 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
| 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.
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 |