 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
| Contagious Shooting |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
Hopefully, you'll never have to fire your pistol in the line of duty. More
hopefully, you'll never find yourself firing your pistol, along with
another or other officers, in a use of deadly force situation.
While every use of deadly force by a police officer will evoke criticism,
that criticism will always be magnified in proportion to the number of
officers firing, and the number of shots fired. When multiple shots are
involved, the criticism will include the number of times a suspect is hit
as well as how many times the suspect is missed. In other words, it's a
no win situation.
There were many critics when police departments began replacing six
shot service revolvers with the higher ammunition capacity
semi-automatic pistols, so it should not surprise you that criticism of the
use of higher ammunition capacity weapons should follow.
Whenever more than one police officer fires his or her weapon
simultaneously, or nearly simultaneously, in the same incident, the
label of "contagious shooting" is quick to be applied. When a suspect is
armed with a gun, and he is an obvious and immediate treat to your life,
or the lives of others, and more than one officer fires more than one or
two times, the contagious shooting label will be applied, but it won't
stick.
The fact that the suspect is armed with a gun will make the force
justified; however, critics will still seize on the number of shots fired,
and the number of hits and misses. When the suspect is armed with a
knife, the critics will add the element of excessive force, and they'll
insist that one shot would have been sufficient. When the suspect is
perceived to be armed, but it turns out that he's not armed...well, now
you have problems.
When you go through your firearms training, your instructors will
stress the point that you, and only you, are responsible for the decision
to fire your weapon, and that responsibility extends to the point of
impact of every bullet you fire. Responsibility. That's the one word you
must never forget when it comes to your decision to fire your pistol.
While the definition of responsibility is rarely applied to a lot of people,
it will always be applied to police officers.
When it comes to criticism, you should just accept the fact that there
will be critics of nearly everything you do. When it comes to your
discharge of firearms, those critics will only increase in numbers. The
vast majority of your critics won't have the slightest idea of what they're
talking about; however, the only time their reckless criticism will be
correct is when you provide a reason for them to get it right.
You have to get an understanding of the critics and those who actually
listen to them. First, the critics believe that deadly force should never
be used. Secondly, they don't understand the meaning of deadly. These
are the same people who believe that police officers should be trained to
shoot to wound people, because they simply can't understand that the
difference between wounding and killing a person with a bullet is totally
beyond your control. From this viewpoint, it's easy to criticize multiple
shots fired since any moron can understand that more bullets fired
increases the odds for more hits; thus, the use of deadly force may
actually turn out to be deadly. But, even that circumstance is not a
certain factor. You could fire ten shots at a suspect. The first shot is a
fatal wound while the additional six hits from the nine additional shots
are not fatal wounds. What's the difference? Well, who knows.
Perhaps one of the other six hits prevented the suspect from returning
fire inflicting a fatal wound to you, before he succumbs to the first fatal
wound inflicted by you.
When it comes to shooting at people, there will never be any absolute
standard for you to follow when you decide to shoot or not shoot. The
following is a true life example where the outcome could have been a
totally justifiable use of deadly force, or it could have been justifiably
labeled as contagious shooting:
In this incident, it was fortunate that I had much more information
relative to what was happening than the other officer. The other officer
only knew that there had been a report of a hold-up, and he saw me with
my gun drawn and waving him away. When the door opened, he
instinctively took the correct action. From that point on, he was guided
totally by his own observations.
Think about how dangerous this situation was. One of the suspects
could have stood behind another suspect and drawn his gun without
being observed by the officer. I'm certain the fact that one of the
suspects was eyeballing me through the crack in the door had some
bearing on that not happening.
While I was almost certain that the other officer had the suspects at
gunpoint, I couldn't be 100% certain. Here's where things could have
gotten dicey. Put yourself in my spot. What if the other officer was a
person in whom you had little confidence in his judgement. The other
officer begins firing his pistol into the doorway. You begin firing
through the door. When the smoke clears, you find out that the three
men in the doorway are victims of the robbery.
While I knew that the other officer was probably confronting three
armed suspects, he could only assume that all three might be armed. I
had decided to begin firing if the other officer fired, because I was not
willing to subject him to return fire from the suspects just to make that
all conclusive verification that he had the right men. It was a terrible
decision I had to make, and one that I was grateful I didn't have to act
on.
This incident got even scarier after the fact. We learned that one of the
suspects had just been paroled from prison after serving ten years of a
fifteen year sentence for armed robbery. When he was apprehended for
that robbery, he engaged a police officer in a gun battle; until, he ran
out of bullets.
The club they robbed had over fifty patrons inside. The suspects made
all the club members lie on the floor and empty their pockets. Two of
the suspects picked up all the money and valuables as the third suspect
covered them. The man who almost certainly saved my life was in the
kitchen when the robbery began. He crawled out from a second floor
window onto the roof of a first floor addition. When he dropped to the
ground, he confronted the suspect with the shotgun. No words were
exchanged. That fourth suspect obviously didn't have the stomach to
shoot him, and the man escaped and called police.
There's one last thing you should learn from this story. Never rely on
information you receive from 911, for it will almost always be
incomplete. In this instance, it was way off the mark.
The problem of contagious shooting is real. It has always been around,
but the acquisition of the higher ammunition capacity semi-automatic
pistols by police has made it more noticeable than in the past. When
police officers were armed with six shot revolvers, you were always
conscious of your limited fire power, and you never wanted to have to
reload your revolver under stressful circumstances. Think about
this...with your semi-auto pistol, you can fire over thirty shots reloading
once with a magazine in the time it would take you to fire twelve shots
from a revolver reloading once with a speed loading device.
Contagious shooting occurs when police officers fire their weapons
simply because another or other officers are firing theirs. The most
obvious example of contagious shooting occurs when a suspect vehicle is
involved. Understand this...firing at a moving vehicle is rarely ever
justified. Okay...a man drives his car through the doors of a shopping
mall, and he begins running over people. Since you obviously don't have
your car inside that mall to use to stop him, and he's made it clear he
intends to run down as many people as possible, your use of deadly force
would be justified. While your bullets can do nothing to disable the car,
you're going to try to incapacitate the driver just to limit the damage
he's doing.
But...then again...you've got to consider your chances of hitting such a
small moving target. How many times will you miss, and where will
your bullets go in a mall crowed with people. You'd probably be better
off firing your pistol repeatedly into one of those big potted plants you
see all over malls. While people may not hear the car coming at them,
or they take the time to identify any noise they hear, they'll certainly
recognize the gunshots and seek cover more quickly. Shooting at cars
is a really bad thing, and it's probably the most common example of
contagious shooting.
I hate to say this, but, as your career progresses, you'll identify a few
police officers who you don't want behind you when you hear shots fired
in front of you. When you're creeping down an alley looking for an
armed person, and you glance behind you only to see another officer
with gun in hand and visibly shaking, you want to change your position.
There are some who through fear, adrenaline, and the sudden
occurrence of gunfire will fire their pistols before identifying a target.
Then...there's the simple matter of inexperience. As a new police
officer, you're not going to want to appear timid. You could find
yourself in a situation where an officer fires his or her pistol. You draw
your weapon, but you can't immediately identify the target at which the
officer is shooting. Or...you clearly see that the officer is firing on a
suspect, and you draw and begin firing. In your zealousness not to
appear timid, you don't realize that the other officer has ceased firing,
because the officer has incapacitated the suspect. We're talking
seconds here, and in most instances, when you hear the gunshots, it will
all probably be over, before you have a chance to participate.
I know you've heard the saying, "Just because everybody does it doesn't
make it right." When it comes to you shooting at people, that saying
should take on a whole new meaning.
hopefully, you'll never find yourself firing your pistol, along with
another or other officers, in a use of deadly force situation.
While every use of deadly force by a police officer will evoke criticism,
that criticism will always be magnified in proportion to the number of
officers firing, and the number of shots fired. When multiple shots are
involved, the criticism will include the number of times a suspect is hit
as well as how many times the suspect is missed. In other words, it's a
no win situation.
There were many critics when police departments began replacing six
shot service revolvers with the higher ammunition capacity
semi-automatic pistols, so it should not surprise you that criticism of the
use of higher ammunition capacity weapons should follow.
Whenever more than one police officer fires his or her weapon
simultaneously, or nearly simultaneously, in the same incident, the
label of "contagious shooting" is quick to be applied. When a suspect is
armed with a gun, and he is an obvious and immediate treat to your life,
or the lives of others, and more than one officer fires more than one or
two times, the contagious shooting label will be applied, but it won't
stick.
The fact that the suspect is armed with a gun will make the force
justified; however, critics will still seize on the number of shots fired,
and the number of hits and misses. When the suspect is armed with a
knife, the critics will add the element of excessive force, and they'll
insist that one shot would have been sufficient. When the suspect is
perceived to be armed, but it turns out that he's not armed...well, now
you have problems.
When you go through your firearms training, your instructors will
stress the point that you, and only you, are responsible for the decision
to fire your weapon, and that responsibility extends to the point of
impact of every bullet you fire. Responsibility. That's the one word you
must never forget when it comes to your decision to fire your pistol.
While the definition of responsibility is rarely applied to a lot of people,
it will always be applied to police officers.
When it comes to criticism, you should just accept the fact that there
will be critics of nearly everything you do. When it comes to your
discharge of firearms, those critics will only increase in numbers. The
vast majority of your critics won't have the slightest idea of what they're
talking about; however, the only time their reckless criticism will be
correct is when you provide a reason for them to get it right.
You have to get an understanding of the critics and those who actually
listen to them. First, the critics believe that deadly force should never
be used. Secondly, they don't understand the meaning of deadly. These
are the same people who believe that police officers should be trained to
shoot to wound people, because they simply can't understand that the
difference between wounding and killing a person with a bullet is totally
beyond your control. From this viewpoint, it's easy to criticize multiple
shots fired since any moron can understand that more bullets fired
increases the odds for more hits; thus, the use of deadly force may
actually turn out to be deadly. But, even that circumstance is not a
certain factor. You could fire ten shots at a suspect. The first shot is a
fatal wound while the additional six hits from the nine additional shots
are not fatal wounds. What's the difference? Well, who knows.
Perhaps one of the other six hits prevented the suspect from returning
fire inflicting a fatal wound to you, before he succumbs to the first fatal
wound inflicted by you.
When it comes to shooting at people, there will never be any absolute
standard for you to follow when you decide to shoot or not shoot. The
following is a true life example where the outcome could have been a
totally justifiable use of deadly force, or it could have been justifiably
labeled as contagious shooting:
In this incident, it was fortunate that I had much more information
relative to what was happening than the other officer. The other officer
only knew that there had been a report of a hold-up, and he saw me with
my gun drawn and waving him away. When the door opened, he
instinctively took the correct action. From that point on, he was guided
totally by his own observations.
Think about how dangerous this situation was. One of the suspects
could have stood behind another suspect and drawn his gun without
being observed by the officer. I'm certain the fact that one of the
suspects was eyeballing me through the crack in the door had some
bearing on that not happening.
While I was almost certain that the other officer had the suspects at
gunpoint, I couldn't be 100% certain. Here's where things could have
gotten dicey. Put yourself in my spot. What if the other officer was a
person in whom you had little confidence in his judgement. The other
officer begins firing his pistol into the doorway. You begin firing
through the door. When the smoke clears, you find out that the three
men in the doorway are victims of the robbery.
While I knew that the other officer was probably confronting three
armed suspects, he could only assume that all three might be armed. I
had decided to begin firing if the other officer fired, because I was not
willing to subject him to return fire from the suspects just to make that
all conclusive verification that he had the right men. It was a terrible
decision I had to make, and one that I was grateful I didn't have to act
on.
This incident got even scarier after the fact. We learned that one of the
suspects had just been paroled from prison after serving ten years of a
fifteen year sentence for armed robbery. When he was apprehended for
that robbery, he engaged a police officer in a gun battle; until, he ran
out of bullets.
The club they robbed had over fifty patrons inside. The suspects made
all the club members lie on the floor and empty their pockets. Two of
the suspects picked up all the money and valuables as the third suspect
covered them. The man who almost certainly saved my life was in the
kitchen when the robbery began. He crawled out from a second floor
window onto the roof of a first floor addition. When he dropped to the
ground, he confronted the suspect with the shotgun. No words were
exchanged. That fourth suspect obviously didn't have the stomach to
shoot him, and the man escaped and called police.
There's one last thing you should learn from this story. Never rely on
information you receive from 911, for it will almost always be
incomplete. In this instance, it was way off the mark.
The problem of contagious shooting is real. It has always been around,
but the acquisition of the higher ammunition capacity semi-automatic
pistols by police has made it more noticeable than in the past. When
police officers were armed with six shot revolvers, you were always
conscious of your limited fire power, and you never wanted to have to
reload your revolver under stressful circumstances. Think about
this...with your semi-auto pistol, you can fire over thirty shots reloading
once with a magazine in the time it would take you to fire twelve shots
from a revolver reloading once with a speed loading device.
Contagious shooting occurs when police officers fire their weapons
simply because another or other officers are firing theirs. The most
obvious example of contagious shooting occurs when a suspect vehicle is
involved. Understand this...firing at a moving vehicle is rarely ever
justified. Okay...a man drives his car through the doors of a shopping
mall, and he begins running over people. Since you obviously don't have
your car inside that mall to use to stop him, and he's made it clear he
intends to run down as many people as possible, your use of deadly force
would be justified. While your bullets can do nothing to disable the car,
you're going to try to incapacitate the driver just to limit the damage
he's doing.
But...then again...you've got to consider your chances of hitting such a
small moving target. How many times will you miss, and where will
your bullets go in a mall crowed with people. You'd probably be better
off firing your pistol repeatedly into one of those big potted plants you
see all over malls. While people may not hear the car coming at them,
or they take the time to identify any noise they hear, they'll certainly
recognize the gunshots and seek cover more quickly. Shooting at cars
is a really bad thing, and it's probably the most common example of
contagious shooting.
I hate to say this, but, as your career progresses, you'll identify a few
police officers who you don't want behind you when you hear shots fired
in front of you. When you're creeping down an alley looking for an
armed person, and you glance behind you only to see another officer
with gun in hand and visibly shaking, you want to change your position.
There are some who through fear, adrenaline, and the sudden
occurrence of gunfire will fire their pistols before identifying a target.
Then...there's the simple matter of inexperience. As a new police
officer, you're not going to want to appear timid. You could find
yourself in a situation where an officer fires his or her pistol. You draw
your weapon, but you can't immediately identify the target at which the
officer is shooting. Or...you clearly see that the officer is firing on a
suspect, and you draw and begin firing. In your zealousness not to
appear timid, you don't realize that the other officer has ceased firing,
because the officer has incapacitated the suspect. We're talking
seconds here, and in most instances, when you hear the gunshots, it will
all probably be over, before you have a chance to participate.
I know you've heard the saying, "Just because everybody does it doesn't
make it right." When it comes to you shooting at people, that saying
should take on a whole new meaning.
You're walking foot patrol when your dispatcher assigns you
to respond to a nearby private club to take a robbery report.
You ask the dispatcher if the robbery is in progress, and the
dispatcher tells you -- pointedly -- that it is not in progress.
Your response is for the report only, and no back-up unit is
assigned.
As you're about to enter the front door of the club which
opens to a steep, narrow stairway to the second floor where
the club is located, you hear a voice shouting, "Officer!
Officer! You turn to see a man running toward you from the
opposite side of the street. Vehicle traffic is heavy, and the
man is nearly struck twice as he runs toward you yelling,
"Officer, don't go in there!"
In seconds, the man is standing in front of you breathlessly
saying, "Officer...three guys...with guns...they're robbing
everybody. Another guy...in the alley...has a sawed-off
shotgun." Incredulously, you ask, "They're still inside?" The
man responds, "Yea, yea, they're still in there."
You instinctively tell the man to run as you press yourself
against the wall of the building. You draw your pistol as you
get on your radio and call for back-up. Almost immediately, a
radio car stops directly in front of the building. It turns out
that the officer had responded just as a routine back-up. You
soon become aware that he does not know what's happening as
he steps from his car. He's shaking the microphone of his
walkie-talkie next to his ear. You transmit again making it
clear to the officer, and everybody, that he is in danger.
Your frustration builds as the officer continues to shake that
microphone as he walks toward the front door oblivious to
what's happening. It's obvious to you that his radio is
malfunctioning, and you begin yelling his name. You're only
about fifteen feet apart, but with the noise of the street and
his attention focused on that stupid microphone, he simply
doesn't hear you. Just as you're about to run forward and
physically remove him from in front of that door, he looks
toward you. The expression on his face relieves your
frustration somewhat, for the sight of you with gun in one
hand and frantically waving him off with the other hand sends
your message loud and clear.
It's too late. Before the officer has a chance to react, the
front door of the building opens. The officer instinctively
draws his pistol and takes a point shoulder position pointing
his pistol at "whoever" is in the doorway. This is where I
really screwed up. When I'd taken up my position, I chose the
wrong side of the door. The door was windowless, and the door
opened toward me. I could clearly see an eyeball peering at
me through the opening between the door and door frame, but
I had no idea who, or how many people, the other officer was
confronting.
The other officer was shouting commands, "Show your
hands...come out of there...show your hands!" The ensuing
seconds were agonizing.
I had already made my decision in that regard. Fortunately, I
had complete faith in that officer's judgement. If he had fired
his weapon, I was confident that he would only do so if he was
certain his life was in imminent danger.
Most fortunately, for both the other officer and me, the three
suspects had stuffed their handguns inside their pants just
before their exit from the building. That steep, narrow
stairway I mentioned earlier prevented them from scattering
or fleeing. The officer had the drop on them, and they knew
it. A lot of luck was with us that day, the suspect in the alley
with the shotgun fled instead of coming to the aid of his
accomplices.
to respond to a nearby private club to take a robbery report.
You ask the dispatcher if the robbery is in progress, and the
dispatcher tells you -- pointedly -- that it is not in progress.
Your response is for the report only, and no back-up unit is
assigned.
As you're about to enter the front door of the club which
opens to a steep, narrow stairway to the second floor where
the club is located, you hear a voice shouting, "Officer!
Officer! You turn to see a man running toward you from the
opposite side of the street. Vehicle traffic is heavy, and the
man is nearly struck twice as he runs toward you yelling,
"Officer, don't go in there!"
In seconds, the man is standing in front of you breathlessly
saying, "Officer...three guys...with guns...they're robbing
everybody. Another guy...in the alley...has a sawed-off
shotgun." Incredulously, you ask, "They're still inside?" The
man responds, "Yea, yea, they're still in there."
You instinctively tell the man to run as you press yourself
against the wall of the building. You draw your pistol as you
get on your radio and call for back-up. Almost immediately, a
radio car stops directly in front of the building. It turns out
that the officer had responded just as a routine back-up. You
soon become aware that he does not know what's happening as
he steps from his car. He's shaking the microphone of his
walkie-talkie next to his ear. You transmit again making it
clear to the officer, and everybody, that he is in danger.
Your frustration builds as the officer continues to shake that
microphone as he walks toward the front door oblivious to
what's happening. It's obvious to you that his radio is
malfunctioning, and you begin yelling his name. You're only
about fifteen feet apart, but with the noise of the street and
his attention focused on that stupid microphone, he simply
doesn't hear you. Just as you're about to run forward and
physically remove him from in front of that door, he looks
toward you. The expression on his face relieves your
frustration somewhat, for the sight of you with gun in one
hand and frantically waving him off with the other hand sends
your message loud and clear.
It's too late. Before the officer has a chance to react, the
front door of the building opens. The officer instinctively
draws his pistol and takes a point shoulder position pointing
his pistol at "whoever" is in the doorway. This is where I
really screwed up. When I'd taken up my position, I chose the
wrong side of the door. The door was windowless, and the door
opened toward me. I could clearly see an eyeball peering at
me through the opening between the door and door frame, but
I had no idea who, or how many people, the other officer was
confronting.
The other officer was shouting commands, "Show your
hands...come out of there...show your hands!" The ensuing
seconds were agonizing.
I had already made my decision in that regard. Fortunately, I
had complete faith in that officer's judgement. If he had fired
his weapon, I was confident that he would only do so if he was
certain his life was in imminent danger.
Most fortunately, for both the other officer and me, the three
suspects had stuffed their handguns inside their pants just
before their exit from the building. That steep, narrow
stairway I mentioned earlier prevented them from scattering
or fleeing. The officer had the drop on them, and they knew
it. A lot of luck was with us that day, the suspect in the alley
with the shotgun fled instead of coming to the aid of his
accomplices.
Ask yourself this question:
If the other officer began firing his weapon, would
you fire your weapon sending your bullets through
that door?
If the other officer began firing his weapon, would
you fire your weapon sending your bullets through
that door?
| Contagious Shooting is a Real Phenomenon |
Let's look at something easy. You confront a suspect who
you've been told is armed with a gun. You stop him in a
residential park area where he's standing with his back to a
hillside. The first thing you should notice is that if you have
to fire you're weapon, any shots fired by you will either hit the
suspect or impact harmlessly into the hillside.
As you hold the suspect at gunpoint, you order him to first
drop the gym bag he is carrying. Here's where he starts
something that you're going to see a lot.
Back to your armed suspect. He finally drops the bag, but as
the bag falls, you clearly make out the sawed-off handle, he's
holding in his hand, of the sawed-off shotgun he was
concealing in the gym bag.
You're pointing your pistol at the suspect. What do you do
now? Do you order him to drop the gun? Do you wait for the
suspect to raise the gun so that it's pointing at you? I don't
think so. This suspect had ample opportunity to drop the bag
while it contained the gun. This suspect has made his
intention very clear, and you are now in a deadly force
situation.
Now, this suspect has a single barrel, single shot 12 gauge
shotgun. You have a 9mm pistol containing 17 bullets. You
know your going to apply deadly force. How many shots are
you going to fire? Your training has taught you to fire two
shots in quick succession. Remember, your intention is not to
kill this suspect, your intention is only to incapacitate him.
You know to fire at center mass only because the torso
presents the larger target. You're not that far apart, so the
critics will say you should shoot the gun out of his hand. Yea,
right...screw those idiots...your life is in real danger here.
You fire two shots from your pistol. One bullet hits the
suspect in the chest, and the other strikes the suspect in the
right shoulder. The suspect immediately drops the shotgun as
he stumbles backward and collapses. Your use of deadly force
is over. The suspect has been incapacitated, and he no longer
presents a threat to you since he is no longer in possession of
the shotgun.
Second take. You fire the first two shots into the suspect's
chest and shoulder. The suspect stumbles backward, but he is
still in possession of the shotgun. Even though he's been
seriously wounded, he attempts to raise the shotgun. You fire
two more shots. Remember, you're under a lot of stress. The
suspect turns slightly as you fire, and one bullet misses, and
the other grazes his left arm. These two shots do nothing to
incapacitate, and the suspect continues to raise the gun. You
fire two more shots. One is a miss, and the other strikes the
suspect on his right inner thigh. At this point, you have no
way of knowing, but you've just inflicted a fatal wound to the
suspect with your sixth shot. On the hit to his right leg, the
bullet has pierced the femoral artery, and the suspect is
bleeding to death. The hit to the leg does make the suspect
fall to the ground, but he continues to grasp the shotgun. As
he lies on the ground, he attempts to bring the shotgun to
bear on you. You fire two more shots. One passes between
his arm and torso and into the ground while the second shot
strikes his right forearm. After all those shots fired, your
eighth and final shot to the forearm finally incapacitates the
suspect when he drops the shotgun from his right hand.
Obviously, if you'd only had six shots, you'd be in trouble since
it was the eighth shot that incapacitated this suspect. The
reason you fired at two shot intervals was to aid you in staying
on target. The more shots you fire in rapid succession, the
farther you'll be drawn off target by the recoil of your pistol.
Realistically...in this incident, as described, with such a
tenacious opponent, you'd have probably fired more than eight
shots and more successive shots. While your training is
critical, the factors of stress and adrenalin are going to affect
your response simply because you're fighting for your life.
The critics will never be able to wrap their brains around the
realities of a life and death struggle.
Now...look at this very same confrontation with only one
difference...there are three police officers present, and each
officer observes the same actions by the suspect. Can you
imagine how many shots will be fired in the few seconds of the
gunfight. Can you speculate how many hits and misses might
be involved. In this instance, the critics will be quick to allege
contagious shooting based only on the number of shots fired
while ignoring that all three officers observed the suspect's
aggressive actions.
you've been told is armed with a gun. You stop him in a
residential park area where he's standing with his back to a
hillside. The first thing you should notice is that if you have
to fire you're weapon, any shots fired by you will either hit the
suspect or impact harmlessly into the hillside.
As you hold the suspect at gunpoint, you order him to first
drop the gym bag he is carrying. Here's where he starts
something that you're going to see a lot.
Back to your armed suspect. He finally drops the bag, but as
the bag falls, you clearly make out the sawed-off handle, he's
holding in his hand, of the sawed-off shotgun he was
concealing in the gym bag.
You're pointing your pistol at the suspect. What do you do
now? Do you order him to drop the gun? Do you wait for the
suspect to raise the gun so that it's pointing at you? I don't
think so. This suspect had ample opportunity to drop the bag
while it contained the gun. This suspect has made his
intention very clear, and you are now in a deadly force
situation.
Now, this suspect has a single barrel, single shot 12 gauge
shotgun. You have a 9mm pistol containing 17 bullets. You
know your going to apply deadly force. How many shots are
you going to fire? Your training has taught you to fire two
shots in quick succession. Remember, your intention is not to
kill this suspect, your intention is only to incapacitate him.
You know to fire at center mass only because the torso
presents the larger target. You're not that far apart, so the
critics will say you should shoot the gun out of his hand. Yea,
right...screw those idiots...your life is in real danger here.
You fire two shots from your pistol. One bullet hits the
suspect in the chest, and the other strikes the suspect in the
right shoulder. The suspect immediately drops the shotgun as
he stumbles backward and collapses. Your use of deadly force
is over. The suspect has been incapacitated, and he no longer
presents a threat to you since he is no longer in possession of
the shotgun.
Second take. You fire the first two shots into the suspect's
chest and shoulder. The suspect stumbles backward, but he is
still in possession of the shotgun. Even though he's been
seriously wounded, he attempts to raise the shotgun. You fire
two more shots. Remember, you're under a lot of stress. The
suspect turns slightly as you fire, and one bullet misses, and
the other grazes his left arm. These two shots do nothing to
incapacitate, and the suspect continues to raise the gun. You
fire two more shots. One is a miss, and the other strikes the
suspect on his right inner thigh. At this point, you have no
way of knowing, but you've just inflicted a fatal wound to the
suspect with your sixth shot. On the hit to his right leg, the
bullet has pierced the femoral artery, and the suspect is
bleeding to death. The hit to the leg does make the suspect
fall to the ground, but he continues to grasp the shotgun. As
he lies on the ground, he attempts to bring the shotgun to
bear on you. You fire two more shots. One passes between
his arm and torso and into the ground while the second shot
strikes his right forearm. After all those shots fired, your
eighth and final shot to the forearm finally incapacitates the
suspect when he drops the shotgun from his right hand.
Obviously, if you'd only had six shots, you'd be in trouble since
it was the eighth shot that incapacitated this suspect. The
reason you fired at two shot intervals was to aid you in staying
on target. The more shots you fire in rapid succession, the
farther you'll be drawn off target by the recoil of your pistol.
Realistically...in this incident, as described, with such a
tenacious opponent, you'd have probably fired more than eight
shots and more successive shots. While your training is
critical, the factors of stress and adrenalin are going to affect
your response simply because you're fighting for your life.
The critics will never be able to wrap their brains around the
realities of a life and death struggle.
Now...look at this very same confrontation with only one
difference...there are three police officers present, and each
officer observes the same actions by the suspect. Can you
imagine how many shots will be fired in the few seconds of the
gunfight. Can you speculate how many hits and misses might
be involved. In this instance, the critics will be quick to allege
contagious shooting based only on the number of shots fired
while ignoring that all three officers observed the suspect's
aggressive actions.
There will be times when you're confronting people
who may be armed, and they'll fiddle and fuss all
over the place. Their hands will be moving in and
around their waists as they turn and twist, and
they'll simply cause you enormous frustration as you
order them to stop while you intently focus on those
hands.
In one of my experiences with a suspect who was
reportedly armed, the suspect simply would not stop
his gyrations; until, he successfully removed the pint
of liquor from his back pocket and dropped it to the
ground hoping I'd not notice. This guy was afraid I'd
arrest him for carrying an open container of alcohol
on the street. Sure...it sounds stupid, and it is
stupid, but you'll learn quickly that people act
stupidly all the time.
who may be armed, and they'll fiddle and fuss all
over the place. Their hands will be moving in and
around their waists as they turn and twist, and
they'll simply cause you enormous frustration as you
order them to stop while you intently focus on those
hands.
In one of my experiences with a suspect who was
reportedly armed, the suspect simply would not stop
his gyrations; until, he successfully removed the pint
of liquor from his back pocket and dropped it to the
ground hoping I'd not notice. This guy was afraid I'd
arrest him for carrying an open container of alcohol
on the street. Sure...it sounds stupid, and it is
stupid, but you'll learn quickly that people act
stupidly all the time.
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| Copyright © 2006 - 2008 - Barry M. Baker - CareerPoliceOfficer.com |
| Disclaimer |
| CareerPoliceOfficer.com is not responsible for the contents of any linked site or any link contained in a linked site, or any changes or updates to such sites. Links are provided only as a convenience, and the inclusion of any link does not imply endorsement by this site. |
| Online Video Learning Systems: Police Exam - U.S. Border Patrol Exam |