Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns .45 ACP +P Speer Gold Dots...Not Impressed!

Another example of how minimal someone being hit by a pass thru..


You still have not addressed the dangerous misses, those projectiles are still going full speed and have not been slowed by the body of the bad guy..

How do you defend that misses are neglegent when very rarely are all shots hits? It seems to mean that misses in a gun fight are the norm, not the exception and that the neglegence falls on the shoulders of the BG as without him there would be no gunfight in the first place.

Kevin

I did the exact same thing on a bet; running a normal qual course at 50 yards while the others watched! Why is it, average cops are surprised that marksmanship isn't difficult, but the process to reach that kind of expertise requires additional effort? When I went through the Wisconsin police school back in 76, there was a dedicated 50 yard course of fire!!!

About five years ago, I attended an NRA handgun/shotgun instructor's course. The two ajunct instructors were from my favorite federal agency. I later wrote an article about that class in Handguns Magazine. I didn't write the following annecdote for the article, but would like to now.

Because the two instructors didn't know me other than I was a free lance writer (my professional history was not germane to my attendance,) one of them seemed to dislike me, if for no other reason than I asked difficult questions. So, on the last night of the course, we were enjoying a slide projection shooting exercise where the students were engaging pre-recorded shoot/don't shoot scenarios using live fire as opposed to FATS style guns with laser/computer generated impacts.

I was "selected" to do the last scenario (I hadn't raised my hand) so I started to suspect I was being set up for what would have been a "no-win" scenario. The engagement involved a BG holding a gun to a woman's head. I had a hunch that if I waited too long, it would be too late, so the first chance I had, I placed one shot over the right eye of the BG at a simulated 25 yards (based on the size of the figure's head/torso). I had only given him one command to surrender before firing. In the end, I had been right. An instant later and my shot opportunity would have been lost and I would have been under fire. The problem was, though I had fired from a legally sufficient standpoint, I had fired sooner than what might be considered a professionally ethical point in the engagement. It had been a "lesson" the instructor's were trying to teach at my expense, but in the end, the class erupted in applause and hoots, and the only thing the instructor could say was: "This exercise is terminated."

During the entire series of exercises, only one student other than myself, had "technically" cleaned the scenario. Of course, these scenarios are intended to shock the students into realizing their own mistakes, but I couldn't help but watch in amazement at the number of shots fired that didn't hit, many of which were fired at the moment one might realize was actually too late to effect a favorable outcome! Many a non-combatant was hit that night, to the good-natured hilarity those types of exercises bring out. No harm, no foul.

While we're at it, another problem I see gradually creeping into the psyche of our nation's law enforcement is the "survive" at all costs attitude. I don't want to die any more than the next guy, but in truth, there was a time when officers came to the rescue, not merely to the aftermath; were expected to "save" lives, even if it meant taking life threatening risks. I'm actually referring to the Columbine shooting spree. I can't for the life of me, imagine an officer standing by outside while gun shots are heard inside a school! Professional training be damned, that behavior is somehow unsavory!

Dan

"Grossly" negligent would be loosing a barrage of shots "not intended" to hit. Suppression fire kind of fits that description.

Dan

I totaly agree...... You were a good officer IMHO, no make that great..

Oh, I didn�t know it was me who had to address this issue.

Personally, I�m a big believer in the never miss principle�there�s too much at stake to be missing, especially in a home defense scenario. For cops on the street, the engagements are just too unpredictable. Misses happen because the target isn�t standing there like a B29 waiting to be shot. Even the best marksman can miss in a gunfight. So while misses are regrettable, and everything should be done to minimize them, I don�t consider them inexcusable.

As for suppression fire, I have actually seen one example (after the fact), where it was appropriate and effective�In fact, it could be the poster child for when it was appropriate. BG armed with semi-auto rifle. Two cops on scene. One opens up with suppression fire, well aimed at the vehicle the BG was hiding behind while the other one took careful aim and waited for the BG to stand. The second officer then opened up and hit the guy 8 times in the upper torso�some really good shooting.

The BG was hiding behind a vehicle, parked in front of his garage. There was no one behind or even around him. While it�s true that there�s still a threat of bullets going through the house, but in the end, no one else was hurt except for the BG.

Dan

While I agree that suppression fire should be a rare occurrence, I don't totally agree with your statement, but probably agree with the sprit in which it was intended.

The use of suppression fire is a very dangerous thing to begin with, which is why it should be a very rare thing (but unfortunately isn�t). To be effective, suppression fire has to be accurate enough to pose an imminent threat to the BG. That requires aimed fire, not spray and pray.

To do this, the shooter (or officer) in question, should know exactly what he�s shooting at. In the scenario I provided, the officer hit the car, very near to where the BG was with almost every shot. Any misses went into the garage.

Certainly not the best thing in the world, but they quite handily neutralized someone who was much better armed than they were, and both officers returned home with the same number of holes they left with.

But I agree with your point, spray and pray has no place on our streets, period!

Dan,

I agree with that one. I picked up the mess after a SWAT incident didn�t go as it should have. All because the SWAT team was unwilling to take on the BG�s head on, and opted to try to sneak in behind them...it didn�t work.

I asked you to address the misses, because of your statement that a bullet that passes thru a BGs body was "irresponsible"

No one has even committed on the 600+ round fired by the Police in Las Vegas in early 2006. Yes 600+ rounds against one BG and Of course MOST were misses and no collateral damage. In self defense shoots collateral damage is rare indeed.

Kev,

thanks for responding.

Dan

Jwp

Thanks for your compliment.

Dan

Dan, you are more than welcome. Your attitude is exactly what it should be in Law enforcement.

Yes, that's my OPINION, not necessarily a statement of fact. If I KNOW that my ammunition will exit my target, yet I still carry that ammunition, I consider that irresponsible and negligent IMO.

True the chances of hitting another person are slim, but that changes with the scenery. If you engage a BG at a mall, I sure wouldn't want to have over-penetrative ammunition. If it was in front of my house, hey, bring it on; at worst I'll kill a cow.

There are cases of people being shot with bullets that perforated the intended target, but I can't read the list to you. I remember one in Southern CA (Either LAPD or Orange County Sheriff), where an officer shot his partner, through the BG with a 147 9mm.

This I can address as inexcusable; on that, we will agree.

Each shooting secnario certainly changes requirement and IMHO one must prepare for worst case secnarioo, A bullet that exits a 140 pound BG may not even be lif threatening to a 350 pound BG with a shot through the right bicept and into the chewst unless enough penetration is achieved. Handguns by nature are penetration challenged and deliberately shooting a penetration challenged bullet is neglegent IMHO. The 600+ rounds fired was mostly because of supressive fire to extract 3 officers behind a stair well the Bg was was hit 21 times with a least 2 rounds from 308 Police Sniper rifles accoeding to the inquiry.
Again anyone one being hit by any projectile after penetrating a BG is rare indeed.
I agree with most of your posts, but take extreme exception the "irresponsible" statement of a bullet exiting a BG

You make your case very well. With that description and forethought, I would agree that my use of the term "irresponsible" may have been a bit harsh; my apologies.

Kevin apparently you are a true gentleman.... but you don't owe me an apology

Thanks to you Gentlemen, as a result of this thread, the 230 gr Ball rounds that were in my carry pistols have been replaced with 230 gr HPs
The ball rounds will remain in my field pistols, both 45 Colt and 45ACP

That's a step in the right direction...good move.

jwp475



I am not assuming a thing. But since you're on the right right track with running for cover, how are you going to effectuate your theory of accuracy being dominant?

Reference LVMPD, no one can conclude whether 600 plus rounds was warranted, including you! But since you brought it up, how many officers were killed or wounded?


Thanks,

Mando

Kevin,



Excellent analysis, and written by one with obvious in-depth knowledge of survival tactics.

Too many neophytes, for lack of better term, get too caught up in killing bad guys as though they were shooting at paper targets. What all too many of these same people gravely forget is a gunfight occurs because a bad guy wants to KILL a good guy. To take time for precise aiming is suicide, which is why survivors are taught to point shoot!


Take care,

Mando