Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Cop firing through his windshield???

This makes for interesting video..... is this discussed in LEO training? Looks like it worked... Not sure if this guy will ever hear again???

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfac5DxRchk&ab_channel=NewYorkPost

It must be SOP. This is the second vid in a month I've seen a cop do it.

Whatever works I guess. Seems reckless but wtf do I know.

A lot of rounds were flying back and fourth in that video. Rather they be going out than coming in.

A friend of mine did that in the early 1990s before it was "a thing." It just wasn't on YouTube. What are you supposed to do if people are shooting at you? Quit because there's a windshield between the two of you?

The officer is responsible for every round going out the windshield. Reckless at best. Would have been deafening in the squad car. And then, empty magazine into stopped vehicle. The officer needs some serious training.

There's a 7 page thread going on about this same video here on the front page...

Does add another dimension to '...Has he been Mirandized yet!?!?!?...'

I know the New Jersey state Police practice shooting left handed oot the drivers side window while going in reverse! Done while practicing night shooting. Why would you shoot your windshield out when it's the only thing protecting you?

Shooting through a windshield isnt strange, odd, or reckless....at all. I see your video and raise you.....


https://youtu.be/Il5M63dxe7o

You are absolutely right. He should have sent a text message to the murder suspects and told them to stop shooting.


You don't know what you are talking about.

Do you think the windshield protected the turds in the getaway vehicle from his bullets? It would not appear so.

He may have to ask people to repeat themselves from now on, but they won't be planning his funeral tomorrow. When the gunfight starts, the only thing that matters is that you WIN.

Those cats at NJSP are high speed low drag, I guess. The deal is, though, that THIS individual officer, was thinking enough to know that he would be more accurate shooting strong hand with support, even if it meant shooting through his own windshield. My guess is that the first shot was loud, but then again, maybe not. During a SNS dump, it is pretty common for auditory exclusion to kick in.

The scumbags are dead, he's not. Call safe lite auto glass and get that car ready for the next shift.

I remember bowfishing as a kid.... you had to aim low to compensate for the light refraction IIRC.... probably something similar with shooting through a windshield... maybe related to the model of car and angle of windshield..... inquiring minds and all

The fuggers were shooting at the cop, what did you want him to do, hide under the dash like that coward in Broward county did?
He fought back and won. As far as I'm concerned we need more just like him.

The mag dump at the end was highly appropriate. Scumbag deserved every bullet that made it into him.

i can remember our firearms instructor setting up a training course for us. using a vehicle

the scenario was you rolled up on a dispute in progress, upon arrival you immediately see things have deteriorated to the point of several individuals pointing guns at you..how do you react. aside from obvious tactical order.

most people exited the car using it for cover. i shot through the wimdshield before exiting the vehicle and seeking cover.


even with ear peotection it was loud.

bullets traveled fine through the glass and struck the targets

as fsr as the mag dumo at the end. if someone is engaging me in a rolling gunfight and upon exiting if ind them still attempting to continue that fight they are gonna get shot until they stop...either continuing the fight or breathing

Windshields are cheap, funerals are expensive.

Killed one, got lead into the other, and took two murder suspects off the streets with zero innocents hit.

The results indicate he was sufficiently trained.

Can he still hear?

We were shooting through windshields in training 10 years ago. Car doors, drywall and all kinds of other stuff to show our people where you can and can't look for cover and how to exploit your adversarys choice of cover. A good firearms program is training their people how to win gunfights, not punch paper.

This time around...that mag change was atrociously slow and clumsy at a time when some quick ballsy perp could have him pinned and drilled in his PV...
what one may be able to do at the academy may not translate to the street.

. From the looks of it, and from what I know, it ain't protecting you from bullets...

And they practice this stuff a lot. Bullets fly true.

And IIRC police are less responsible for where their bullets end than a civilian, I'm not sure where I stand on that part.

but shooting through the windshield was smart, proven and worked again.

I'm surprised, but I guess I shouldn't be, that folks can be so ignorant.

Because it’s not bullet proof.

I may have to adopt this one. Should I have the student look where he is driving or shooting? I have to call bullsheit!

Fighting to win often makes no sense to many folks. Sometimes fighting to win puts others at risk. Sometimes it makes no sense. Lots of times it keeps one alive. Unorthodox keeps folks alive often. get out of the car and kneel behind the door often kills.

YMMV but I know I value me enough I"ll do whatever. Even if its in reverse while firing.

Laffin’.........reckless?

You need to account for the angle of the windshield (shooting in or out), other than that there’s not much to it besides the noise/concussion. It takes more time to learn to draw efficiently de the confines of a cruiser.

George

I am all for doing what it takes to win. Being in charge of a range and the safety of everyone on it pretty much makes the shooting weak handed out a car window while driving in reverse an impossible exercise to monitor for an instructor during training. Most shooters can't hit a target consistently at 7 yards weak handed, let alone shooting out a car window while driving in a direction you aren't looking. Spray and pray at best or driving blind, you pick which is the better option. Accident waiting to happen, which is unacceptable on the range.

With that said we have done some things with Simmunitions that would be impossible to simulate with live fire. Not ideal but the only way to do some training exercises and keep everyone safe.

My son once told me he was trained to shoot left handed out the driver’s side window while reversing fast, during his training for personnel protective services work while in the Navy.

When I was a kid, a guy my father and I used to go shooting with had been a deputy sheriff in the days of split windshields. He said they were trained, in high speed pursuit work, to knock out the passenger side windshield, rest their carbine (94 Winchester .32 Specials) over the dash, butt against the seat back, and fire as the opportunity arose. Disappointed that he never got a chance to try it.

It looked to me like the officer was square to the target (suspect vehicle) before he started shooting the first time (after trying to decide whether to shoot earlier under less ideal circumstances), and his shots are pretty straight on at the suspect vehicle. (We cannot see what is in front because of the position of the camera but he should have had a good view of the street in front of the car. We do know that they did not meet any vehicles traveling in the opposite direction, which supports an inference that the road was clear ahead of the suspect vehicle.) The officer even took some shots two handed. He had a really solid target the second time (which was angled but at a solid vehicle and at closer range), with a solid building wall toward the latter part. He also appears to have a very solid target and backstop firing into the vehicle the third time. Contrary to your assertion, the vehicle was not stopped. It was trying to back up and then pulled forward, probably to get around the police car or to run over the officer. The suspects had shot at the officer multiple times earlier and gave no reason to believe that they were done shooting at that point. The officer also warned a bystander to get down, and the perps easily could have shot the bystander or turned it into a hostage deal had the officer not pinned them down by continuing to shoot. (Also, if you will dump rounds at the police, you will dump rounds in a Walmart or school if you get away on foot.) To me, it appears to square with the bulk of the federal case law in use of force situations. (Can’t speak to Nevada state law or specific Ninth Circuit case law.) The deaf part is on the officer, and it's like taking cancer drugs-bad, but better than the alternatives.

LMAO who the fugg is this guy?



Protecting you from what? Bugs?

When the real schitt hits the fan, you take calculated risks that seem counter-intuitive. Real gunfights aren't a day at the square range session.

If I can shoot burrets through my windshield, from inside, exactly what is it protecting me from inbound from the outside?

That's the dumbest fahqin' statement I've read here today. I don't think it's the officer that needs the serious training here about the real world.

Starman's wingman.

The officer responded great and using two hands with a sight picture is so much smarter than some hanging an arm out the window movie bs.

The reload was fine too. Adrenaline pumping, talk on the radio, yell at suspects, seat belt, car in park or neutral, door open, eject mag, reload, work the slide all while keeping focus on two bad guys.

I realize many people run dry runs in their brain and do it flawless and smooth every time...welcome to REALITY.

Yup. Real life isn't a square range.

Spot on opinion.

I would think that reckless or not,I don't know of anyone of us that wouldn't be shooting back as fast and good as we could if we were being shot at. Yea,in I might be responsible for every round but the main thing going through someone's mind right then is surviving,not to hold back because someone could get hurt.

I'd think one would have a sensation of his head imploding every time a round was fired. That had to have hurt, and he'll most certainly file for a hearing disability in the near future.
As a stupid kid, I once fired a round through the open rear window of a station wagon from the driver's seat. Rest assured, I will never do that again.

thats interesting, that cop fired 30 rounds...now what if a person with their family had police rounds whiz past and hit some of their family,

would you consider that a threat you are entitled to give an armed respond to?...first utmost priority is to look after yer family...
hence neutralise ANY imminent threat as best and as rapidly as one can.....or does that liberty only apply to cops?

I doubt cops would be too happy or understanding if you hit and killed one of theirs when just trying to look after your family.
do you think LE would refrain from attempting to prosecute you?

now keep in mind... cops will approach the wrong home with a no-knock warrant and shoot dead the totally innocent resident
for simply trying to protect himself from an invasive threat...and police will argue to the judge that their actions were totally justified.

Good job. He didnt hide in a stairwell or outside the school.

He may be a democrat.

I don't know that it's taught but it makes perfect sense to fire through a soft barrier to hit something on the other side.

spencer and starman should less time spooning with one another.

It is taught in my training classes.

I wrote that poorly.

I was trying to say I don't know if that cop or other cops I've seen recently were taught to do it or just did it instinctively.

We trained for shooting through windshields at the Sheriff's Office here in Florida. Of course it is a last ditched effort to save yourself, but it works! You need to at least try and send all the rounds through the same hole in the windshield, but it can be done with accuracy. One of the instructors was easily able to hit steel targets at 15 meters consistently. If someone is approaching your vehicle and firing at you....shooting back through the windshield works!

In the heat of a gun battle, the cop's not going to take the time to Mirandize someone intent on killing him.

When you've got nothing to offer, change the topic.

One of the dudes' names was Miranda. He exercised his right to remain silent.

Whoooooooooosh!

you don't even think about any of that when you are in a fight.

https://youtu.be/5locEWj1rMU

Might want to watch this.

Mirandized?......really? Obviously someone doesn't know Dik about the law!

Ron

Seems like it could make driving more difficult if you completely spider web the windshield in front of you while driving..

Aim low when shooting through a windshield. Don't worry about your hearing or spiderwebs, put the threat down.

I agree, when not driving. Could make it a little hard to continue a high speed pursuit when you can't see (driving), though.

Do you know the name of the ones that were shot........................ did you read the article????

Sheeeeesh, some of this group is a bit obtuse................. Or maybe my attempt at a little levity was too cryptic............

Ernest Arturo Miranda( the guy from Arizona, the guy in the LANDMARK SCOTUS RULING) - 'you have the right to, yadda, yadda, yadda.........'

OR

Fidel Miranda (THE GUY IN THE ARTICLE, THE GUY IN THE CAR, THE GUY THAT GOT SHOT) - Bam, Bam.....bambambam,....Bam, Bam..................

Rant - OFF

It's probably MY fault..................

Spooning?














J/K.....lol

Also aim low when the enemy is riding Shetland ponies.

The officer was coming to a stop and was shooting through the windshield as suppressive fire so they couldn’t take aim while he got out of the car. I’m pretty sure he didn’t expect to actually hit them but it sure made it safer to exit his car.

The video I watched showed a cop in high speed pursuit, navigating heavy traffic, reporting the activity over the radio and still manages to stay on the perp’s ass, get his pistol out and fire at the perp!

Michael Jordan’s best antics on a basketball court wouldn’t rival this guy’s physical prowess in this incident. Your criticism is about as valid as those desk jockeys that wanted to castigate Chesley Sullenberger...

Auditory exclusion doesn't mean you aren't deafened by the sound, it just means you don't notice being deafened.

Starboy hasn't done anything in his miserable life. Therefore he doesn't KNOW anything. He's just another sockpuppet troll.

I would love to read the write-up for whatever commendation this cop deserves. He was awesome.

That makes more sense, then. Good work by the officer.

The officer did fine!!

WOW! +P+

After seeing many of the responses, I'm wanting to make reservations to take Crimson Tide and NHK9 with me to any type of gunfight...

Besides, I've seen both of them shoot....

I'm well aware of auditory exclusion and deafness. I have the T shirt for both. If you read my post closely, you'll notice I didn't say anything about AE preventing hearing loss.

Count on cheating. It is my policy.

I have zero desire to get into the OP’s conversation....



Good on the cop for killing bad guys.... but... the cheerleading is a bit much.



“Michael Jordan’s best antics on a basketball court wouldn’t rival this guy’s physical prowess in this incident”


No. Anyone that’s actually skilled could, and would tear it apart. Just because he or an innocent didn’t die, doesn’t mean he’s better at his “game” than a world class athlete is at their “game”.




This-

“high speed pursuit, navigating heavy traffic, reporting the activity over the radio and still manages to stay on the perp’s ass, get his pistol out and fire at the perp”



Is called his job. It’s what should be expected, and mandated from him and his coworkers.

Well you have your say and as wrong as you may be you are entitled to do so. Michael Jordan, Ted Williams or Wayne Gretzky performed at the top of their respective sports, but they trained with controlled circumstances knowing if they goofed up they could do it over.

You really need to get shot at during a high speed chase and you may change your mind about his job description and the practice a cop gets to deal with those circumstances.

One thing we always did right after a mission or exercise was an After Action Review or "Hot Wash". This allowed us to point out strengths and weaknesses in training, SOPs, and equipment and it's a good habit to get into IMO regardless of what you call it.

Just because everyone survived with no injuries doesn't mean you can't do it better the next time the SHTF.

If I was that cop I'd be looking at the video and seeing if there were things I could improve in.

Oh and Shrapnel, I'm pretty sure Formidilosous has been shot at more than once unless I'm completely wrong about where he is.

https://www.bozemandailychronicle.c...d3f7f9e-7b33-562c-bcc2-cffce03182dd.html

The world is full of tough guys that know all about these circumstances. My son is a LEO and was one of the first on the scene to this fatal shooting of another officer. He didn’t get to look at a video to see what he could do better...

I'm not saying I could of done better in that particular set of circumstances. My only somewhat relevant experience is infantry based anyhow and we had close air support.

It doesn't mean the officer and his department can't look at the video and try and get better at their job. I'm not trying to denigrate the officer at all as he managed a tough situation and survived, but he would be foolish IMO if he doesn't try to learn from it and get better at his job.

Do you think the department your son works for looked at what happened (in the incident you linked) and tried to learn from it?

I'm fairly certain that department training, SOPs and equipment are driven in part by actual incidents and also possible scenarios that they figure they are likely to encounter. Unfortunately sometimes those lessons learned are purchased with blood.

Muffin, sorry my thick skull missed the humor! That is kinda funny.

Ron

When you think you are good enough, you are wrong. Professionals always seek to improve.


mike r

How can police be sure theres not a child in the back seat? Seems somewhat reckless to shoot into a car when they dont know what/who else might be in it. Shooting out a tire or into the engine compartment I can see...

No problem........... sorry bought the mini-rant!

Generally, I think that if the perps are shooting at you, shouldn't you shoot back? Plus, when you're chasing another vehicle at a high rate of speed, the tires and engine block probably aren't an option. Checking to see if there's a kid in the truck??? Maybe the cop should have politely asked them to pull over, I'm sure they would have complied.

Those are tough questions. But shooting at a tire or into the engine compartment in order to stop the car is forbidden in many departments because of liability issues. Lawyers have sued cities for damages cause by car wrecks stating that the officers destroyed the ability of the crooks to control the car, and are therefore liable for the damage caused by wrecks.

I believe that lawsuits have boiled down the act of shooting - using deadly force- as justified to "end the threat". The cop has to consider, often in a split second, whether shooting the crook, and the danger it entails, is worth the risk versus letting the crook escape, and therefore continue to commit violent crimes where victims may be subject to death or great bodily injury.

Consider the backlash at recent shootings where the cop held his fire, or did not engage. Some people get overwhelmed at what to have for dinner, or what present to buy for someone. Others make great decisions under stress. With all these cameras, there is a lot of opinions after the fact, but some opinions are better based on knowledge and experience, and not mere emotion. That being said, having these videos can be a tremendous asset for "hot washes" or after actions reviews. These provide records of actual events which can be learned from, and real viable training can grow out of.

Are you being for real? You don’t know me, but I do not work behind a desk. Yesterday morning my coworkers and I actually did use the video for learning purposes. The first thing that was said by anyone was- “well... we’d be put on probation for gun-handling that bad”, and it went down hill from there.

Your belief of “performance” is completely incorrect. Your thoughts are shared by the large portion of the gun carrying “professionals”, yet when actually measured at their tasks the absolute best teams on earth are about as good at their “sport”, as a decent regional junior high basketball team is at theirs.








And that’s why people continue to die. Remove the emotion and evaluate honestly. A LOT of police and military personel (a very good case can be made for most) get killed and wounded, or shoot the wrong people because they are under trained, under skilled, and do not learn from the past. I guarantee you I have never done a single mission of any type without us and others absolutely destroying our performance- no matter how good the outcome. Then we immediately change, correct, and practice the solution to the failures under conditions vastly harder than they were initially noted, so that they never happen again. Doing otherwise is like repeatedly going into the ring of a UFC fight, getting your butt destroyed every time, but never learning from the fights.

Winning fighters and coaches evaluate everything done critically and are hyper focused on removing weaknesses. Losers high five each other “because they played”.









See, this is my problem with both LE and the military. The general idea that the most important thing is to go home at night. “Surviving” isn’t the most important thing. If it was then why did you sign up to carry a gun in the first place? Winning is the most important thing, and it’s pretty hard to win if you kill the very thing you are supposed to be protecting.

Got a technical question.

There's several versions of this video on the internet but the one in the OP show the first shots fired through the windshield while the perp's vehicle is traveling beside a moving U-Haul truck going in the same direction. It's not parked. It's rolling right next to the perp's vehicle while the officer is shooting. Look at the parked vehicles on the left of the screen to see how its traveling.

Right at the beginning of this clip and then again at about 27 seconds. Five rounds. Then the U-Haul driver stands on the brakes.

I'm guessing that none of those five rounds went winging off to the right and penetrated the U-Haul or the driver otherwise we'd have heard about it.

But you guys who practice shooting through windshields - do your duty rounds reliably go pretty straight that way?

Generally yes. There is deviation due to angle of the glass, but not by feet at closer ranges with well designed projectiles.

I reckon when you start a gunfight with the police, it falls on the suspect if anyone in the vehicle is endangered.

Very well stated and correct.

No, that's incorrect. Every time I've started a gunfight with police, they've always asked (politely I might add) if there were others in the car, before returning fire.

Actually, when properly trained and vetted the shooter is expected to know the final resting place of each round fired, to include pass throughs. This level actually exists as a standard but is rarely enforced or supported by "management". It takes talent, time and effort to achieve this level and few agencies recognize or can afford it.


mike r

Rockape.... you be the simpleton who came to CF desperately seeking advice on how to handle your neighbors dog...

then gave tactical entry advice on school shootings that you said you got from watching hollywoods Saving Private Ryan.

not even funny , just sad.




Yet a police chief has said , that if the officer in question had harmed or killed any innocents, that he very much expected
the city would be paying up BIG for his recklessness.

why don't you just stick to entertaining the CF with your hick brain conspiracy theories like you do?

The officer is responsible for every round going out the windshield. Reckless at best. Would have been deafening in the squad car. And then, empty magazine into stopped vehicle. The officer needs some serious training.[/quote]

LMAO who the fugg is this guy?

Ex police officer, who now puts people back together in surgery. Just my opinion. Who are you?

Yep, we were kind of spooning, when we had a three way with your mama. Troll on, it takes the heat off others.

He had a solid target in his sights yes, and could say was aiming centre mass....but if you know anything about
the angle/degree of upward projectile deflection when firing through angled windshields...(and taking into account the distance of the target)
id say all his rounds went right over the top by a healthy margin.

Its highly evident from the video showing angle of gun and distance to target, that the officer is not skilled or
trained to effectively shoot through squad car windshields.

And from what I understand they don't train their guys to do such.

In your experience, when you’ve shot at targets through a windshield, how far off target were you?

When you factor in duty ammunition for .40 vs .45 vs 9mm vs .357 Sig, what difference did you see?

I’m just curious if my experiences will mirror yours.

George