Never forget how quickly violence can unfold

Status
Not open for further replies.
9MMare said:
And did the cop get hit? Never heard. Hope not.
Click to expand...

I don't know what caliber the officer had, but it might be something on the internet by now.

As for the cop getting hit...yes he was. If you read the article and listen to the audio in the link the OP posted, the officer reported "I've been hit in the side. I''m OK."


9MMare said:
As a vet, I'm surprised he hit the mag release accidentally. (If that is what happened but that seems right.)
Click to expand...

Looking at the video, it looks like that's exactly what happened. I don't understand why he made the move he did at the time he lost the magazine, but you can clearly see the moment that it happened. His whole grip shifted on the gun during that time.
 
Google told me the perp had his three kids in the car. Must have had a really messed up soul to pick a deadly fight over a speeding ticket when you have your kids in the car.
 
Real handgun fights between determined individuals are not like the movies where one quickly prevails.
When neither party is psychologically stopped exchanging hits is a rather common occurance.

The old westerns are particiularly bad at illustrating that, where the fastest draw wins the gun fight. In reality the faster draw may pull and fire and score good hits first and still take lethal fire.
Back then with even worse medical treatment available movie style duels would have been fatal for both parties in a large percentage of incidents. However such showdowns were also rare in real life and more of a Hollywood creation based on ~1950s morals.

Handguns poke holes, and people can often function for more than 15 seconds even if thier heart is almost completely destroyed. So torso shots are rarely instant stops.
You can find instances where both individuals in gun fights take numerous rounds or even exchange most of a magazine scoring hits on eachother.





I also saw what I though was smoking in the middle of the road after the gunfight.
 
I'm sorry but I did not see the black guy getting hit. At what time in the video did he take this hit? He would never have gotten the jump on me, not the way he came out of the car. I would have my pistol drawn already and with his hand behind his back and him approaching and disobeying, hell I may have shot first. Several signs showing this was not going to end in a civil manor.
 
The officer was outside of his vehicle - you can see where the camera rolls back and forth from his weight being lifted from the car shortly after he stops. The sound is just too dodgy with wind noise to detect the other guy's reports and who shot first, but I would bet the officer was standing with weapon drawn before the guy even started walking towards him. The lessons of Newhall are still saving lives and will always be relevant.
 
OK - I guess I'll have to watch it again. If the officer was outside his vehicle when the exchange started ... I wonder why he got back in. It seems like it would have been better to stay on his feet and remain mobile - possibly moving to the back of his police cruiser and using it for concealment.

I hate to try and second guess something like this - esp. when it happened so fast. But one of the lessons my brain checked off here - was the degree of advantage that went to the shooter who was highly mobile. He moved quickly and fired from several different angles. We're lucky we didn't lose a police officer.

CA R
 
CA Raider said:
OK - I guess I'll have to watch it again. If the officer was outside his vehicle when the exchange started ... I wonder why he got back in. It seems like it would have been better to stay on his feet and remain mobile - possibly moving to the back of his police cruiser and using it for concealment.

I hate to try and second guess something like this - esp. when it happened so fast. But one of the lessons my brain checked off here - was the degree of advantage that went to the shooter who was highly mobile. He moved quickly and fired from several different angles. We're lucky we didn't lose a police officer.

CA R
Click to expand...

I very much agree on all points. I can't begin to imagine what I would have actually done in that situation, much less what the officer actually did do. I can say what I wish I would have done, but that's just what it is - a wish.
 
CA Raider said:
OK - I guess I'll have to watch it again. If the officer was outside his vehicle when the exchange started ... I wonder why he got back in.
Click to expand...

Looks to me like the officer may have gotten back in the vehicle only after the bad guy drove away. If he were in the vehicle before that, I would have expected to see fire aimed at the camera (i.e., vehicle windshield). Instead, the bad guy seemed to be firing around the vehicle, not at it.

CA Raider said:
It seems like it would have been better to stay on his feet and remain mobile - possibly moving to the back of his police cruiser and using it for concealment.
Click to expand...

I think that's exactly what he did. And "concealment" isn't really the best term here. Against handgun fire, a cruiser may also provide "cover."

CA Raider said:
I hate to try and second guess something like this - esp. when it happened so fast. But one of the lessons my brain checked off here - was the degree of advantage that went to the shooter who was highly mobile. He moved quickly and fired from several different angles. We're lucky we didn't lose a police officer.
Click to expand...

The bad guy had to move quickly and fire from different angles in order to hit the highly mobile police officer. At least, that's my impression from the video. If the officer were in the vehicle throughout the event--or even at the conclusion of the shooting--he likely would have been killed as well.
 
It is too bad we can't see the trooper. As he was the winner, it would be most instructive to emulate what he did right while improving upon and anything he could have done better. Not seeing him, all we can do is guess. We can be almost certain he was out with his gun drawn in advance (excellent). We know he made a rapid COM hit (excellent). We don't know if he moved (we know he didn't press the fight forward to end it when the criminal fumbled, we would have seen it.)

All we can learn from the loser that we can see on the video...is how to get shot to death by a cop. Not terribly instructive!

I like the analysis linked above. Note: all the things he talked about the lead up may not have been consciously processed, but either way, the subconscious at least knew things were way wrong (not a motorist irate at a ticket), and that is why you trust your gut feeling/instinct and act. Don't second guess that feeling, your subconscious is processing these cues a lot faster than your conscious can keep up.

I'm not saying to draw your CCW and drill someone based on gut feeling...but start to take measures based on it. Scan, retreat, prepare mentally and physically for action. That way you can react fast if it goes south, if it doesn't, no harm.
 
Strange things can happen anywhere at any time to any of us at a split-second notice. I have a crazy neighbor who threatened my life twice in the last year for no good reason other than I didn't agree with him about his insane ideas. The first time was a hands-on attack and the second was a pulled pistol. The guy is nuts. I carry on my property and in my vehicle at all times. I NEED A DASH CAM!! And side and rearward cams...
 
CA Raider said:
OK - I guess I'll have to watch it again. If the officer was outside his vehicle when the exchange started ... I wonder why he got back in. It seems like it would have been better to stay on his feet and remain mobile - possibly moving to the back of his police cruiser and using it for concealment.

I hate to try and second guess something like this - esp. when it happened so fast. But one of the lessons my brain checked off here - was the degree of advantage that went to the shooter who was highly mobile. He moved quickly and fired from several different angles. We're lucky we didn't lose a police officer.

CA R
Click to expand...

Based on how the attacker was aiming the gun as he dodged around the front of the police car during the incident, I'd say the officer was outside the vehicle and moving around the vehicle for cover while the shooting was taking place. If he got back into the car, he didn't do so until AFTER the attacker fled.
 
I already posted on this in another thread... I have to take serious issue with the statement that things "happened quickly" here. In fact the incident developed slowly enough that the officer had time to take immediate defensive action (and I'm not talking about using his firearm.....) before the things turned deadly...

Some years ago I was in charge of officer survival training as part of my duties on a hundred man department. In south Florida one of the effects of the "Miami Shootout" was that every department got a serious wakeup call about tactics on the street when deadly confrontations were a possibility. A few of us did something about it.... In my case I had two trainers (very experienced officers) that proposed an in-depth officer survival program for all of our officers. I was glad to support them and we brought it off. In brief we held an advanced seminar for all of our officers over about a month's time and in the process "killed" every one of them on tape with various scenarios played out with everything from vehicle chases to ambushes, to escalating confrontations that went deadly... Then we took each scenario, broke it down, (incredible to see yourself in action on tape... after the fact) then did our best to teach every cop and supervisor the tactics needed to survive and, if possible avoid, these kind of situations...

Properly trained, the moment that individual started disregarding verbal commands and stepped out of the car with his shooting hand concealed all that was necessary was to high speed reverse away from him before things got ugly - and there was absolutely plenty of time -to not only clear away a good 100 feet but also to turn your patrol car to form immediate cover, while alerting all in the area of a possible violent individual......

Much, much more to talk about here - but not on a public forum. Any police trainers interested in learning more should send a pm and I'll be glad to go over the changes we made.... Remember -John Wayne is dead and if you insist on shooting it out with an armed subject without doing everything possible to give yourself an advantage you might be joining him...
 
Strambo said:
It is too bad we can't see the trooper. As he was the winner, it would be most instructive to emulate what he did right while improving upon and anything he could have done better.
Click to expand...

Well there was many more variables and decisions made but there is also a big difference:
The officer had body armor that likely stopped the pistol round of the attacker and is why he determined he was okay on the radio, and the attacker did not. They both took a round to the torso, though the officer's shot was probably centered better on the other guy as I don't think the officer was entirely sideways to the attacker when hit himself and he was hit in the side.
The armor plays a big a role when two are exchanging fire and both scoring hits, because the hits of one are counting a lot more than the hits of the other.

Body armor is hot, generally stiff, degrades over time, and is probably not going to be worn by most concealed carry individuals.

Additionally officers often get priority medical treatment such as the first ambulance on the scene if they are injured. While the other guy may get second or otherwise delayed or even no medical treatment after shooting it out with police.
Several minutes difference between treatment times can also often be the difference between life and death. Other times they don't treat them at all or neglect them because they are the bad guy and considered fatally injured. This may not be officially done, but happens all the time.

So considering someone the loser or winner of the gunfight based on who survives in such situations is often faulty.
 
Last edited:
" was necessary was to high speed reverse away from him "

that's a very good solution.
and it applies to all of us when we are in our vehicles - not just the police.

I won't second-guess the officer. Just wish him a speedy recovery.
But I'll keep your method in mind.

CA R
 
The presence of those kids in the car changes the whole situation of course. As odd as the gunfight seems, there are plenty of wackos out there who do make the choice to engage with a cop, nobody knows why. But the fact that he had the kids along on his crazy trip makes me shudder. I wonder what his plans were if he hadn't been stopped? Or if he had gotten away farther than a mile?
I understand the cop did not know the kids were even there, but if he had known that I'm sure his choice would be the same; don't let the crazy guy escape with hostages.
 
" was necessary was to high speed reverse away from him "
Click to expand...
It happened that the first time I saw this clip, I was with a retired LEO. The comment made was that when the man immediately jumped out of his vehicle upon stopping that the police car would have have been put in reverse at that time in preparation for a quick retreat.
 
A few of the basic tenets of what we taught.... An officer's first job is to make it through each day and go home in one piece.... Sound tactics are far, far more important than your skill with weapons... If you must engage - do your best to delay a confrontation until the odds are in your favor (this is just another way of saying "Wait for your backup if at all possible" ). Most assaults on officers are tipped off well in advance of the actual assault - but you must be alert to them...

Among other small changes we made - We strongly encouraged our officers not to chase a fleeing individual on foot by themselves (no matter how much you emphasize this.... most young officers will be after them in a heartbeat - despite the fact that this action gives the offender every opportunity for a hasty ambush). Instead we taught them that each officer should stop where they are and instead take charge of the incident and set up a good perimeter to contain... then when enough force is available hunt them down in an organized and safe manner with all the odds on your side....

The above is just a glimpse of the changes we made and strongly encouraged. We never lost an officer on the job, and given the circumstances in Dade county back then, that was no minor accomplishment. During my 22 years (hired the last week of 1973, retired out in 1995) combining both Dade and Broward counties we lost three officers a year, every year for all of my career. These numbers only counted those killed on the job. Most could have been avoided - but not all. There are some circumstances where the only way you survive is either dumb luck or divine intervention. To this day, with an adult beverage in hand I could probably recount almost every one of these deaths, one at a time....
 
I'll be more politically correct in my response this time...

It could have been a case of 'suicide by cop.' Because he certainly knew he was about to draw on another armed, trained person.

We cant presume to know the stresses he was under. It certainly seems like the act of a desperate man.
 
"make it through each day and go home in one piece.... Sound tactics are far, far more important than your skill with weapons"

darn good advice.

CA R
 
Just looking at the video the first thing I noticed was that when the vet pulled over he did not pull over far enough onto the side of the road to be safe. The driver has plenty of room on the passenger side of the vehicle to pull over another yard but does not do so. At the least the officer would have had to walk over to the passenger side window to speak with a driver who had no bad intent. So the first sign of a problem was where the driver stopped.

Second, in the vid you can see a person in the front passenger seat. There head shows, a small one, above the head rest.

Third. The driver exits the car and the door opens into the traffic lane and when he gets out he steps directly into the traffic lane. Showing no concern of vehicles coming at him at 70mph. Leave aside his aggressive posture for the moment, that he stepped directly into the lane of oncoming traffic is a very bad sign. If he had smiled and looked friendly when he exited the vehicle with hands in the open it still would have been a very bad sign. Given that he had a choice what rational person chooses to step into a lane of rapidly moving vehicles. More cops, road construction workers and persons are likely killed on freeways each year by this action than by shootouts. It meant the fella didn't care.

It's always best to plan that no round you shoot a fella with will stop them immediately. If you do this you will realize that your handgun is not your primary self defense tool and is in fact pretty low on the list of said tools and plan accordingly. You also won't be as surprised.

tipoc
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top