Join TexasGunTalk

Alternative View on the kid shot carrying a replica AK

Discussion in 'Guns Over Texas Radio Show' started by CrankyBuddha, Oct 30, 2013.

  1. CrankyBuddha

    CrankyBuddha Member

    53
    1
    8
    Aug 26, 2013
    Houston, TX
    I was listening to another radio show and they made, what I think, is a valid point. They theorized that many police departments have essentially trained officers to shoot anyone with a gun that is not in uniform. In shoot houses and training scenarios, the non-shoot targets are all unarmed or uniformed and the shoot targets are armed. This creates a trained reflex of shooting when you see a gun. In a high stress situation,as we have discussed before, you revert to what you have learned by repetition so when a couple of cops in a fairly small, peaceful town (no, Jason this was not LA but a small town in northern CA) roll up and the the adrenaline dump kicks in because they see a guy with a gun they shoot, unfortunately, that can happen whether the suspect shows any indication of violence at all. The simple fact of having a gun makes them a threat. Bottom line, some departments may be training police to shoot armed citizens on sight.

    I don't believe this is a purposeful action (except maybe in Chicago or NYC) and is likely an unintended consequence but it is something that should be looked at.

    -Cranky
     


  2. majormadmax

    majormadmax TGT Addict

    11,594
    1,001
    113
    Aug 27, 2009
    San Antonio!
    No, you (and they) have it wrong. Law enforcement agencies don't teach officers to shoot at armed citizens at sight, they are taught to shoot at someone who poses a threat to them. Simply having a firearm isn't justification to shoot unless it is pointed at the officer.

    Take a closer look at what happened, the kid had an Airsoft AK-47 with the orange barrel tip removed; thereby looking like the real thing. In the split second the officer had to evaluate the situation, there was nothing to indicate it wasn't a real firearm. It was pointed at him and he took appropriate action.

    Unfortunately, it was the kid's bad decision that got him killed, not the officer's correct one.
     
  3. SIG_Fiend

    SIG_Fiend Administrator TGT Supporter Admin

    7,143
    18
    38
    Feb 21, 2008
    Austin, TX
    There is plenty of shoot/no shoot, decision making, problem solving type training and drills that goes on in the LE community. Maybe not with all departments necessarily, but it has become a very common thing, typically built in to department training standards and quals.

    One issue that just simply doesn't seem to get enough, or hardly any, mainstream media focus is the speed at which those sorts of situations can happen. The average person is just simply not accustomed to seeing and acting/reacting in tenths of a second, or at the least not accustomed to thinking in that fine of a degree of time. They hear LEOs "shot a guy in the back 10 times" and immediately jump to conclusions of lack of training or that the LEOs were out to intentionally kill the guy, unprovoked. They fail to see or understand things such as the study performed by a large federal agency that found, on average, the average citizen or LEO in a defensive situation can fire at a rate of roughly 4 rounds per second (.25sec splits). Some people can push 5-6, though that usually takes a pretty well-trained shooter. Couple that with 2-3 officers all firing simultaneously for the span of just 1 second, because the suspect made a sudden jerk or movement the wrong way (intentional or not). 4x3 = 12, and human beings are capable of twisting their bodies and moving within the span of just a few tenths of a second. The average person doesn't see or understand this, or if they do, it's in some other context that hasn't been linked to LE, to self defense shootings, etc.
     
  4. CrankyBuddha

    CrankyBuddha Member

    53
    1
    8
    Aug 26, 2013
    Houston, TX
    I have some questions.

    How are officers taught to shoot at only people who have a weapon and are a threat? Is it a lecture? Is it using realistic training scenarios similar to the force-on-force scenarios offered by some training companies? How much time is spent in that type of training versus the amount of time spent with paper targets? How can paper targets be used to simulate non-uniformed people with weapons that are not a threat?

    I am pretty sure, that most departments don't have the money needed to to realistic training very often at all. I don't think for a minute that this is an intentional thing. On the contrary, I think it is an unintentional consequence.

    -Cranky
     
  5. majormadmax

    majormadmax TGT Addict

    11,594
    1,001
    113
    Aug 27, 2009
    San Antonio!
    I have gone through scenario simulators with both the SAPD and FBI, and can assure you that it is very realistic training and a lot more comprehensive and challenging than the vast majority of commercial training available.

    Most large departments have similar set-ups, so it's probably more common than you think. For smaller agencies, many use available resources from larger departments.

    But regardless of how well trained officers are, there is really no need to second-guess a shoot especially if you don't have any more information on it than what you see, hear and read in the news. Every shooting results in an in-depth investigation and a Grand Jury, and the vast majority of the time the ruling is in the favor of the officer.
     
  6. majormadmax

    majormadmax TGT Addict

    11,594
    1,001
    113
    Aug 27, 2009
    San Antonio!
    I would recommend the following if you're really interested in police operations, I've gone through the SAPD course and it will open your eyes as to what law enforcement in your town is all about!

     
  7. Renegade

    Renegade SuperOwner

    5,740
    493
    83
    Mar 5, 2008
    Texas
    Second guessing as you say, is the only reason police investigations of themselves have any validity. It fosters trust the system is working. It is a good thing.
     
  8. M. Sage

    M. Sage TGT Addict

    Jan 21, 2009
    San Antonio
    It's an employer's prerogative to question and second-guess any and all actions taken by his/her employee(s). So can we spare the usual whining about second-guesses, please?
     
  9. majormadmax

    majormadmax TGT Addict

    11,594
    1,001
    113
    Aug 27, 2009
    San Antonio!
    No one is talking about the "employer" in this case, we're talking about mis- or under-informed citizens who think they know the real story when all they've learned was what they've heard on the news.

    Yes, "whining" is an appropriate term when those individual second-guess the actions of an officer in such a situation. There's little chance they've ever been in a similar situation unless they're in law enforcement or the military.

    It's easy to Monday morning quarterback the events that take place from the luxury of sitting at home behind a keyboard; but until such time they've been put in the same predicament under the same pressures and stresses that the officer in question was under, it's pure and unsubstantiated speculation as to what happened.

    A lot of people seem willing to give a civilian (George Zimmerman) the benefit of the doubt to his actions under similar circumstances, and rightfully so; but when the same happens to a police officer there's a crowd that is convinced that he should have stood there and let an unknown individual point an AK-47 at him without defending his own life. That's pathetic.
     
  10. CrankyBuddha

    CrankyBuddha Member

    53
    1
    8
    Aug 26, 2013
    Houston, TX
    The original question I posed had nothing to do with second guessing the officer. I posed a valid question about the unintended consequences of training procedures.

    "mis- or under-informed citizens" as you refer to ARE the employers of the police. OUR tax dollars pay for salaries training and equipment.

    I never have understood the railings of the "antis" about "Fascist" police but the statements that have just been made have just helped me understand why they feel that way.

    Don't question us you whining prole?

    That, in essence, is what you just said...

    BTW, the person who originally posed this question and got me thinking about it was a retired marine and a retired police officer.

    -Really Cranky
     


    Last edited: Nov 1, 2013

Share This Page