The Miami Shootout. You're thoughts?
- Thread starter megatronrules
- Start date
- Status
Dean Speir
Member
Errata and observations…
megatronrules asserts:
AK103K opines:
And Ian states:
Hkmp5sd observes
Seriously, as has been noted here, McNeill kinda threw his on, almost as an afterthought, but I'm wondering just what was available in the way of a "rifle-rated vest" back then. The ceramic inserts were available in certain applications, but rarely used, as I recall.
Deadman thinks:
JohnKSa sez:
Hey!, we're all looking at this almost 17 years later, 20/20 hindsight and all that, and it's something I've made a close study of since November 1987. I've also authored several monographs about the event (see Miami: 11 April 1986) and various aspects of the aftermath (the FBI's weapons and ammunition selections, the enormous impact the September 1987 Wound Ballistics Seminar at Quantico had on the entire ammunition industry, etc.)
The only thing I'm left with is a wacking great admiration for the courage of SA Eddie Mireles, a grudging respect for the mindset and skill of Michael Platt, and a firm belief in one of ("Murphy's?") first dicta of battle: no plan survives first contact with the enemy.
megatronrules asserts:
And this is based on what evidence or report?
AK103K opines:
I don't know how you can incorporate anything to do with the abortive North Hollywood Bank of America take-down into the FBI/Kendell firefight other than each involved a pair of well-armed bad guys. If Platt and Matix had had the ordnance and armor with which Matasereanu and Phillips deployed, they'd've killed all eight of the FBI agents and razed the entire neighborhood! Matasereanu and Phillips were a couple of clowns (albeit hard ones) whose entire training and practice appear to have been repeated viewings of Michael Mann's Heat! Hell, Phillips killed himself rather than stay in the fight!
And Ian states:
Law Enforcement had no such knowledge of either Michael Platt and William Matix, much less their military backgrounds or even an inkling of their identities. Nor can you claim with any confidence that Platt had not "trained for one-handed and weak-handed shooting." Both men were not only well-trained by the military, but well-practiced on their own, witness their regular shooting trips (with murderous intent on at least two separate occasions) onto the Tamiami Trail. Ten days before they lived it out with the FBI, they'd purchased 5,000 rounds of ammo, no trace of which was ever found, the suggestion being that they shot it up in the 'Glades.
There were but eight actually on the Kendell scene that Friday, and they went with what was then issued them… S&W revolvers. Only Grogan, Risner and Dove were SWAT-qualified and permitted to deploy with the S&W Models 459.
I've never seen this documented, #1, and, #2, he also fired his own handgun as well as that of Matix, but produced no wounds with any of those six revolver shots.
There were seven FBI casualties, all of which were inflicted by Platt with his Mini-14!
Hkmp5sd observes
How 'bout any sort of vests!
Seriously, as has been noted here, McNeill kinda threw his on, almost as an afterthought, but I'm wondering just what was available in the way of a "rifle-rated vest" back then. The ceramic inserts were available in certain applications, but rarely used, as I recall.
Don't know where you got this tidbit from, but it is not supported by any documentation I've ever seen, and specifically refuted by the FBI's own inventory sheet.
Ye Gawds, man! Where ever are you getting this stuff!?! Of the vehicles which were unable to respond timely, there were an additional four 12 gauge Remington Models 870, a Heckler & Koch MP5-SD (Unit #88), and an M16 (Unit #83). [ibid]
Deadman thinks:
How so? The fatal wound from Dove's "one in a million shot" transected Platt's brachial artery before it penetrated his chest. Yes, Risner also hit Platt with a (Gawd!, I love "copspeak!") "non-survivable, potentially fatal" round to the chest, but it was that first 115-grain Silvertip which sealed his fate.
JohnKSa sez:
Actually, they were out looking for two unknown bank robbers with a weapons' profile somewhat at variance with what Matix and Platt brought with them that day, being two six-inch magnum revolvers (one S&W, one Dan Wesson), a folding-stocked S&W Model 3000 12 gauge pump shotgun and a folding Ruger Mini-14.
Hey!, we're all looking at this almost 17 years later, 20/20 hindsight and all that, and it's something I've made a close study of since November 1987. I've also authored several monographs about the event (see Miami: 11 April 1986) and various aspects of the aftermath (the FBI's weapons and ammunition selections, the enormous impact the September 1987 Wound Ballistics Seminar at Quantico had on the entire ammunition industry, etc.)
The only thing I'm left with is a wacking great admiration for the courage of SA Eddie Mireles, a grudging respect for the mindset and skill of Michael Platt, and a firm belief in one of ("Murphy's?") first dicta of battle: no plan survives first contact with the enemy.
Platt & Matix were known to be armed and ruthless based simply on their bank robberies and the shooting of Mr. Colazzo (from whom they stole their car). If they were not thought to be armed and dangerous, why did the FBI have SWAT teams assigned to the case?
Their lack of weak-hand training is implied by Platt's repeated misses at very close range when using his weak hand.
The info I have is that Agent Arrantia was wounded by Matix (with a shotgun), not Platt.
I was mistaken when I said there were 9 agents. You're right; there were 8.
The fact that revolvers were the standard issue weapon for the FBI agents carrying them may explain their use, but it does not justify it.
Their lack of weak-hand training is implied by Platt's repeated misses at very close range when using his weak hand.
The info I have is that Agent Arrantia was wounded by Matix (with a shotgun), not Platt.
I was mistaken when I said there were 9 agents. You're right; there were 8.
The fact that revolvers were the standard issue weapon for the FBI agents carrying them may explain their use, but it does not justify it.
You know, it is tragic to think that perhaps a single AR-15, or even an old 30-30 could have made a difference.
On a different note, I have always wondered why the Branch Davidians, or Randy Weaver, or that group in Montana a few years ago didn't fight it out. It is true that in the end, they would have lost, but why not fight?
Right or wrong, I think that things went much smoother for the Feds than they could have.
Especially with the Davidians- The accounts say that they were well armed. They most likely could have made the Feds pay for their victory.
So, why not?
Perhaps just something about human nature that makes you hesitate?
Sorry for the philosophy. I am not trying to turn this political, just yammering.
On a different note, I have always wondered why the Branch Davidians, or Randy Weaver, or that group in Montana a few years ago didn't fight it out. It is true that in the end, they would have lost, but why not fight?
Right or wrong, I think that things went much smoother for the Feds than they could have.
Especially with the Davidians- The accounts say that they were well armed. They most likely could have made the Feds pay for their victory.
So, why not?
Perhaps just something about human nature that makes you hesitate?
Sorry for the philosophy. I am not trying to turn this political, just yammering.
Hkmp5sd
Member
Dean Speir,
Agent Gordon McNeil "has stated flatly that they knew exactly what they were up against: heavily armed professional criminals who liked to kill with high powered weapons."
"McNeil and his team knew that the perpertrators were two white males in their mid-thirties with an affinity for professional-class weapons."
"They were known to use military tactics and were suspected to be members of white supremacist cults."
FROM: Four Minute Massacre: The FBI Miami Shootout by Massad Ayoob. (American Handgunner Magazine, January/February 1989)
Guess what....I have several reports on the shootout from assorted sources and there in inaccuracies between them. An example is some of the official statements made by McNeil are incorrectly quoted in the FBI's own report.
The report you linked to at The Gun Zone is an abridged version and also includes inaccuracies. This version was written 10 years after the fact. Ayoob was in Miami 3 weeks after the shootout and interviewed sources including Metro Dade Police, FBI and the Medical Examiner that were conducting the investigation.
Agent Gordon McNeil "has stated flatly that they knew exactly what they were up against: heavily armed professional criminals who liked to kill with high powered weapons."
"McNeil and his team knew that the perpertrators were two white males in their mid-thirties with an affinity for professional-class weapons."
"They were known to use military tactics and were suspected to be members of white supremacist cults."
FROM: Four Minute Massacre: The FBI Miami Shootout by Massad Ayoob. (American Handgunner Magazine, January/February 1989)
Guess what....I have several reports on the shootout from assorted sources and there in inaccuracies between them. An example is some of the official statements made by McNeil are incorrectly quoted in the FBI's own report.
The report you linked to at The Gun Zone is an abridged version and also includes inaccuracies. This version was written 10 years after the fact. Ayoob was in Miami 3 weeks after the shootout and interviewed sources including Metro Dade Police, FBI and the Medical Examiner that were conducting the investigation.
Sean Smith
Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2002
- Messages
- 4,925
Combat is unpredictable. Nobody is always right when it comes to a gunfight. Not Delta Force, not SEALS, not the SAS, not anybody. Sure, the FBI guys made some amateur hour goof-ups (blind due to lost glasses? Shotguns where you can't get them once the fight starts?). And they made the always-unforgivable tactical error of underestimating your enemy.
Having said that, it has to be borne in mind that they didn't have the "perfect" ex post facto view of the situation. Well, based on the posts here, "perfect" is pretty relative. They just knew about where the bad guys were, so they went after them. You know, protect the public so the bad people don't get a chance to murder more law-abiding citizens.
No doubt, there are lessons to be learned, but the whole "eff the eff bee aye" subtext of some people's posts seems misplaced here. If you are going to, in the fullness of time and comfort of your couch, talk about how stupid the FBI agents were, you should at least recognize their bravery as well. Because they KNEW they were going into a dangerous situation, and they did it anyway. You know, doing their duty and all that. They paid a price - no doubt a higher price than they should have - so the general public wouldn't have to. And that should count for something.
Having said that, it has to be borne in mind that they didn't have the "perfect" ex post facto view of the situation. Well, based on the posts here, "perfect" is pretty relative.
They just knew about where the bad guys were, so they went after them. You know, protect the public so the bad people don't get a chance to murder more law-abiding citizens. No doubt, there are lessons to be learned, but the whole "eff the eff bee aye" subtext of some people's posts seems misplaced here. If you are going to, in the fullness of time and comfort of your couch, talk about how stupid the FBI agents were, you should at least recognize their bravery as well. Because they KNEW they were going into a dangerous situation, and they did it anyway. You know, doing their duty and all that. They paid a price - no doubt a higher price than they should have - so the general public wouldn't have to. And that should count for something.
I wasn't implying that they knew M&P by name, but they certainly knew them by MO. Well enough, in fact, to be able to correctly predict where they might be. That's how the whole confrontation occurred.
I can't quote a source on this, but unless I'm badly mistaken, M&P were known to use long guns at least some of the time.
As to the question about the choice of long guns. I'd go for a small, lite, hi-cap semi-auto rifle. I like shotguns plenty, but when you might have to shoot through car doors, windshields, etc., rifles get the nod in my opinion.
4thHorseman
Member
I tend to agree with most of what has been said, but my twist is, Platt put up a tremedous effort. If he was a good guy, he would of received (or at least his realitives) numerous medals for heroism. But it was not to be , Platt was a BG.
Platt was just better armed and a more determined fighter. Platt was well trained as mentioned earlier.
Platt was just better armed and a more determined fighter. Platt was well trained as mentioned earlier.
Dean Speir
Member
Once more into the breech…
Basically, McNeill grabbed all the available Field SAs and put them into a certain area that morning looking for a specific vehicle described to them by a ballsy eyewitness to a precious crime.
Hkmp5sd persists:
If you haven't yet obtained a copy of Dr. French Anderson's Forensic Analysis (it's one of the few things that Shawn Dodson and I have ever agreed upon), beg, borrow or abscond with one, and then try to track down the two-hour debriefing video (circa '87) featuring Sgt. David Rivers, head of the Metro-Dade PD crime scene investigation team. It has some of the best information on the whole event, from the previous robberies/shootings which led to that rolling stakeout on 10 April, to the different communication frequencies used by Metro-Dade and the FBI (who weren't able to radio one another directly), to the 911 audio tapes of eye-witnesses to the firefight, and finally, after-action statements from the surviving SAs at the time of the event, not after they'd been "massaged" by Bureau policy administrators.
They didn't. They had the C1 Squad rolling that morning, some of whom were "SWAT-trained/qualified."
Basically, McNeill grabbed all the available Field SAs and put them into a certain area that morning looking for a specific vehicle described to them by a ballsy eyewitness to a precious crime.
Your information is incorrect, Ian. And by your spelling of Gil Orrantia's name, I know just where you obtained your information. Matix fired one (1) round from his shotgun, and then was effectively out of the fight with one of McNeill's rounds which fractured his skull and contused his brain. That he was later able to pull himself together enough to find his way to the passenger's seat of the Grogan/Dove vehicle is another remarkable aspect of that day; the FBI is fortunate that he didn't have it together enough to actively get back into the fight.
O for the love of Peter G. Kokalis, Goon, where the hell were you on 28 February 1993?!? The Davidians did fight it out with the ATF cowboys, and shot the hell out of them! It was ATF who called the "crease-fire" 43 minutes into the engagement because they'd run out of ammunition.
Hkmp5sd persists:
Mas is an old friend of almost 17 years standing, and his AH report in 1989 was a pretty good one given what he/we knew then, but it rife with factual errors and is far from the definitive text; a much better one is Dr. Anderson's extraordinary Forensic Analysis, which is science, not speculation, and his investigation led Dr. Jay Barnhart, the Metro-Dade Medical Examiner who had been the associate who had signed off on the autopsies in 1986, to make some revisions to those reports almost ten years later.
Based on your assertions here, I'm afraid you're not conversant enough with those events to make any such statement about "inaccuracies." You simply cannot take Mas' original AH report (the less said about the 1991 follow-up one the better!), plus some viewings of the NBC "In The Line of Fire" teleflick and ABC's FBI: The Untold Stories hosted by Pernell Roberts, and think you have some authoritative knowledge of what happened that day. Even the FBI's own "in-house" training film is inaccurate as it works overtime to put the best possible agency light on the subject. You gotta be careful of your sources… some people have even held up John Ross' fanciful deviant sex scene in Unintended Consequences as authentic, and one of the reasons that more SAs weren't at the firefight!
If you haven't yet obtained a copy of Dr. French Anderson's Forensic Analysis (it's one of the few things that Shawn Dodson and I have ever agreed upon), beg, borrow or abscond with one, and then try to track down the two-hour debriefing video (circa '87) featuring Sgt. David Rivers, head of the Metro-Dade PD crime scene investigation team. It has some of the best information on the whole event, from the previous robberies/shootings which led to that rolling stakeout on 10 April, to the different communication frequencies used by Metro-Dade and the FBI (who weren't able to radio one another directly), to the 911 audio tapes of eye-witnesses to the firefight, and finally, after-action statements from the surviving SAs at the time of the event, not after they'd been "massaged" by Bureau policy administrators.
Pilgrim
Member
If the Branch Davidians had launched a violent counter-attack after the BATF raid team ran out of ammunition, there would have been more than just four BATF funerals.
AK103K
member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2002
- Messages
- 7,610
Dean,
My point was, when police encounter people who are not impressed by their presence or supposed authority, and are willing, if not eager to bring the fight to them, it becomes a whole different world, especially for the police. The general population has been conditioned since childhood to "do as your told", especially when the police are involved. For the most part, I think the police also expect this, from all but a few. In this case they even had a good idea that who they were after could be a problem, and they STILL didnt have the proper weapons with them. You, and the police have a handgun with you because you always can.(unless you take it out during a chase and lay it on the seat) But, if your "expecting" ANY kind of trouble, wouldnt you bring along as much fire power you could? The other boys came to play and brought their toys. The FBI probably was thinking they'd get out in their fancy suits, flash their shiney badges, shout "FBI, your under arrest" and the world would stop, as its supposed to. The only problem here was, the other boys were'nt impressed.
Hkmp5sd
Member
Dean Speir,
Got it. Read it.
As in all things related to humans, there are inaccuracies when information comes from more than one source. For forensic information, I agree that Dr. Anderson's report is the best source. For information about what the agents knew and said at the time of the encounter, I believe the earlier reports over the later reports for anything that is NOT on actual audio tape at the time of the shooting. Stories change with each telling and as years pass, even the agents involved can slightly alter their story without knowing it.
This shooting is the most written about one in recent history and as time goes on, it will soon equal JFK in the number of different versions floating around. Since none of us are eyewitnesses, we must base our evaulation on what information is available.
In your opinion, you know what happened. In my opinion, I know what happened. And like JFK, NONE us will agree on everything!
BTW, since Ayoob is an old friend of yours, how about some free passes to LFI?
Got it. Read it.
As in all things related to humans, there are inaccuracies when information comes from more than one source. For forensic information, I agree that Dr. Anderson's report is the best source. For information about what the agents knew and said at the time of the encounter, I believe the earlier reports over the later reports for anything that is NOT on actual audio tape at the time of the shooting. Stories change with each telling and as years pass, even the agents involved can slightly alter their story without knowing it.
This shooting is the most written about one in recent history and as time goes on, it will soon equal JFK in the number of different versions floating around. Since none of us are eyewitnesses, we must base our evaulation on what information is available.
In your opinion, you know what happened. In my opinion, I know what happened. And like JFK, NONE us will agree on everything!
BTW, since Ayoob is an old friend of yours, how about some free passes to LFI?
Dean Speir
Member
[sigh]
As I have stated, the best information about that event comes from two sources:
- David Rivers debriefing video tape (which preceeds Mas' first report by over a year, and does contain audio of both police communications during the low speed pursuit and 911-calls during the firefight.).
- French Anderson's superior Forensic Analysis.[/list=1] My problem is that too many think that, because it has so much other excellent material in it, Ross' fictional account is authentic, and that the various TV dramatizations are even remotely accurate.
Um, he's my friend, not necessarily yours, #1, and, #2, I finally took him up on his longtime offer in October 1994. It was "information-intensive," so I am most enthusiastic about LFI I.
Part of what cracks me up about the criticism of this event is that people 17 years later are critical of the FBI as if they believe that the FBI has no idea there were things to be learned from that tragic event. Although the Bureau did cast a certain amount of spin on the event, they were uncharacteristically forthcoming in their after-action briefings and training films, about the mistakes made and lessons learned. The FBI knows that there were tactics to be changed and trained for, since the Miami Incident. They may not have come up with the best final solution to it, but yer durn skippy, they've responded to it.
Biggest lesson learned, to me? At day's end, it's the cook rather than the kitchen. A determined agent with a small .38 and a lot of guts ended the fight.
Arm and train yourselves as best you can, but also you must equip yourselves with the proper mindset, if you would perservere.
Biggest lesson learned, to me? At day's end, it's the cook rather than the kitchen. A determined agent with a small .38 and a lot of guts ended the fight.
Arm and train yourselves as best you can, but also you must equip yourselves with the proper mindset, if you would perservere.
AmericanFreeBird
Member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2002
- Messages
- 172
The FBI knew that these guys had at least one semi-auto rifle with them and none of them thought to bring even so much as a 12ga along for backup?
They were absolutely lousy marksman, who taught them to shoot anyway?
They made some very stupid tactical errors (such as leaving a gun on a car seat vs. in a holster etc.) that cost them dearly.
They screwed up would be my assesment.
They were absolutely lousy marksman, who taught them to shoot anyway?
They made some very stupid tactical errors (such as leaving a gun on a car seat vs. in a holster etc.) that cost them dearly.
They screwed up would be my assesment.
Hkmp5sd
Member
Don't have access to that. Wanna send me a copy?
Double Maduro
Member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2002
- Messages
- 1,125
AmericanFreeBird
You said;
"They were absolutely lousy marksman, who taught them to shoot anyway?"
Fact is that one of the bg's was fatally wounded in the first seconds of the fight and the other only got off one round from his 12g before being shot in the head. Not bad shooting, pumped full of adrenaline and being shot at.
No one else has mentioned it here, and I haven't been flamed in awhile - so here goes, what do you think the outcome would have been if the agents were using oh say a .45 instead of the .38's and 9's they were using?
Yes, I know that it doesn't matter the size of the round but placement, but with the same placement, would Platt have been able to continue and would Matix have recovered from his head wound in time to fire the 3 shots from his .357?
If the rounds the agents were using had been effective, they were acurate enough, there would have been no need for vests, shotguns or rifles, and a lot of good guys would not have been wounded or killed.
Just a thought.
And please, I AM NOT, trying to ignite the 9 vs .45 debate again.
You said;
"They were absolutely lousy marksman, who taught them to shoot anyway?"
Fact is that one of the bg's was fatally wounded in the first seconds of the fight and the other only got off one round from his 12g before being shot in the head. Not bad shooting, pumped full of adrenaline and being shot at.
No one else has mentioned it here, and I haven't been flamed in awhile - so here goes, what do you think the outcome would have been if the agents were using oh say a .45 instead of the .38's and 9's they were using?
Yes, I know that it doesn't matter the size of the round but placement, but with the same placement, would Platt have been able to continue and would Matix have recovered from his head wound in time to fire the 3 shots from his .357?
If the rounds the agents were using had been effective, they were acurate enough, there would have been no need for vests, shotguns or rifles, and a lot of good guys would not have been wounded or killed.
Just a thought.
And please, I AM NOT, trying to ignite the 9 vs .45 debate again.
IIRC, at least 2 agents had 12 ga pumps. Agent Mirales (sp?) used one with one-hand, until he ran out of ammo and switched to his revolver. They also had two agents with M16s who, unfortunately, were on the toilet in a fast food joint a mile away when the takedown occurred.
Apple a Day
Member
Hkmp5sd,
Thanks, I always wondered about how they all ended up that way... or started out that way depending on how you look at the incident. Much obliged.
Thanks, I always wondered about how they all ended up that way... or started out that way depending on how you look at the incident. Much obliged.
I know that the Feds lost four men in that standoff with the Davidians, but they should have lost more. They were attacking an entrenched force that was well armed. I have read that the Davidians had a couple of Barrett .50's that they could have easily opened up on the Feds while they were trying to get straightened around, but they didn't.
And they left them call a time out when they ran out of ammo.
Seems kinda backward for a gunfight, huh?
And they left them call a time out when they ran out of ammo.
Seems kinda backward for a gunfight, huh?
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
To add to what Maduro said, suggesting the FBI were lousy marksmen was actually wrong. As I recall, one had several shooting awards and another one or two were regular competitors. The problem was, the type of marksmanship they were most familiar with involved standing still and shooting at a stationary target that did not shoot back.
Think about it. In the short distances that most of the shooting took place, I bet many of the participants could have shot and hit stationary targets a large amount of the time if they were just shooting from the hip for say anything inside 15 yards. A lot of this fight was not about marksmanship alone (although the first and fatal hit on Matix was). Unfortunately, there are minimally two dynamic aspects to a fit. They involve putting your hits on target while at the same time not allowing hit be delivered to/on your as a target. If you are exposing yourself to take an aimed shot, then that part of you can also receive an aimed shot as it will be unprotected by cover.
The FBI guys were not necessarily bad marksmen. What they were was very unprepared to be good marksmen in a surreal gunfight at close range where they were getting torn up and killed at a much greater rate than their well outnumbered opponents.
Think about it. In the short distances that most of the shooting took place, I bet many of the participants could have shot and hit stationary targets a large amount of the time if they were just shooting from the hip for say anything inside 15 yards. A lot of this fight was not about marksmanship alone (although the first and fatal hit on Matix was). Unfortunately, there are minimally two dynamic aspects to a fit. They involve putting your hits on target while at the same time not allowing hit be delivered to/on your as a target. If you are exposing yourself to take an aimed shot, then that part of you can also receive an aimed shot as it will be unprotected by cover.
The FBI guys were not necessarily bad marksmen. What they were was very unprepared to be good marksmen in a surreal gunfight at close range where they were getting torn up and killed at a much greater rate than their well outnumbered opponents.
- Status
Similar threads
