Starting this so that I don't derail the other thread.

IMO a lot of people don't train as much as they should at short distances because (1) In order to do it correctly you really need a timer and people don't want to invest in one and (2) From a training point of view shooting at long distance is actually MORE reassuring. If you hit, great. If you miss you can tell yourself it's really OK, because after all....look how far away that target is! If you try to shoot fast up close and can't, there's not a lot of room for excuses and it can be really demoralizing.

I thought I'd post up some of the stuff that I normally practice to spur conversation. These 3 drills constitute a large portion of my "stand and shoot" training. I normally shoot from the 5 or 7 yard line. At 7 yards for these drills I'm 95%ish target focused, so shooting at 7 yards translates well to closer shooting as well. At 5 yards I'm definitely completely target focused and I really don't see a reason to shoot any closer than that.

All of these drills are set up for USPSA targets. The A Zone is roughly 6x12 and can be easily replicated by folding a sheet of typing paper lengthwise to the correct width.

BILL DRILL
This is the most popular of the three drills. Draw and fire six rounds. That's it. Nothing to it.
A good par time is anything less than two seconds at 7 yards.

BLAKE DRILL
Three targets places side by side with about three feet between them. Draw and fire two round at each target.
This is the same amount of rounds fired as the Bill Drill but you also have to make two transitions.
The par time is 2 seconds at 7 yards.
For me, this drill is incredibly difficult. I can count on one hand the number of times I've cleaned it with all As under two seconds.

ACCELERATOR
Set up targets so that from left to right they appear to be about a yard apart. The distance to the targets can be changed. I usually vary this drill with targets at 3-7-15 yards or 7-15-25 yards.
This drill forces you to change your sight focus and trigger control for varying target difficulty. It's a great way to work on close distance stuff and also add in a little distance work.
Fire two shots at each target, reload, fire two shots at each target. I usually fire near to far-reload-far to near. That incorporates a little bit of everything.
Six seconds is the par time for this drill and honestly it seems completely impossible to me. Ignoring the insane par time, this is still a great drill.

Thanks for posting this.....I've never had any formal training so this is very helpful.

Blue, that last one we incorporate in our semi annual quals but is done with one tactical mag change after the first run through. It is also done with four targets 3-7-15-25, time is a generous 15 seconds. Sure sifts the wheat from the chaff.

Are they uniformed officers wearing duty gear? I don't think that I've ever seen a dept. have their officers perform tactical mag reloads before.

All sworn officers uniform and plain clothes. They carry the Sig 226 in 9mm so that would be a half expended mag mag changed out and put in a pocket, this is just another tool in their kit.

Don't they make shot time apps for smart phones these days? I've been using the same PACT timer/chronograph for nearly 30 years...that thing has paid for itself a hundred times over.

paper dinner plates work well also, but aren't as "eye catchy" (too say nothing of cheaper) and they don't need taped.

Surrender, hands up, with back to target, was an old standards, still useful

If possible shoot what ever practice you do choose, with weak hands as much as possible.

Use a 180 deg. range if possible, which allows targets at 90 to 180 deg sweep

use range that has firing line movement. not target. In other words you move to the target rather than moving the target near and far. Take an old door. for barricade practice.

tag

I've shot the Bill Drill quite a bit over the years. I like the Accelerator Drill, sounds like a good one. Gonna try that out very soon.

I have no formal training, but does staying completely committed to a threat with your weapon on target and firing count for anything, or is it all mostly tactically trained maneuvering and mindset?

If not I best find a class.

Not directing this at anyone, but: my grandmother can do this, it just takes her longer.

flash sight picture, and press do not use the analytical, mind, decision, pull, ----the later takes to long. The commitment is in the flash sight picture. The aggressor has already taken two and the gun is/should be repositioned for the next encounter.

Civilian techniques are far different form than police and military. They do a bunch of other stuff because of policy, communications etc.

if you haven't already shot the aggressor, holding them at gunpoint is risky, (fatigue, hair triggers, multiple aggressors, tunnel concentration. etc)
the slowest part of the presentation is the "sock on" whereas moving the gun from the chest, straight out , sight picture , press occurs in tenths of sec.
mean while your consciousness can remain on the situation.

moving the gun with the eye on the sights, through any arc, up and down is counter productive

Yeah. I've had hit and miss luck with them.

Depends on what the class is geared towards. I find the best classes are those that are geared heavily to one side or the other. Either teach me how to shoot a gun or teach me how to tactic. Classes that combine the two are usually pretty weak all the way around.

For civillian defensive uses the tactical maneuvering stuff is far less important than shooting well, IMO. And I'm pretty sure you've got the mindset stuff locked down.

And I'd add that those drills aren't really about testing a specific scenario related skill. They're completely technique builders.

To get a two second Bill Drill you've gotta hit your grip perfectly, draw and index the gun on the target without any actual conscious effort, and have a grip that's strong enough to control the recoil without causing trigger freeze.

The Blake Drill incorporates all of that, but adds the need for a relaxed posture that lets you move fluidly and your ability to drive the gun to the target directly where you're looking and stop it there without over swinging it.

The Accelerator forces you to recognize target difficulty and adjust your focus and trigger control on the fly.

_____________

Building all of those skills lets you perform in any situation, without training for any one scenario.

Agreed...
Basic level of competence at arms is essential, beginning with marksmanship...if you can't hit a stationary target, moving on to tactics isn't going to do you much good.

Next is learning how to move safely in a tactical situation, and weapon handling / manipulation is very important. Have to know how to move in a fluid environment while maintaining basic gun safety. When doing force on force exercises, those not in the fray are observers. It's amazing how frequently people cover themselves, parts of their body, or their partner with the muzzle of their gun while moving around during an engagement. Or watching people's trigger fingers drifting toward the trigger as the tension rises. I can remember at least twice where there were ND's during movement. I don't recall anyone shooting themselves during my class, but the instructor informed me it was far more common than anyone would like to admit. It becomes even more of a problem after the first rounds go off. Many who were completely safe leading up to the event, completely disregard all safety after the first round flies. A scenario where it's a room clearing sort of thing, they do well until they hit "the" room...a shot is fired, everyone either returns fire, or goes for cover....from that point on, often you'll see that fingers never come off triggers regardless of what's happening. It's eye opening!

A lot of people either don't think about this or brush it off because they're "safe on the range", but it would be rather embarrassing to begin your gunfight by putting the first round into yourself. And doing so could significantly degrade your performance for the second act of the gunfight.

Should have said firing "accurate hits" counting for anything, I don't have a clue what the term techniques you mentioned above even mean, as far covering a downed aggressor, if I was convinced he was down for good, I'd immediately check parking lot, aisles etc for a backup compadre in crime while yelling for other un-armeds to get down, wouldn't know what else to do, but do know that is all somehow built in survival fight/defend muscle memory.

Thanks Blue, kinda what I was trying to convey to ETOH earlier, I do think me not having any [immediate?] fear of aggressors is stupid, practicing for better more accurate shooting has to be a very good thing.

Every idiot and his brother has a cell phone these days. If you have a cell phone, you can have a shot timer just by visiting Google Play or the Apple (gag) App Store.

I have a timer app on my Samsung Galaxy that I use to qualify our officers with. The one I use is Shoot Utilities IPSC-USPSA Google Play

I only use the par timer for now and it works just fine. The only improvement they could make is to make the buzzer louder and of lower frequency.

The one I really like is by Sure-Fire, but it's only available for the iPhone (gag).

most civilian self defense isn't complicated, its usually one on one at short distances. Mental mindset must include "don't underestimate the craziness of the aggressor" who knows they may been practicing Tae Kwon Doo kicking techniques for the last 4 years while they were in reform school.

and as yu mention there is always one more guy than the ones you see

movement shooting includes hitting stationary targets while you move, and moving targets while you are stationary. Try to rig a rail, higher on one end that allows a round plate to roll down it. Now do it with you and it moving.

If I where involved in a multiple aggressor I would be more afraid of being shot by "friendlys ". As a civilian I will use the weapon to remove myself from the area.

Room/building clearing is police/military stuff not good for civilians. Usually handled better by explosives.

I don't believe in hitting the same target in the same place more than once is good training. Any decent hit should do it. If it doesn't, you need to go for a head shot with your second shot.
After some experience with live shootings, both mine and others, the biggest problem is getting that hit that will do the job. BG's pumped up on drugs, etc. sometimes are very hard to stop. The other problem is getting target fixated. There is a very strong tendency to zero in on one spot or technique and keep doing it while hoping for the results you so desperately need. You can easily wind up with an empty gun and the problem still present.
I don't have or want a timer. The only thing I want are meaningful hits.
I never been a fan of trying to hit something while moving. Either shoot or duck behind cover. E

Good thread w/ some interesting replies. Not missing is critical, not missing quickly while controlling multiple shots on multiple targets should be the goal before working on tactics. A sub 2 second Bill drill is the holy grail. My best from concealment, aiwb, is 2.2 secs. I have broken 2.0 secs only a few times using an open carry ALS. I think the Bill drill is the best 6 shot test when fire cold from concealment.


mike r

I think Oheremicus, back in the day, was some sort of operator. That "stand your ground and hit your target" mindset was commonly taught to operators back in the day, vs today's "move and shoot" mindset.

That was the least objectionable thing he said.

I agree with much you say here. My room clearing example was just that, not a suggestion that people take room clearing classes. However, all the skills you learn in room clearing can be applied to the concrete jungle; cover, concealment, and movement.

just to add more

action shooting is accurate shooting and not precision shooting, the target is rather large and is "weighted" in importance as much as speed. (accuracy)

a good way to build par time muscle memory without a timer is simply select the target such as an IPSC or paper plate and select a distance

from your presentation shoot sighted pairs (for those who are sensitive to double tap) increasing your speed until you miss at that distance. Slow down until you are hitting 80-90% This is your internal clock at that range

The time increases with distance because while the target size is still constant will appear smaller. (obvious I know) but it is difficult to hold the sights for most shooters.


I believe the best and the one technique the civilian shooter can master is the speed rock. This goes with the percentages and while all the other stuff is fun..........

Blue - you mention par times of 2 seconds, etc. Is that from concealment, or race gun holsters? Carry ammo or light game gun ammo?

I tried the Bill Drill yesterday, starting from concealment with hands at my sides I wasn't able to get below 2.40 seconds, probably need to work on drawing faster because that was most of the time. Splits were ~.20 give or take a little. Thoughts?

I'm using a smartphone app too that doesn't always pick up all the shots, so I had to discard about half of the times I shot.

No doubt Bleu's response to this will be ridicule...this forum gets a bit repetitive.

There are those who feel only their type of training is valid; this forum is full of them. But there can be any number of training regimines that work well regardless of whether they make sense to us, whether we like them, or whether they fit with the "hive mind". Example: the Israeli technique for handgun combat seems foolish by Western standards, yet it fits their society, and has proven to be more than adequate in the real world...Few get more actual shooting incidents than the Israeli's.

Various US military units have changed their training to something similar to what you describe above. I remember reading an article about special ops training (don't recall which unit), and due to the new prevalence of hard plate body armor many are now training to put their first round into the pelvis, then follow up with a head shot, basically skipping the upper chest shot altogether.

John Farnam refers to your opponent (BG, or target, etc) as "the problem" and your shooting is merely working the problem until it's no longer a problem. He used a 3D target held up with a balloon in one of 3 chambers decades ago. Not until you hit the supporting balloon would the target fall, and you have solved the problem. Chambers were abdominal, chest, head. Most would start off with two shots to the chest. Then you had the choice of head or abdominal cavity to find the "solution". It was good training...not difinitive, but good.

So I see nothing wrong with that type of training. Personally I will shoot two shots to each point of aim because a second shot to the same point of aim (as demonstrated by Bleu's Bill Drill) takes but a fraction of a second, while changing your point of aim is 2-3x as long as split times in between rounds.

It doesn't take drugs...There are countless cases of highly motivated individuals who were not on drugs soaking up crazy numbers of bullets and continuing to fight.

Meaningful hits are of paramount importance. But what if it takes too long to get them?

You cannot improve what you don't measure. Handgun combat shooting, whether you like it or not, will come down to speed & accuracy; which is why all the combat shooting games score based on speed and accuracy. I would want to measure both elements, not just one.

Blue, you owe me a keyboard.

If the premise is that firing more than one round into the same place is bad training, then yes....I will definitely ridicule that.

Bill Drills, Blake Drills, the Accelerator....None of the drills I listed have anything to do with training for scenarios with body armor or anything else. They're about gun handling. I'm having a completely different conversation than you and O. I'm not talking about shooting different parts of people, or any parts of people.

But to say that it's "not good training" to shoot something like a Bill Drill because it doesn't involve also shoot the target in the face or dick is absurd.

I hope you know you just ruined the internet for a lot of people. Buy you a beer if we ever cross paths.

HAaaaaa lol

Judge, " I can understand why you shot the guy 3 times, but the whole magazine"



Bill Drill teaches continuity, no mental hiccups, and a really good check to see if your gun is working. (personally i like it because it teaches the trigger finger when the disconnector has engaged in a 1911 and when the slack is gone in a glock something very hard with single shots.)

It's the standard given to me to use from a no-retention kydex holster. Standard ammo. Some of the 115grain factory ammo I've had wasn't strong enough to use in competition. For drills like this it won't make much, if any, difference.

.2 splits puts you at a 1.4 draw...? That's pretty quick from concealment, at least it would be for me. I'd be looking at your splits. What are you shooting?

Getting your draw down to a 1.2ish and splits to .17ish gets you real close.

___________________________

What I've found is that people can shoot at 7 yards MUCH faster than they think they can. When I shoot a Bill Drill I'm pulling the trigger almost as fast as I can.

There are two things that slow people down on drills like this, and they're sort of related.

Try this.... Set up a target and load up two mags of twelve rounds. Fire three sets of 6 just into the berm beside the target. Don't focus on anything at all, just death grip the gun and run the trigger as fast as you can. Do it with your eyes closed if you find yourself focusing on a "target" on the berm. Pay attention to how that feels. Then aim the gun at the target, focus your eyes entirely on the target (no sight focus at all), and fire the last six rounds at that same pace. With a good grip and assuming you're not shooting some sort of crazy hot round you'll probably put all six rounds in the A box.

People normally don't shoot that fast because (1) They're not confident that they can control the recoil and keep the rounds in the A zone and (2) They're over aiming.
--The first drill solves the first problem and starts addressing the second problem.

Then do this to help finish solving the second problem....

At 7 yards fire three or four rounds with perfect sight alignment at the center of the target (no time limit, put them all in one hole). Next, get that same sight picture, but deviate your front sight (front sight only, don't move the rear of the gun at all) all the way to the left of the rear notch. Fire three or four more rounds for accuracy. Do the same thing to the right.

What I've found doing this sight deviation drill is that at 7 yards all I need is to see most of my fiber optic in the rear notch. I have have the front sight 1/3 out of the rear notch and still get A hits. That's what finally convinced me that I was over aiming. You'll lose a lot of time on drills like this by looking for a good sight picture, even if you're just barely looking for it, for each shot. If your splits are .2s I'd bet that's happening. Do this drill and you'll allow yourself to stay target focused and just see the front sight moving around in the A box in your "blurry vision". That little bit of time you make up on each of six shots ends up being substantial.




That's why I rarely even recommend them anymore. They can be so finicky that you just spend your range session farting around with your phone and being frustrated with that instead of focusing on your shooting.

So rather than just enter into some gentlemanly debate, where you can educate E and possibly others you just go straight to ridicule?

TOTALLY agree...and I get that...I didn't mean to give the impression that I see no use to those types of drills, because I do; and I use those types of drills myself.



I guess every other thread on the "Handguns Forum" turning into a pizzin contest by page 3 doesn't get old for you.

No, I'm not going to try and convince O of anything. I'm just going to tell him that I think he's wrong, but at least I did it in a funny way that would bring joy to the forum.

For the sake of the masses you're so concerned about I'll start with this...


The notion that you should shoot someone one time with a "decent" hit, then assess if it worked and then move on to another target area is ridiculous. I'm not sure where to start, but I have faith that anyone who would understand what I would say can figure out how absurd that is for themselves.

What pissing match are you referring to?

The one GG just started. He's the only one pissing and moaning ...

Yeah, I figured someone was going to go there when I typed my reply. Seriously not trying to start a pizzin contest, and I did my best to be respectful even while chastising Bleu...Just trying to get people to think. Don't we have enough contentious threads on here?

Bleu can be pretty funny, but unlike Deflave, he has a brain beyond his humor...knows his chit, and IMO has a lot to offer in the way of damn good advise. His post in response to Yondering's inquiry about Bill Drills is just awesome and great information. Wish he would have put that much thought to responding to E, even though Otheremericus could have used a LOT more tact in his response.

Everyone knows that GG is a combat hardened warpig who outshoots his local swat team. He is obviously above debate w/ someone who has actually trained in the current century. And I would bet that De Flave can outshoot and outhink GG while drinking his 6th beer.

Carry on Walter Mitty.


mike r

I'm with Blue, the Ohem post was utterly preposterous on so many levels that a persuasive response would be an exercise in futility.
Instead, he deflated the whole argument with humor. Touche!

Not to mention that The Real Hawkeye thinks tha Oheremicus was an "operator" back in the day. I nearly busted a gut with that little jewel.

This ^^^^^^^ in spades.

MM

Well, Blue, you are certainly entitled to your opinion. I base mine on my own experiences, that means mistakes I made while doing it for real and those made by others. The other thing is I don't feel the need to do a lot training. But certain basics are needed to be maintained. They are to avoid target fixation, i.e. "keep shooting him until he goes down," and two, make sure you actually hit him where it will get the job done.
This idea of aimed fire was not taught back when I got into law enforcement. At 7 yds, we shot from the hip, reloaded (I guess it was assumed the bad guy would hold his fire) and shot six more. You concentrated on emptying your gun on the bad guy to stop him..... Bitter experience taught us this didn't work at times. Then came the idea of a double tap as fast as you could draw and shoot. That's fine, as long as it worked. But, again, experience showed that when in a big hurry, too many missed what they shot at when it came time to do it for real. But LAPD's training for focusing on the front sight, slowed them down and improved accuracy. That's why they have the best survival rate among the big law enforcement agencies. They hit what they need to hit.
My last point is that the odds are good that anybody one goes against may well be pumped on drugs or nuts. If that's the case, a body hit, even with a .44 Magnum, may not do the job. You need to be prepared to do a head shot. E

How long were you in law enforcement? San Jose ring a bell?

jwp, if you have something to say, say it. E

Be careful, you'll get chastised...

Tough crowd...
Bob

I disagree wholeheartedly. I train, preach and teach upper thoracic hits. If I can cover them all with my fist excellent. Body armor drills are not practical in the real world. The first thing a person does when they're hit is move whether it's a flinch from the hit or oh Shiite I gotta get outta here. Trying to follow up a center mass shot with a head shot is not reasonable. I've been trained that way and it's wrong. All the new training I've received in the past couple years was pound upper chest till he goes down. The head is far too animated to reliably hit. If you can't shoot on the move or at least train for it then my friend you're putting yourself in a world of hurt.

Oh and Blue, keep posting the training tips. They've been very helpful.

You're always talking about this "experience" you have, so you should tell us about your "experience".

Why so defensive?

It's not like you shot an unarmed man in the back.

Thanks man, good info.

I'm shooting either of a pair of G19 pistols, one with an RMR and one without. Times are equal with both. Ammo is handloads but essentially +P 115gr. I haven't been practicing my draw in a while, and could definitely work on that. You're right on the draw time, ~1.4-1.5 seconds.



That's exactly how I shoot when I'm going fast. The pistol, hands, and arms act as one unit, aiming is done with arms & torso. I do practice that kind of shooting, but have very little competition experience.

When you tell us about your live shootings and Blue tells us about his, I'll describe mine. E

Just my observation on red dot pistols, the advantage gained is at distance or on the move. The Bill Drill is shot pretty well with either point shooting, as Blue points out. Move the Bill Drill out to 20 yards or while moving and the dot will excel.

Blue, you need to read the autopsy report. I have shot no one in the back. He was "unarmed" ? "Unarmed" people can't kill or do great bodily harm ? Blue, are you really that ignorant ? E

Well, Mac, what you say is true. Head shots are much harder to make. But guys pumped up on street drugs really can't be stopped any other way. I know of many cases where it simply couldn't be done any other way.
As a civilian, at age 73, even if I were to train in the "shoot while moving" mode, I seriously doubt I could ever learn to hit much.
As a historical note, many who have studied Wyatt Earp's shootings believe he never had a bullet touch him because when he was shooting, he stayed in one spot. He did not move and thus attract attention.
The other thing is that if an opponent is shot, and then decides to move as a result of this, he has lost at some of his ability to do harm to you if not all of it. E

REPORT: Sudden Death In San Jose

Robert h. shepherd

A man was slain by a police officer during the early morning hours of Sunday September 19. Here is a summary of events condensed from various articles appearing in The San Jose Mercury this past week. John Henry Smith, a chemist working for IBM, had just taken his date home from a party and was apparently on the way home. Near Kiely Boulevard and Saratoga Avenue Officer Rocklin Wooley, on patrol with his dog, observed him make an illegal turn against a red light, pursued with red light and siren, stopped him at the rear of an apartment complex, Meridian Corners, at 4 221 Norwalk Drive. Smith got out of his car, was abusive, used obscene language,

calmed down, accepted his ticket and was about to drive on when two off-duty, out of uniform policemen (Officers Darrel Richter and Robert Watts), stopped to see if Wooley required any assistance. Smith then went berserk, got out of his car, threatened the police with a tire iron, was squirted with mace, subdued, placed under arrest and requested to submit to a search. This he started to do, then suddenly refused to cooperate. (From here on the story begins to get confusing, if it hasn't already.) Cries For Help Somewhere along the way Smith once again made threatening gestures with the tire iron, was set upon by the police dog, ran across the street to a chain link fence, tried to climb over, was once more attacked by the dog. Residents of the nearby apartment buildings, where he and the two off duty men all lived, state that they heard moaning and cries for help. He then returned to the police car, placed his hands on it and agreed to be searched. (Officer Wooley was unable to put hand cuffs on him because, for some

reason, he didn't have any.) Again Smith broke iway, running toward the entrance of the buildings. At this time Wooley drew his gun, and fearing Smith intended to enter the apartment and re-arm himself, shot him in the chest. The coroner's report states the body was found bare to the waist, bore marks probably made by the dog, and had a split lip, as well as the fatal gunshot wound. (An x-marks the spot type photo shows the location of the body as being several feet inside a pass-through, or hall way). Not Drunk, No Drugs An autopsy later proved Smith to be "clean," he'd had a few drinks but was not drunk, nor was he under the influence of drugs—contrary to an earlier statement of opinion by Chief of Police Robert Murphy. Briefly, these are the facts of a sad, melancholy, mess, as presented in the papers. Now for some personal views ana comments. Assuming (which I do not), that the officers' account is substantially correct, I hold the shooting to be inexcusable; if what I have good reason to suspect, did in fact, occur, then it

is criminal. If three men, plus a trained dog, could not cope with one man, of medium height and rather slight build, in a less permanent manner, then they are not the calibre men (or dogs), needed on an up to date metropolitan police force. I was somewhat acquainted with John Smith; a few years back we belonged to the same social organization, the Servetus Club, a singles group affiliated with the First Unitarian Church of San Jose. He was a handsome, intelligent and sensitive man, out-going and friendly. At parties he had a few drinks, liked to talk, was a mixer; neither I, nor anyone I've talked to, ever saw him drunk or acting other than a gentleman. Actions Not Possible He was not, by nature, violent or pugnacious in any way. Therefore, 1 find it most difficult to believe Mr. Smith could possibly have acted in the manner described by Officers Wooley, Richter, and Watts, except under conditions of extreme provocation and/or duress. I ask all members of the Stanford community, especially residents of San Jose, to write to Mr. Thomas W. Fletcher, City Manager, 801 North First Street, San Jose; urging that; (1 ) a thorough and impartial inquiry be held by an agency independent of the governments of San Jose and Santa Clara County, (2 ) the three police officers involved be suspended from duty, with or without pay, until such time as an investigation can be completed. I'd like to close with one more incontrovertible fact. John Henry Smith was a black. (Robert H. Shepherd is an operating engineer in the Stanford Steam Plant.)

http://www.bikernet.com/pages/October_23_2003_Part_2.aspx


BIKERNET COP CONVICTION STUDY-- Bad Cop: Convicting a cop, nearly impossible... California - It's been more than three decades since a police officer faced criminal charges for fatally shooting someone in Santa Clara County.

As a county grand jury considers this week whether to charge a San Jose officer in the July shooting death of a Vietnamese woman, the long-ago case of former officer Rocklin Woolley illustrates the long odds involved in trying an officer for killing in the line of duty.

"It's always hard for a jury to convict an officer, particularly in our county, where the public has a high opinion of police,'' said Dave Davies, a retired prosecutor who unsuccessfully sought to convict Woolley of felony manslaughter.

Woolley's case bore many similarities to the July 13 shooting of Bich Cau Thi Tran by San Jose police officer Chad Marshall. Both shootings drew public outrage and involved victims who were not white. The officers said they acted in self-defense and were accused of overreacting with deadly force to a harmless threat.

But what is especially telling about the failed prosecution of Woolley is that in some ways, his behavior seems more difficult to justify than that of Marshall, the officer in the Tran case. While Marshall faced a woman wielding a large, sharp instrument -- which turned out to be a vegetable peeler -- Woolley shot an unarmed man who was running away from him.

Woolley was a 27-year-old patrol officer when he stopped motorist John Henry Smith Jr., 37, for allegedly making an illegal U-turn Sept. 19, 1971. Smith, a black IBM research technician on his way home from a date, angrily protested the traffic stop when two off-duty officers who lived nearby happened on the scene.

Police said Smith threatened the officers with a tire iron. Woolley said he tried to subdue Smith with tear gas, then sent his police dog after him as he slipped free and fled toward an apartment complex.

As Smith reached the apartments, Woolley fired a single shot from his .45-caliber pistol, killing the unarmed man. Woolley later said he acted in self-defense, fearing Smith would arm himself once inside the apartments.

Community tension prompted calls for outside investigations. Two months later, a grand jury indicted Woolley on charges of manslaughter and using illegal tear gas.

At Woolley's trial, Davies told jurors the unarmed Smith posed no threat when he was shot. There was evidence Woolley threatened to kill Smith for suggesting he would sue over being tear-gassed. And officers said Smith had brandished a tire iron, but the tire iron turned out to fit one of their cars, not Smith's.

Then-Police Chief Robert Murphy said afterward that he no longer believed Woolley was justified in the shooting. Woolley, who was later fired along with another officer, lives in Placerville and declined comment. The city paid $30,000 to settle lawsuits on behalf of Smith's three children.

Though other fatal police shootings have been controversial since then, none resulted in charges against the officers, let alone convictions. Officials declined calls for an open grand jury hearing into the 1976 shooting of unarmed Latino bartender Danny Trevino by two San Jose officers.

The first such open hearing was held 20 years later over the 1996 death of Gustavo Soto Mesa, a suspected drunken driver fatally shot in the back as he ran from a sheriff's deputy. The grand jury declined to charge the deputy, who said his gun fired accidentally.

- See more at: http://www.bikernet.com/pages/October_23_2003_Part_2.aspx#sthash.dWsnA3v5.dpuf
_________________________

Did you really cite bikernet.com as a source. LMFAO


mike r

Well this fizzled out quickly.

Just like the dnc party on election night ;]

Thanks for starting it anyway. It's good info on some basic drills. I'll be trying them more.

Well it's your fault for suggesting stuff that may take work to achieve and that standards are important. You also fail to recognize the immense value of point shooting.


mike r

It seemed more like it went sideways.

Haven't had a chance yet to try these, but I appreciate the suggestions.

Thanks for the drills Blue.
When it cools off below 116 around here I may be able to get out and try some again.

Unfortunately for me, I'm shooting tomorrow evening. We’re hosting a soccer coach from England who of course wants to go shooting, so we have to get his range time in tomorrow evening or it’s nothing. He shoots competitive air rifle and has never shot the real thing, so this will be a treat for him. For me, it will just be sweat! Wish we were doing it tonight, it’s hot but at least the wind is blowing.

Geeze...it's like we live in the desert or something!!

Nice try L2H. Who is that guy ? That so called report is full of so many errors, and lies I won't even begin to point them out. If you want to be a shill for the "black community," like Black Lives Matter and push that sort of thing, be my guest. What I've noticed is no one has paid much attention to your attempt to smear me again. So..... have a nice day. E