Taurus 66
Member
REALLY! A police shooting caught on tape? 
Police shooting caught on tape
- Thread starter Preacherman
- Start date
- Status
fistful
member
And no one has yet criticized the media for capitalizing on a mother's grief and ignorance as if her crying were actual news?
GUY GETS SHOT; MOTHER UPSET
Not much of a headline, is it?
GUY GETS SHOT; MOTHER UPSET
Not much of a headline, is it?
joab
Member
Back to an old question
I have precisely one question:
If a non LEO had stopped the guy and he came out with a gun we would be critiquing his CQB tactics and calling for the head of the detainer.
The cops had lawful reason to stop and detain the guy, he had the responsibility to meet the cops in a responsible manner
ie: unarmed
I have precisely one question:
No a "civilian" would not have had the right or reason to stop and detain the guy.
If a non LEO had stopped the guy and he came out with a gun we would be critiquing his CQB tactics and calling for the head of the detainer.
The cops had lawful reason to stop and detain the guy, he had the responsibility to meet the cops in a responsible manner
ie: unarmed
fistful
member
Doesn't it appear that he puts both hands together just before he gets popped? Doesn't it look as though he is preparing to pull back the slide, probably to chamber a round? I would think the guy with the AR could at least have thought the same thing.
specoperator
Member
Why dont they obey LEO verbal commands?
This is all to familiar, the OLE "let's challenge the police" demneanor and attitude. I have been pulled over numerous times for traffic infractions, I have alway's done exactly what the officer has said to do, and then some. I have alway's flipped the dome light on, place my hands at 10 and 2 o'clock on the steering wheel, and left my weapon in plain sight. By the looks of this goons demeanor, he's challenging the officers "do something" as if he has the upper hand, but the jokes on him. He found out what it's like to ignore verbal commands when you have a weapon in your hand. Do I feel sorry for the family, sure, but not when thier son is a punk, and stupid enouph to get out of the car with a firearm, and ignoring the LEO's verbal commands.
This is all to familiar, the OLE "let's challenge the police" demneanor and attitude. I have been pulled over numerous times for traffic infractions, I have alway's done exactly what the officer has said to do, and then some. I have alway's flipped the dome light on, place my hands at 10 and 2 o'clock on the steering wheel, and left my weapon in plain sight. By the looks of this goons demeanor, he's challenging the officers "do something" as if he has the upper hand, but the jokes on him. He found out what it's like to ignore verbal commands when you have a weapon in your hand. Do I feel sorry for the family, sure, but not when thier son is a punk, and stupid enouph to get out of the car with a firearm, and ignoring the LEO's verbal commands.
jashobeam
Member
That is one sloppy shot!
Why has no one commented on the bullet placement? The man was shot in the jaw. The officer had a rifle and somehow managed to botch an easy shot. It wasn't like the perp was a real quick mover, hopping from foot to foot, bobbing and weaving, or ducking and jumping. For 8 seconds he basically remained stationary.
Was the officer shooting at the head? The chest?
If that had been the result of a shot fired from a handgun, I would understand. I thought the rifle had a scope, but after reviewing the video I really couldn't tell. Scope or not, bad shot!
What do you all think? Am I being too critical?
Why has no one commented on the bullet placement? The man was shot in the jaw. The officer had a rifle and somehow managed to botch an easy shot. It wasn't like the perp was a real quick mover, hopping from foot to foot, bobbing and weaving, or ducking and jumping. For 8 seconds he basically remained stationary.
Was the officer shooting at the head? The chest?
If that had been the result of a shot fired from a handgun, I would understand. I thought the rifle had a scope, but after reviewing the video I really couldn't tell. Scope or not, bad shot!
What do you all think? Am I being too critical?
For all we know..
the officer that made the shot was in the process of moving into position, saw the dinkus bring his hands together onto the firearm, and took a shot he had all of a second to make. If those were the circumstances then I'd say it was a pretty good shot...or using the standard of it did what it needed to do (stop the guy from continuing to bring his gun to bear), then it was a pretty good shot.
Is there another article or video out there I am not aware of? A whole lot of posters are referring to the number of officers and the positions of these officers. Nothing I saw in the video posted at the beginning of the thread shows any of this information.
migoi
the officer that made the shot was in the process of moving into position, saw the dinkus bring his hands together onto the firearm, and took a shot he had all of a second to make. If those were the circumstances then I'd say it was a pretty good shot...or using the standard of it did what it needed to do (stop the guy from continuing to bring his gun to bear), then it was a pretty good shot.
Is there another article or video out there I am not aware of? A whole lot of posters are referring to the number of officers and the positions of these officers. Nothing I saw in the video posted at the beginning of the thread shows any of this information.
migoi
rustymaggot
Member
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2005
- Messages
- 838
im new and dont know how to quote people.......
however, heres the post im replying to...........
" That is one sloppy shot!
Why has no one commented on the bullet placement? The man was shot in the jaw. .......................What do you all think? Am I being too critical?"
answer; far too critical.
many years ago out at the local range i met our countys swap sniper. acording to him shot placement is upper lip as this is the most direct route to the lower brainstem.
if you ask me the shooter was only 3/4 to 1 inch off target, and, the wound didnt seem to be off to either side by much. that was a exelent shot made by the officer. consider a few points.... he is not swat, hes just a patrolman and is not expected to be as proficient with a rifle as a swat member. the round was a 223 not a 308. if 308 was used the suspect would be dead and this would be called expert shot placement. 223 can deflect off bone and thats why snipers dont use it. the officer was under pressure. i have had to shoot when my life depended on it and it isnt as easy as all that. granted when i had to shoot it was against a animal, not a human being and im grateful for that. i would assume having to kill someone is fairly tramatic for anyone, even a trained officer. think of the officers feelings at this moment. he was forced to shoot someone in the face. forced is a accutare term for what happened. the suspect forced the leo's hand and made him shoot. no question. you do not lead the police on a chase and then get out with a gun and expect to live. the fact that the officer made a one inch away from perfect shot under considerable pressure is commendable.
next topic, would this be a clean shoot if the shooter was a civilian? yes, if some parralells are made.
for a leo the street is his home. a armed suspect on the street is just like a armed suspect in someones house. evading the police is akin to breaking into a homeowners house. its the boundary that seperates the relm of ok to do and not ok to do. once these parralells are made then the situation is very similar. homeowner tells a suspect in the owners house to drop his weapon, leo tells a suspect on the street to drop his weapon. same thing in my book.
however, heres the post im replying to...........
" That is one sloppy shot!
Why has no one commented on the bullet placement? The man was shot in the jaw. .......................What do you all think? Am I being too critical?"
answer; far too critical.
many years ago out at the local range i met our countys swap sniper. acording to him shot placement is upper lip as this is the most direct route to the lower brainstem.
if you ask me the shooter was only 3/4 to 1 inch off target, and, the wound didnt seem to be off to either side by much. that was a exelent shot made by the officer. consider a few points.... he is not swat, hes just a patrolman and is not expected to be as proficient with a rifle as a swat member. the round was a 223 not a 308. if 308 was used the suspect would be dead and this would be called expert shot placement. 223 can deflect off bone and thats why snipers dont use it. the officer was under pressure. i have had to shoot when my life depended on it and it isnt as easy as all that. granted when i had to shoot it was against a animal, not a human being and im grateful for that. i would assume having to kill someone is fairly tramatic for anyone, even a trained officer. think of the officers feelings at this moment. he was forced to shoot someone in the face. forced is a accutare term for what happened. the suspect forced the leo's hand and made him shoot. no question. you do not lead the police on a chase and then get out with a gun and expect to live. the fact that the officer made a one inch away from perfect shot under considerable pressure is commendable.
next topic, would this be a clean shoot if the shooter was a civilian? yes, if some parralells are made.
for a leo the street is his home. a armed suspect on the street is just like a armed suspect in someones house. evading the police is akin to breaking into a homeowners house. its the boundary that seperates the relm of ok to do and not ok to do. once these parralells are made then the situation is very similar. homeowner tells a suspect in the owners house to drop his weapon, leo tells a suspect on the street to drop his weapon. same thing in my book.
misANTHrope
Member
Just a few notes:
I see a lot of people referring to this guy as having a criminal record. I don't know if they're getting some other sources or what, but there is no mention in that video of him having a record, period. Nothing about him running from the police, as someone mentioned. Nothing about him being a felon, as has been mentioned. Nothing about him being a "gangbanger," as several have asserted. That still shot might show him flashing a gang sign, or it might show him pointing to the poster on the wall behind him. I'll admit that I'm no "gangxpert" at all, though a bit of online research I did didn't show any hand sign like what he was doing.
If you think I'm trying to say he's innocent and pure as the driven snow, I'm not. He apparently committed some offense, since it was a "case pending against him" that prompted him to threaten suicide.
I'm kind of iffy on the shoot myself. On the one hand, it's pretty much a good rule of thumb that when the police have guns on you and are giving you orders, getting out of the car with a gun of your own is not a wise decision in any language. It seems to me that rather than being defiant or aggressive, he was despondant and maybe considering the final moments of his life. I think he was in a "suicide by cop" state of mind, and he almost succeeded.
The threat he provided is kind of questionable to me, but it's right on the fence. His last hand movement didn't look really aggressive to me, but I wasn't there with my heart pumping in my ears, either. Maybe in a few seconds, he would have decided to keep living. Maybe in a few seconds he would have decided to get himself shot. Maybe in a few seconds he would have decided to go out with a bang. I don't know, and his body language doesn't point one way or another to me.
I think a little more time might have been desirable, but I'm not going to call it a bad shoot. As for the mother wondering why "they didn't send someone over to talk to him?" Nonsense. Hey, let's approach an armed man who's pretty clearly in a clouded state of mind and probably not capable of sound judgment. She's being ridiculous, but I've noticed mothers tend to get that way when it comes to their children.
I call it a good shot, but let's call it a good shoot based on the available information, not assumptions of "gangbanger" and "felon."
I see a lot of people referring to this guy as having a criminal record. I don't know if they're getting some other sources or what, but there is no mention in that video of him having a record, period. Nothing about him running from the police, as someone mentioned. Nothing about him being a felon, as has been mentioned. Nothing about him being a "gangbanger," as several have asserted. That still shot might show him flashing a gang sign, or it might show him pointing to the poster on the wall behind him. I'll admit that I'm no "gangxpert" at all, though a bit of online research I did didn't show any hand sign like what he was doing.
If you think I'm trying to say he's innocent and pure as the driven snow, I'm not. He apparently committed some offense, since it was a "case pending against him" that prompted him to threaten suicide.
I'm kind of iffy on the shoot myself. On the one hand, it's pretty much a good rule of thumb that when the police have guns on you and are giving you orders, getting out of the car with a gun of your own is not a wise decision in any language. It seems to me that rather than being defiant or aggressive, he was despondant and maybe considering the final moments of his life. I think he was in a "suicide by cop" state of mind, and he almost succeeded.
The threat he provided is kind of questionable to me, but it's right on the fence. His last hand movement didn't look really aggressive to me, but I wasn't there with my heart pumping in my ears, either. Maybe in a few seconds, he would have decided to keep living. Maybe in a few seconds he would have decided to get himself shot. Maybe in a few seconds he would have decided to go out with a bang. I don't know, and his body language doesn't point one way or another to me.
I think a little more time might have been desirable, but I'm not going to call it a bad shoot. As for the mother wondering why "they didn't send someone over to talk to him?" Nonsense. Hey, let's approach an armed man who's pretty clearly in a clouded state of mind and probably not capable of sound judgment. She's being ridiculous, but I've noticed mothers tend to get that way when it comes to their children.
I call it a good shot, but let's call it a good shoot based on the available information, not assumptions of "gangbanger" and "felon."
3rdPig
Re: Subject of the thread.
I was unable to download the video, however based on the cumulative descriptions of the event, IMHO it sounds like it was a good shoot. I'm currently in security consulting, but base my opinion on prior LEO experience.
3rdPig,
With all due respect to you, I believe the example you gave concerning your father is a completely different animal. I'm certain that I did things during my 20's and 30's as a LEO that I would do differently today, but I disagree with the approach LE took in your father's case.
Perhaps there are some details that you left out that would change my opinion; but if your father had theatened no other person, was on his property (drunk or not), the local police had no right to trespass (I'm assuming thay shot him in his garage), and demand he drop his gun.
At best the police had reasonable suspicion based upon what the neighbors may have stated (IMHO no probable cause).
Again, I do not disrespect your opinion, but I wholeheartedly disagree with it , as well as, with the notion that the police always, and under any circumstances, have the right to demand that a ctizen disarm himself (i.e. private property - no warrants). Evidently the court didn't agree with your father or I.
Just out of curiosity, what state did this take place in?
irontorc
Re: Subject of the thread.
I was unable to download the video, however based on the cumulative descriptions of the event, IMHO it sounds like it was a good shoot. I'm currently in security consulting, but base my opinion on prior LEO experience.
3rdPig,
With all due respect to you, I believe the example you gave concerning your father is a completely different animal. I'm certain that I did things during my 20's and 30's as a LEO that I would do differently today, but I disagree with the approach LE took in your father's case.
Perhaps there are some details that you left out that would change my opinion; but if your father had theatened no other person, was on his property (drunk or not), the local police had no right to trespass (I'm assuming thay shot him in his garage), and demand he drop his gun.
At best the police had reasonable suspicion based upon what the neighbors may have stated (IMHO no probable cause).
Again, I do not disrespect your opinion, but I wholeheartedly disagree with it , as well as, with the notion that the police always, and under any circumstances, have the right to demand that a ctizen disarm himself (i.e. private property - no warrants). Evidently the court didn't agree with your father or I.
Just out of curiosity, what state did this take place in?
irontorc
Camp David
member
jashobeam said:
The American public has gotten use to the idea of police not being able to hit the side of a barn with their weapons! A recent shootout by police (over 200 shots) revealed that despite such an expense of ammunition, officers were unable to hit the target (A Chevy Suburban)! Meanwhile in a natural disaster that is New Orleans, private mercenaries of Blackwater Inc. patrolled the streets openly wielding M-16s and other assault weapons with clips of ammunition running into the hundreds! Officers throughout the nation relying on Glock semi-automatics and trained to spray lead rather than making a single intelligent shot!
Is anyone teaching accuracy anymore?
I recall a few years ago two guys wearing body armor frustrated California law enforcement for hours! DID ANYONE EVEN THINK TO SHOOT THESE GUYS IN THE HEAD?
Most boy scouts taking a rifle accuracy badge are better equipped to shoot than an average police officer!
Sorry if I criticize, but I've lost faith in law enforcement when they can't shoot!
jashobeam
Member
Thread subject: good or bad shot
First, let me say that I believe the officer was justified in taking the shot.
Now I'd like to make a few more comments about the shot itself, then I'll let it go since the officer's competence with a rifle is not the subject of this thread.
I will agree that in all likelihood the officer was rushed in taking his shot and, obviously, he was quite nervous. I am willing to make every excuse for this officer, but my original assessment still seems every bit as true--that it was a sloppy shot.
A member posted the opinion that I am indeed being too critical, and perhaps I am. I would like to comment on a few of the points he brought up to defend the officer.
1) Since when are patrol officers instructed to attempt to shoot at the brainstem? Aren't they taught to shoot center mass? If a head shot is desirable, wouldn't it make sense to NOT aim for the narrowest portion of it (the brainstem at the base of the skull)?
2) Shooting at the lip so as to hit the brainstem might be true IF your target IS FACING YOU. This doesn't work when you are broadside to him and staring at his profile, in which case a lip shot will yield little more than bloody lips and busted chops.
3) Since I, too, believe the officer was perhaps rushed over his shot, why did he increase the level of difficulty of the shot by aiming for a small spot that, if missed, could do little more than disfigure a man's face?
4) His shot was only off by an inch? Not only will I assert that his shot was off by more than an inch, but I will speculate that if the officer had missed by an equal distance in the opposite direction of his intended point of aim (if he was in fact aiming at the brainstem) he would have entirely missed his target.
I am not looking to pick a fight with anyone here, as that is not the way of the High Road, but I do expect those who are competent with firearms to acknowledge a poor shot when they see one, and not, to the contrary, declare it to be something close to an excellent shot. Offer all the excuses you care to offer and I will probably agree with many of them, but please don't tell me this was anything but a poorly placed shot.
It was a tense, traumatic moment in which the officer was in fear for his life and had to take a shot before being entirely prepared to do so. The shot worked as intended by removing the threat. Nevertheless, it was a sloppy, less than ideal shot. That's all I'm going to say on this subject. Thank you all for tolerating my rant.
First, let me say that I believe the officer was justified in taking the shot.
Now I'd like to make a few more comments about the shot itself, then I'll let it go since the officer's competence with a rifle is not the subject of this thread.
I will agree that in all likelihood the officer was rushed in taking his shot and, obviously, he was quite nervous. I am willing to make every excuse for this officer, but my original assessment still seems every bit as true--that it was a sloppy shot.
A member posted the opinion that I am indeed being too critical, and perhaps I am. I would like to comment on a few of the points he brought up to defend the officer.
1) Since when are patrol officers instructed to attempt to shoot at the brainstem? Aren't they taught to shoot center mass? If a head shot is desirable, wouldn't it make sense to NOT aim for the narrowest portion of it (the brainstem at the base of the skull)?
2) Shooting at the lip so as to hit the brainstem might be true IF your target IS FACING YOU. This doesn't work when you are broadside to him and staring at his profile, in which case a lip shot will yield little more than bloody lips and busted chops.
3) Since I, too, believe the officer was perhaps rushed over his shot, why did he increase the level of difficulty of the shot by aiming for a small spot that, if missed, could do little more than disfigure a man's face?
4) His shot was only off by an inch? Not only will I assert that his shot was off by more than an inch, but I will speculate that if the officer had missed by an equal distance in the opposite direction of his intended point of aim (if he was in fact aiming at the brainstem) he would have entirely missed his target.
I am not looking to pick a fight with anyone here, as that is not the way of the High Road, but I do expect those who are competent with firearms to acknowledge a poor shot when they see one, and not, to the contrary, declare it to be something close to an excellent shot. Offer all the excuses you care to offer and I will probably agree with many of them, but please don't tell me this was anything but a poorly placed shot.
It was a tense, traumatic moment in which the officer was in fear for his life and had to take a shot before being entirely prepared to do so. The shot worked as intended by removing the threat. Nevertheless, it was a sloppy, less than ideal shot. That's all I'm going to say on this subject. Thank you all for tolerating my rant.
odysseus
Member
To simply answer: Yes, you are being way too critical.
Remember, in times of stress and with the dynamics of a conflict, most people are only half as good as their training. Seems he did alright.
joab
Member
One shot stop.
Where is the botched shot?
The goal is to shoot to stop, not shoot to kill. He stopped
Lonestar.45
Member
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2004
- Messages
- 1,077
Rules for when you're stopped by the po-po:
Rule #1: When stopped by police with gun, don't exit the car with it in your hand, and if you do for some moronic reason, and they yell to put the gun down, PUT THE GUN DOWN.
Rule #2: If you want to commit suicide by cops (as this guy apparently wanted), you need to CHARGE them to ensure you won't be fed through a tube for the rest of your life; don't stand there like a moron.
Rule #3: See Rules # 1 and 2.
Rule #1: When stopped by police with gun, don't exit the car with it in your hand, and if you do for some moronic reason, and they yell to put the gun down, PUT THE GUN DOWN.
Rule #2: If you want to commit suicide by cops (as this guy apparently wanted), you need to CHARGE them to ensure you won't be fed through a tube for the rest of your life; don't stand there like a moron.
Rule #3: See Rules # 1 and 2.
Nimitz
Member
mixed about this shooting...was it necessary? no not in my eyes.
from what i have seen before police really DONT want to shoot a suspect. and show the most restrain ever.
these cops didnt show much restrain...not saying it was a BAD shoot because the threat was there...but there have been many situations just like this or even more dangerous and the police didnt shoot....
was that an AR?
Chad
from what i have seen before police really DONT want to shoot a suspect. and show the most restrain ever.
these cops didnt show much restrain...not saying it was a BAD shoot because the threat was there...but there have been many situations just like this or even more dangerous and the police didnt shoot....
was that an AR?
Chad
No_Brakes23
Member
Try rereading the thread jashobeam. I and another member both commented on this.
IF you want to know if you are being too critical, go draw the profile of your face on a target, and see how many rounds out of 20 or 30 round mag you can put in the profile. Then see how many of those hit the "lips" or "jaws."
fistful
member
The more I replay the video, the more it seems the guy is resigning himself to death. Watch how this guy gets deliberately out of the car, slams the door, and stands facing away from the cops, as if not wanting to look toward his impending death.
He had made mention of suicide, no?
He had made mention of suicide, no?
jashobeam
Member
Right you are, No Brakes23
Somehow I did not see your post or the post of the other member who mentioned the shot placement. Perhaps I missed a page when originally reading the thread. It is customary for me to always read entirely through a thread whether I intend to post or not; I disagree with the practice of those who foresake reading the posts of others and skip to the end of a thread to post their own responses.
I thank you for the correction.
I do also realize, after much thought, that this shot did effectively achieve its purpose and that there are a number of very probable causes for the bullet having deviated from the shooter's intended point of aim. Fortunately for the young man who was shot, he is still alive and will hopefully become a better person as a result of his brush with death. I will retire from beating this dead horse.
Somehow I did not see your post or the post of the other member who mentioned the shot placement. Perhaps I missed a page when originally reading the thread. It is customary for me to always read entirely through a thread whether I intend to post or not; I disagree with the practice of those who foresake reading the posts of others and skip to the end of a thread to post their own responses.
I thank you for the correction.
I do also realize, after much thought, that this shot did effectively achieve its purpose and that there are a number of very probable causes for the bullet having deviated from the shooter's intended point of aim. Fortunately for the young man who was shot, he is still alive and will hopefully become a better person as a result of his brush with death. I will retire from beating this dead horse.
It was bright daylight, there were at least 4 officers on scene, at least one with a rifle. The suspect was not visibly agitated and did not make any threatening gestures other than his 3 seconds of non-compliance. Under those circumstances the shooting does not appear justified.
This reminds me of the scene in "RoboCop" where a walking machine gun gives a command to "drop the weapon, you have 10 seconds to comply" and then blew the suspect away when the clock ranout. Do we want machines or humans behind the trigger pulling? Sure the guy was a punk, sure the required warning was given, but these cops should exercise a little restraint instead of behaving like robots.
This reminds me of the scene in "RoboCop" where a walking machine gun gives a command to "drop the weapon, you have 10 seconds to comply" and then blew the suspect away when the clock ranout. Do we want machines or humans behind the trigger pulling? Sure the guy was a punk, sure the required warning was given, but these cops should exercise a little restraint instead of behaving like robots.
jashobeam, you think a .223 to the jaw is just going to result in some blood and smashed teeth? It knocked him out cold, friend, same as it would to anyone. His knees went out and he sat down, like Mike Tyson had just punched him in the liver. It was a lucky shot for both the cop and the perp, IMHO.
All the cop bashing on this thread is amazing and disappointing. :banghead:
I would have shot him the moment he stepped out of the car holding a gun. The officers showed admirable restraint in my book.
All the cop bashing on this thread is amazing and disappointing. :banghead:
I would have shot him the moment he stepped out of the car holding a gun. The officers showed admirable restraint in my book.
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
As noted above, the "upper lip" as the most direct route to the brain stem is ONLY if the guy is facing you directly. However, I can't imagine that snipers attempt brain stem shots in that manner when the brain stem is at the far side of the individual being show. A slight deflection after hitting bone or teeth and you have a brainstem miss. The problem is that the brain stem is a very small target compared to the whole head and it is small, on the far side of the person being shot, and has few directly visible indicators as to its actual location.
Occasionally, you will get a person who tries to commit suicide by eating the muzzle of their gun and pulling the trigger. If the round isn't aimed up into the brain case or isn't pointed straight back, the person can blow out the back of his neck, missing the brain and stem, and survive the shooting.
Even if some snipers are trained to do brainstem shots, I am sort of doubting it would be a normal shot for Kerrville PD.
NineseveN
member
Oooh yay! Cop bashing and suggesting stupid human tricks! I have to get in on this. Let me download this video and I'll be back. 
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked