sticking a gun in his waistband and walking out the house with the "I'm gonna find somebody to rob and kill" focus on his evenings activity. The felon is packing that gun as part of his trade, just like a doctor carries a stethescope. He's a preditor looking for meat. The cop on the beat is just a guy doing his job, and the citizen is going about his buisness not even thinking that he's being watched by somebody who's planning on killing him to achieve his goal. It's all about mentality.

The cops are not trained to a degree they must, but instead are even retro-impared by the stuff put out in the police acadamy. When not to shoot, the ramifications of shooting, how far the police union will protect them if it's not a textbook shooting. The fellon is not operating under any restrictions of any sort. No review boards, law suits. If you can get them to be honest, how many cops are afraid to pull the trigger because of the problems if he has misjudged something he has about 1/2 a second to think. The cop and the citizen both have the "what if" senerio to worry about.

All the advantage is with the preditor. He knows what he's going to do, and does not give a tinkers d--- about any consiquences. He doesn't care about over penitrating the target and shooting that grandmother crossing the street down the block. God help the armed citizen who shoots back and his 9mm round goes through the target into a townhouse and hits an inocent bystander. Or even if its perfect and he hits the bad guy and the the bad guy lives to sue him.

It's never going to be a level playing field while the good guys battle the bad guys, because evil doesn't care. All the airsoft or paintball is not going to really help untill the mental program is in place. The truth is most cops and citizens have not grown up in an inner city getto, and do not have the life's experiance in going to a vicious level of combat in an instant. Training will help some, a little. But there's nothing you can do untill you train your mind to a less civilized way of dealing with it. It's 90% mindset. Training is only the gravy on the meatloaf.

I've gotten to know some of the real street guys in Washington D.C through a group therapy session at the V.A. hospital on Irving street, Washington D.C. I'm going to go out on a limb here, and admit I had/have a problem with booze getting out of control due to depression. The V.A. put me in a group therapy session and it was an eye opener in more ways that one for this white bread dude from the suburbs. Over the course of some months I've gotten to know my fellow group members quite well, and vise versa. We call one another if we're going to fall off the wagon. Six months sober so far. Some of them who have become friends of sorts, have served time for violent fellonies. We've had some intersting talks down in the coffee bar in the lobby.

One, I'll call Harvey, is a big hulking sort of Forrest Whitiker type. He's been in Lorton for armed robbery. The kind of training they do has very little to do with shooting. It's all about getting close to the would be victim without displaying any weapon. Then its a fast ambush, with the gun right in your face, and your being told to "give it up!" or get popped. Try to pull a weapon of your own, you get popped. They practice for extemely close range, like in your face contact range, and never give the target a chance. They don't practice shooting per se. For one, they don't have a place to shoot more than a few rounds at a time before someone calls the police. Most of them only fire a gun to make sure it works. Some don't even have the gun loaded to capacity. These guys ain't out there playing with airsoft or paintball. They do practice tactics.

The tactics are all about watching the target, closing on a paralel course, or a quick stepping out from a doorway or from behind a parked truck or van. Or walking toward the victim on a sidewalk, and just before you pass each other going oposite ways, they step right in front of you, weapon right in your belly and tell you to give it up. Wallet and cell phone right now!

Airsoft is not going to prepare you for a guy with a hoodie on that has one of those pockets on the front that goes all the way through, so you can actually clasp your hands together in the pocket. They like those because they can have their Glock/Davis/Raven, held in the hoodie pocket, shielding the outline with the left hand over it, and then spring the trap when thier two feet or less from you. On the street, if you can't see thier hands, plan on an ambush.

On this subject of practice, like one of my group said; "I'm gonna be right here in front of you man, why I gotta target practice? You ain't go'in nowhere." Pactical aproach for thier buisness, which is robbery. Range is so close you know what he had for dinner by his breath.

If you want to practice tactics for the street, its all about mindset, not shooting. 90% of what will let you go home at night is the thinking you've done before ever picking up that gun. Are you really ready to at any moment, kill someone? Because they are. Most citizens are not. They will hesitate.

Good guys, either cops or armed citizens are generally not thinking about it like that. That puts them one down before the game even starts.
 
carl said,
If you want to practice tactics for the street, its all about mindset, not shooting. 90% of what will let you go home at night is the thinking you've done before ever picking up that gun. Are you really ready to at any moment, kill someone? Because they are.

I agree, I can only speak for myself, but if my situational awareness fails, game on. My mindset for a long time has been be cautious in going about my business, provoking no one, but when confronted in the senarios carl mentioned I will pull the trigger. How do I know, Because I know I can, will, and have.
 
Airsoft is not going to prepare you for a guy with a hoodie on that has one of those pockets on the front that goes all the way through, so you can actually clasp your hands together in the pocket. They like those because they can have their Glock/Davis/Raven, held in the hoodie pocket, shielding the outline with the left hand over it, and then spring the trap when thier two feet or less from you. On the street, if you can't see thier hands, plan on an ambush.


I think you are illustrating the need for training. Hardware is not a substitute for training.
 
The officers who practiced the most off duty did so in the form of competitive shooting. You have to ask yourself how much of that transfers to shooting to save your life.

Obviously quite a bit as they were available to be interviewed.:)
 
Existing every day in an environment where violence from fistfights to shootings are the norm the felons expect to be killed and will not hesitate to fire first. They have learned to survive by hitting while their victim is thinking about it.


This statement says it all
 
Duke, you obviously don't know a lot about airsoft. I agree that the crap 14 year old kids buy at WalMart is not a good training experience. However, there is a whole other side of airsoft that is not as mainstream. In the more advanced airsoft side of things, guns cost anywhere from $150 to $1500, most guns costing about $400. The gear used is often real military gear, costing much more than the gun itself. The people who play are rarely under 21. The guns are not plastic. Many players have real Eagle Industries gear and a real Aimpoint, as well as several other expensive pieces of gear. the BBs shoot a lot harder, a lot faster, and a lot more accurately than the garbage they sell to teenagers at walmart.

That is what airsoft has always been to me. I play on a team and it is a lot of fun. I don't see it as training, because airsoft guns do not perform in the same way as real guns, and people do not fear being shot with a plastic BB. So you are right that it is not a substitute for real training. These airsoft guns are rarely ever available at retail stores and almost always have to be ordered online. If your experience is kids running around your neighborhood with airsoft guns from walmart, you have never seen one of these.

My point isn't to champion airsoft. My point is that banning or regulating anything can hurt people who are responsible and do use it with respect of the community. There is a large group of players that would be the victims of unnecessary restrictions.

As for the clear plastic garbage that kids buy from walmart, I hate it and I wish it would go away. It causes nothing but problems, and the parents who let their kids run around town packing these things and pointing them at people are just as much to blame.
 
Actually I am quite familiar with the "advanced airsoft" weapons. Some of them look like the real thing from anything more than a few yards away.

Just to clarify or repeat: I'm not in favor of "banning airsoft." I would favor banning their carry or use by any person or in any location or situation where a real firearm would be banned.

For example, way, way back in 1986, when Soviets and other dinosaurs roamed the earth, a buddy and I bought "Softair" (yes, that was the name back then) guns. He had an MP5K, I had a KG-9. They looked pretty realistic, even weighed and handled like the real thing, using plastic casings and plastic BBs. We replaced those with copper BBs, of course. A few of our friends quickly followed suit.

In that innocent age, we took them to our high school in briefcases and bags, and shot them at one another. It was a huge old school with a lot of poorly-supervised after-school activities, so it was possible to stalk one-another through the halls, laboratories, classrooms, bathrooms and abandoned wings of the place and gun one another down from ambush.

That sort of behavior --- would not be a very good idea today.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top