Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 2/26/2007 5:24:09 AM EST
New findings on how offenders train with, carry and deploy the weapons they use to attack police officers have emerged in a just-published, 5-year study by the FBI.

Among other things, the data reveal that most would-be cop killers:

--show signs of being armed that officers miss;

--have more experience using deadly force in “street combat” than their intended victims;

--practice with firearms more often and shoot more accurately;

--have no hesitation whatsoever about pulling the trigger. “If you hesitate,” one told the study’s researchers, “you’re dead. You have the instinct or you don’t. If you don’t, you’re in trouble on the street….”

These and other weapons-related findings comprise one chapter in a 180-page research summary called “Violent Encounters: A Study of Felonious Assaults on Our Nation’s Law Enforcement Officers.” The study is the third in a series of long investigations into fatal and nonfatal attacks on POs by the FBI team of Dr. Anthony Pinizzotto, clinical forensic psychologist, and Ed Davis, criminal investigative instructor, both with the Bureau’s Behavioral Science Unit, and Charles Miller III, coordinator of the LEOs Killed and Assaulted program.

“Violent Encounters” also reports in detail on the personal characteristics of attacked officers and their assaulters, the role of perception in life-threatening confrontations, the myths of memory that can hamper OIS investigations, the suicide-by-cop phenomenon, current training issues, and other matters relevant to officer survival. (Force Science News and our strategic partner PoliceOne.com will be reporting on more findings from this landmark study in future transmissions.)

Commenting on the broad-based study, Dr. Bill Lewinski, executive director of the Force Science Research Center at Minnesota State University-Mankato, called it “very challenging and insightful--important work that only a handful of gifted and experienced researchers could accomplish.”

From a pool of more than 800 incidents, the researchers selected 40, involving 43 offenders (13 of them admitted gangbangers-drug traffickers) and 50 officers, for in-depth exploration. They visited crime scenes and extensively interviewed surviving officers and attackers alike, most of the latter in prison.

Here are highlights of what they learned about weapon selection, familiarity, transport and use by criminals attempting to murder cops, a small portion of the overall research:

Weapon Choice

Predominately handguns were used in the assaults on officers and all but one were obtained illegally, usually in street transactions or in thefts. In contrast to media myth, none of the firearms in the study was obtained from gun shows. What was available “was the overriding factor in weapon choice,” the report says. Only 1 offender hand-picked a particular gun “because he felt it would do the most damage to a human being.”

Researcher Davis, in a presentation and discussion for the International Assn. of Chiefs of Police, noted that none of the attackers interviewed was “hindered by any law--federal, state or local--that has ever been established to prevent gun ownership. They just laughed at gun laws.”

Familiarity

Several of the offenders began regularly to carry weapons when they were 9 to 12 years old, although the average age was 17 when they first started packing “most of the time.” Gang members especially started young.

Nearly 40% of the offenders had some type of formal firearms training, primarily from the military. More than 80% “regularly practiced with handguns, averaging 23 practice sessions a year,” the study reports, usually in informal settings like trash dumps, rural woods, back yards and “street corners in known drug-trafficking areas.”

One spoke of being motivated to improve his gun skills by his belief that officers “go to the range two, three times a week [and] practice arms so they can hit anything.”

In reality, victim officers in the study averaged just 14 hours of sidearm training and 2.5 qualifications per year. Only 6 of the 50 officers reported practicing regularly with handguns apart from what their department required, and that was mostly in competitive shooting. Overall, the offenders practiced more often than the officers they assaulted, and this “may have helped increase [their] marksmanship skills,” the study says.

The offender quoted above about his practice motivation, for example, fired 12 rounds at an officer, striking him 3 times. The officer fired 7 rounds, all misses.

More than 40% of the offenders had been involved in actual shooting confrontations before they feloniously assaulted an officer. Ten of these “street combat veterans,” all from “inner-city, drug-trafficking environments,” had taken part in 5 or more “criminal firefight experiences” in their lifetime.

One reported that he was 14 when he was first shot on the street, “about 18 before a cop shot me.” Another said getting shot was a pivotal experience “because I made up my mind no one was gonna shoot me again.”

Again in contrast, only 8 of the 50 LEO victims had participated in a prior shooting; 1 had been involved in 2 previously, another in 3. Seven of the 8 had killed offenders.

Concealment

The offenders said they most often hid guns on their person in the front waistband, with the groin area and the small of the back nearly tied for second place. Some occasionally gave their weapons to another person to carry, “most often a female companion.” None regularly used a holster, and about 40% at least sometimes carried a backup weapon.

In motor vehicles, they most often kept their firearm readily available on their person, or, less often, under the seat. In residences, most stashed their weapon under a pillow, on a nightstand, under the mattress--somewhere within immediate reach while in bed.

Almost all carried when on the move and strong majorities did so when socializing, committing crimes or being at home. About one-third brought weapons with them to work. Interestingly, the offenders in this study more commonly admitted having guns under all these circumstances than did offenders interviewed in the researchers’ earlier 2 surveys, conducted in the 1980s and ’90s.

According to Davis, “Male offenders said time and time again that female officers tend to search them more thoroughly than male officers. In prison, most of the offenders were more afraid to carry contraband or weapons when a female CO was on duty.”

On the street, however, both male and female officers too often regard female subjects “as less of a threat, assuming that they not going to have a gun,” Davis said. In truth, the researchers concluded that more female offenders are armed today than 20 years ago--“not just female gang associates, but female offenders generally.”

Shooting Style

Twenty-six of the offenders [about 60%], including all of the street combat veterans, “claimed to be instinctive shooters, pointing and firing the weapon without consciously aligning the sights,” the study says.

“They practice getting the gun out and using it,” Davis explained. “They shoot for effect.” Or as one of the offenders put it: “[W]e’re not working with no marksmanship….We just putting it in your direction, you know….It don’t matter…as long as it’s gonna hit you…if it’s up at your head or your chest, down at your legs, whatever….Once I squeeze and you fall, then…if I want to execute you, then I could go from there.”

Hit Rate

More often than the officers they attacked, offenders delivered at least some rounds on target in their encounters. Nearly 70% of assailants were successful in that regard with handguns, compared to about 40% of the victim officers, the study found. (Efforts of offenders and officers to get on target were considered successful if any rounds struck, regardless of the number fired.)

Davis speculated that the offenders might have had an advantage because in all but 3 cases they fired first, usually catching the officer by surprise. Indeed, the report points out, “10 of the total victim officers had been wounded [and thus impaired] before they returned gunfire at their attackers.”

Missed Cues

Officers would less likely be caught off guard by attackers if they were more observant of indicators of concealed weapons, the study concludes. These particularly include manners of dress, ways of moving and unconscious gestures often related to carrying.

“Officers should look for unnatural protrusions or bulges in the waist, back and crotch areas,” the study says, and watch for “shirts that appear rippled or wavy on one side of the body while the fabric on the other side appears smooth.” In warm weather, multilayered clothing inappropriate to the temperature may be a giveaway. On cold or rainy days, a subject’s jacket hood may not be covering his head because it is being used to conceal a handgun.

Because they eschew holsters, offenders reported frequently touching a concealed gun with hands or arms “to assure themselves that it is still hidden, secure and accessible” and hasn’t shifted. Such gestures are especially noticeable “whenever individuals change body positions, such as standing, sitting or exiting a vehicle.” If they run, they may need to keep a constant grip on a hidden gun to control it.

Just as cops generally blade their body to make their sidearm less accessible, armed criminals “do the same in encounters with LEOs to ensure concealment and easy access.”

An irony, Davis noted, is that officers who are assigned to look for concealed weapons, while working off-duty security at night clubs for instance, are often highly proficient at detecting them. “But then when they go back to the street without that specific assignment, they seem to ‘turn off’ that skill,” and thus are startled--sometimes fatally--when a suspect suddenly produces a weapon and attacks.

Mind-set

Thirty-six of the 50 officers in the study had “experienced hazardous situations where they had the legal authority” to use deadly force “but chose not to shoot.” They averaged 4 such prior incidents before the encounters that the researchers investigated. “It appeared clear that none of these officers were willing to use deadly force against an offender if other options were available,” the researchers concluded.

The offenders were of a different mind-set entirely. In fact, Davis said the study team “did not realize how cold blooded the younger generation of offender is. They have been exposed to killing after killing, they fully expect to get killed and they don’t hesitate to shoot anybody, including a police officer. They can go from riding down the street saying what a beautiful day it is to killing in the next instant.”

“Offenders typically displayed no moral or ethical restraints in using firearms,” the report states. “In fact, the street combat veterans survived by developing a shoot-first mentality.

“Officers never can assume that a criminal is unarmed until they have thoroughly searched the person and the surroundings themselves.” Nor, in the interest of personal safety, can officers “let their guards down in any type of law enforcement situation.”

Link Posted: 2/26/2007 5:31:28 AM EST
Translation:

* Guns are bad.
* Criminal psychopaths can shoot guns too.





CMOS
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 5:32:58 AM EST
Link?

Corey
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 5:34:00 AM EST
Excellent post.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 5:35:47 AM EST
Saw that one at work last week. Interesting that some of the crooks are practising more because they wrongly believe cops get a lot of firearms training.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 5:36:46 AM EST

Originally Posted By CMOS:
Translation:

* Guns are bad.
* Criminal psychopaths can shoot guns too.





CMOS


I didnt get that at all, what I got was crooks train, most LEO's dont and usually the attacks just dont come out of no where meaning they are indicators of a attack.

btw they did say gun laws have no effect on criminals getting guns.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 5:39:21 AM EST
Hmmm.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 5:40:21 AM EST
Sometimes its scary how it takes these studies forever to figure out things that most people already know through common sense or casual observation.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 5:40:21 AM EST

Researcher Davis, in a presentation and discussion for the International Assn. of Chiefs of Police, noted that none of the attackers interviewed was “hindered by any law--federal, state or local--that has ever been established to prevent gun ownership. They just laughed at gun laws.”

Very interesting. Very interesting indeed, coming from the source.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 5:45:51 AM EST
PAGING BRADY, MCCARTHY, AND ALL THE OTHER GUN GRABBERS!!!!



Weapon Choice

Predominately handguns were used in the assaults on officers and all but one were obtained illegally, usually in street transactions or in thefts. In contrast to media myth, none of the firearms in the study was obtained from gun shows. What was available “was the overriding factor in weapon choice,” the report says. Only 1 offender hand-picked a particular gun “because he felt it would do the most damage to a human being.”

Researcher Davis, in a presentation and discussion for the International Assn. of Chiefs of Police, noted that none of the attackers interviewed was “hindered by any law--federal, state or local--that has ever been established to prevent gun ownership. They just laughed at gun laws.”


Link Posted: 2/26/2007 5:46:42 AM EST
Very interesting.



Some of the statistics are causing the BS detector to jump a little bit though.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 5:47:02 AM EST
Cops are generally not gun people, and therefore don't practice enough to be proficient. You see it time and time again at the range, in competition, etc. Just because you carry a gun every day doesn't mean you're proficient at using it. Some cops who I see regularly at competitions have told me that exactly. To quote one:

"When I started shooting IDPA, I had no idea how bad I really was at using a pistol. I was fumbling magazines during reloads, missing at short distances, etc etc. It scared me to the point where I decided it was a skill I have to master".

I think the problem (and this isn't unique to police officers) is that a lot of people assume you can point shoot at things 10-15 yards away and score good hits. The reality is that point shooting only works marginally better at very close ranges (<5 yards) and is a severe detriment past that range.

I wish all police officers spent time learning pistol handling like some I shoot with. They would be a lot safer if they ever got into a firefight. It's usually a situation where you don't get a redo.

Link Posted: 2/26/2007 5:52:32 AM EST

Originally Posted By madmathew:
Sometimes its scary how it takes these studies forever to figure out things that most people already know through common sense or casual observation.
Actually, most people, cops included, seem to think that very few criminals actually practice anything.

When I was in the Marines, I met a detective from the Riverside County, CA Sheriff's Office. He was at Camp Pendleton investigating a guy that had been in our unit and saw me and another guy practicing disarms with a rubber pistol during a smoke break. He struck up a conversation about fighting and such and talked about it for a pretty good while. Anyway, back to the point. He emailed me about 5 videos of guys in prison yards at Folsom and San Quintin practicing to disarm cops, pull pistols out of retention holsters, and turning, drawing, and firing when they are up against a wall to be frisked.

Criminals can be just as smart and just as good at what they do as any of us are at what we do. Underestimating them is a good way to end up dead.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 5:53:23 AM EST
Reminds me a little bit of Andy MacNab's book about pistol training for Northern Ireland-he mentions them training to draw and shoot at ranges of less than a foot.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 6:03:39 AM EST
Real shame...if Brady.org really wanted to do something to keep the streets safer, they'd donate to a Police only competition league. Duty arms in duty gear. $$ prizes to top, and separate others so some of the $$ prizes go to some of the others (like the GSSF matches). Provide $$ for ammo for practice.

AFARR
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 6:09:06 AM EST

Originally Posted By joker581:

Originally Posted By madmathew:
Sometimes its scary how it takes these studies forever to figure out things that most people already know through common sense or casual observation.
Actually, most people, cops included, seem to think that very few criminals actually practice anything.

When I was in the Marines, I met a detective from the Riverside County, CA Sheriff's Office. He was at Camp Pendleton investigating a guy that had been in our unit and saw me and another guy practicing disarms with a rubber pistol during a smoke break. He struck up a conversation about fighting and such and talked about it for a pretty good while. Anyway, back to the point. He emailed me about 5 videos of guys in prison yards at Folsom and San Quintin practicing to disarm cops, pull pistols out of retention holsters, and turning, drawing, and firing when they are up against a wall to be frisked.

Criminals can be just as smart and just as good at what they do as any of us are at what we do. Underestimating them is a good way to end up dead.


An Orange County deputy told me they see that in the prisons, and find police duty gear and retention holsters in gangbangers houses.

This same deputy could unlock a Safariland 6004 while facing the wearer, using his hand in a chopping motion. Retention holsters are easy to defeat, if you have the will to learn how.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 6:09:38 AM EST
[Last Edit: 2/26/2007 6:11:36 AM EST by 1911greg]
one of my gripes out here in CA is the lack of good people in Law Enforcement, I saw a ton of squared away military guys who would exercise common sense and already had a survival mentality, but in the end it seemed like the out of shape college boys with no real world experience were selected for positions.

maybe a kinder more gentle police force.

god forbid you hire someone who has actually been in a fight before!
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 6:25:47 AM EST



The offenders were of a different mind-set entirely. In fact, Davis said the study team “did not realize how cold blooded the younger generation of offender is. They have been exposed to killing after killing, they fully expect to get killed and they don’t hesitate to shoot anybody, including a police officer. They can go from riding down the street saying what a beautiful day it is to killing in the next instant.”

“Offenders typically displayed no moral or ethical restraints in using firearms,” the report states. “In fact, the street combat veterans survived by developing a shoot-first mentality.



Police have traditionally been poor shots, but the quoted part is the real bottom line here. The gangsta mentality is deep in these thugs. There is nothing and I mean nothing keeping them from doing the sort of things we all read about happening in Knoxville, TN recently except your gun. I am very tired of hearing about how bad "shoot first mentality" is on the part of non thugs. Your choices are shoot first or get shot. It's just not that complicated.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 6:40:44 AM EST
I do like the idea of police competitions for training. IDPA, IPSC and such.

I also understand the issue of cops not wanting to use their weapon at all if it can be avoided.

Even I second guess alot of cops when their stories are posted here.

They are damned if the do, damned if they don't.

TXL
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 6:41:54 AM EST

Originally Posted By TxLewis:

They are damned if the do, dead if they don't.

TXL
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 6:50:50 AM EST
Agencies need to spend a LOT more time and money on combat training.

Link Posted: 2/26/2007 6:50:52 AM EST
[Last Edit: 2/26/2007 6:52:58 AM EST by John_Wayne777]
People need to READ this and understand what it means.

There is lots of good info in there about how criminals approach fights.



The offenders were of a different mind-set entirely. In fact, Davis said the study team “did not realize how cold blooded the younger generation of offender is. They have been exposed to killing after killing, they fully expect to get killed and they don’t hesitate to shoot anybody, including a police officer. They can go from riding down the street saying what a beautiful day it is to killing in the next instant.”


...so guess what?

YOU had better be able to do the same thing too.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 7:13:13 AM EST

Nearly 40% of the offenders had some type of formal firearms training, primarily from the military.


This is kind of hard for me to believe.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 7:42:40 AM EST
Agencies don't want to hire warriors anymore. They want college kids who are steeped in the 'community policing' philosophy. They also don't want to train their people in realistic fighting techniques, as then plaintiffs attorneys will accuse them of teaching their people to kill. They are more concerned about citizen complaints than officers getting injured or killed. And there is always the issue of money- the first thing to get cut when the budget gets tight (and it gets tighter every year) is the training budget. Officers who shoot on their own or spend their own money to attend firearms training are often seen as Rambos or overly-aggressive liability risks. Many officers are more afraid of the legal aftermath of shooting someone than they are of the actual gunfight, so they are thinking about all the wrong things when the balloon goes up. It doesn't help that every officer-involved shooting is hyper-scrutinized by people who have no clue about deadly force situations. Every police shooting should be investigated thoroughly, but some of the shit that goes on is unbelievable.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 7:48:51 AM EST

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
Agencies need to spend a LOT more time and money on combat training.




That is not going to be popular with the "Militarization of the Police" crowd here.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 7:58:33 AM EST

Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
Agencies need to spend a LOT more time and money on combat training.




That is not going to be popular with the "Militarization of the Police" crowd here.



Haha, nope. I guess I'm in that camp somewhat--why would we want police officers to have combat training in the first place? It may be sort of like "combat" in places like LA, but I am uncomfortable even seeing police wearing BDUs. If by combat you mean realistic shooting scenarios, then fine, but not actual military tactics. The problems in American cities have much to do with certain substances being prohibited and lots and lots of denial amongst those who set policy.

Link Posted: 2/26/2007 8:05:57 AM EST

Originally Posted By Sparky315:
Agencies don't want to hire warriors anymore. They want college kids who are steeped in the 'community policing' philosophy. They also don't want to train their people in realistic fighting techniques, as then plaintiffs attorneys will accuse them of teaching their people to kill. They are more concerned about citizen complaints than officers getting injured or killed. And there is always the issue of money- the first thing to get cut when the budget gets tight (and it gets tighter every year) is the training budget. Officers who shoot on their own or spend their own money to attend firearms training are often seen as Rambos or overly-aggressive liability risks. Many officers are more afraid of the legal aftermath of shooting someone than they are of the actual gunfight, so they are thinking about all the wrong things when the balloon goes up. It doesn't help that every officer-involved shooting is hyper-scrutinized by people who have no clue about deadly force situations. Every police shooting should be investigated thoroughly, but some of the shit that goes on is unbelievable.


Its the same for any self defense shooting.

And some of the people on this board are the worst offenders.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 8:23:58 AM EST

Sometimes its scary how it takes these studies forever to figure out things that most people already know through common sense or casual observation.



Cha-ching. We have a winner.

This is an example of the intentional dumbing down of America.

Higher education was supposed to make people smarter, it is doing just the opposite. It just wasn't supposed to be that way.

Conservatives own culture and believing that which is correct...is correct.

Liberals, to feel smarter, wiser and morally superior, must believe the opposite of Conservatives. So, liberals are forced to believe incorrect things and to disbelieve correct things. They are called "counter-culture" for a reason. Worse they are so intollerant they seek to force their psychotic culture on everyone else and to exterminate all other cultures.

Liberals are responsible for this kind of thing, they are the moral equivalent of HIV.

Link Posted: 2/26/2007 8:24:08 AM EST
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 8:30:57 AM EST
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 8:38:20 AM EST
[Last Edit: 2/26/2007 8:39:36 AM EST by AZ-K9]
2 Violent Encounters: Felonious Assaults on America’s Law Enforcement Officers is available from the UCR Program Office, FBI Complex, 1000 Custer Hollow Road, Clarksburg, WV 26306-0150 or by calling 888-827-6427.


Also note it appears this grand report is the culmination of studying a grand total of 43 offenders and 50 cops.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 8:44:57 AM EST

Originally Posted By Wobblin-Goblin:

Researcher Davis, in a presentation and discussion for the International Assn. of Chiefs of Police, noted that none of the attackers interviewed was “hindered by any law--federal, state or local--that has ever been established to prevent gun ownership. They just laughed at gun laws.”

Very interesting. Very interesting indeed, coming from the source.


Least there is a working black market for when they ban guns outright...

...may come in useful...

Just saying...
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 8:47:49 AM EST

Originally Posted By AZ-K9:
Also note it appears this grand report is the culmination of studying a grand total of 43 offenders and 50 cops.


Given the complexities of getting *any* sample like this, that's probably about the best you can get.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 8:49:07 AM EST
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 8:52:45 AM EST
Lot of common sense in that article, so I'm gonna have to assume it's a spoof.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 11:09:25 AM EST

Originally Posted By Corey:
Link?

Corey


yes, please.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 11:24:40 AM EST

Originally Posted By Freeside:

Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
Agencies need to spend a LOT more time and money on combat training.




That is not going to be popular with the "Militarization of the Police" crowd here.



Haha, nope. I guess I'm in that camp somewhat--why would we want police officers to have combat training in the first place? It may be sort of like "combat" in places like LA, but I am uncomfortable even seeing police wearing BDUs. If by combat you mean realistic shooting scenarios, then fine, but not actual military tactics. The problems in American cities have much to do with certain substances being prohibited and lots and lots of denial amongst those who set policy.



Proper training has nothing to do with pants.

Firearms tactics/combat training is firearms tactics regardless of the orginization.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 11:38:29 AM EST

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:

Originally Posted By Freeside:

Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
Agencies need to spend a LOT more time and money on combat training.




That is not going to be popular with the "Militarization of the Police" crowd here.



Haha, nope. I guess I'm in that camp somewhat--why would we want police officers to have combat training in the first place? It may be sort of like "combat" in places like LA, but I am uncomfortable even seeing police wearing BDUs. If by combat you mean realistic shooting scenarios, then fine, but not actual military tactics. The problems in American cities have much to do with certain substances being prohibited and lots and lots of denial amongst those who set policy.



Proper training has nothing to do with pants.

Firearms tactics/combat training is firearms tactics regardless of the orginization.


+1! and it's a shame when officers have to pay for this kind of training out of their own pockets, using their vacation days to do it....But at least some of them are willing to go even when the agency won't help them go.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 12:04:37 PM EST

Originally Posted By bluefalcon:

Originally Posted By Corey:
Link?

Corey


yes, please.


+1, or is that 3?
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 12:11:18 PM EST
Old School tag.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 12:27:36 PM EST
When I was young and just started " The Job " I went shooting all the time
On my own time using my own Ammo
Now unfortunately I've fallen into a rut

Most people in my Dept shoot only once a year to Qualify and then don't even clean or lube their weapons
That's just the start, here's some of the offenses I've seen in recent years

Guy was left handed but too cheap to buy the proper holster so he carried his weapon in a right side holster that someone gave him
Another guy has been carrying a Sig 228 in a Sig 226 holster, it's obcious it doesn't fit and looks as if it's going to fall out all the time
Some guys carry their guns in Condition Three contrary to Dept Policy
Spotted some people with No Spare Mags on their rigs
Actually spotted a guy with the spare mags but they were unloaded
Another guy bought a New Glock Holster inserted his G17 and couldn't get it out so he left it that way for two days before he asked for help ( it was a twist and draw style )

You can't imagine the stupididty that goes on
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 12:30:29 PM EST
I am going to try and get a few copies of the study and pass them out. What is not mentioned here is that in a real SHTF these gang bangers will be the big issue for the local governments. I keep thinking of Jericho where everybody works together. What BS. When 20-35 gang members show up in your neighborhood things will be difficult. Who are you going to call? The police will be down at the Safeway and hospital trying to maintain order. Just my 2 cents.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 12:34:20 PM EST
[Last Edit: 2/26/2007 12:44:24 PM EST by Max_Mike]

Originally Posted By 1911greg:

Originally Posted By CMOS:
Translation:

* Guns are bad.
* Criminal psychopaths can shoot guns too.





CMOS


I didnt get that at all, what I got was crooks train, most LEO's dont and usually the attacks just dont come out of no where meaning they are indicators of a attack.

btw they did say gun laws have no effect on criminals getting guns.


Me either, what I got was.

1. The police need a lot more, a whole lot more training for situational awareness and with firearms.

2. Thugs don't follow gun laws.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 12:38:56 PM EST

Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
Agencies need to spend a LOT more time and money on combat training.




That is not going to be popular with the "Militarization of the Police" crowd here.


Proper training (and enough of it) and militarization are not the same.

Just maybe if the police had enough proper training with firearms and on dealing with the public there would be fewer problems.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 2:24:28 PM EST
I recently read a very good book by Gabe Suarez titled "The Combative Perspective: The Thinking Man's Guide to Self-Defense".

This book is all about mindset, and is very informative, and easy to read.

To paraphrase one part of the book, Gabe says that you must assume that your adversary is bigger than you, stronger than you, armed better than you, and more proficient with his weapon than you are.

When you are training, if you envision yourself going up against an emaciated scrawny crackhead with a dull pocket knife as the type of "bad guy" that you will encounter on the street, you will be underestimating your enemy. This false idea of what the bad guy's abilities are can get you killed.

The book is well worth reading, and I highly recommend it.

Link to Book

Link Posted: 2/26/2007 2:37:42 PM EST

Originally Posted By AZ-K9:
2 Violent Encounters: Felonious Assaults on America’s Law Enforcement Officers is available from the UCR Program Office, FBI Complex, 1000 Custer Hollow Road, Clarksburg, WV 26306-0150 or by calling 888-827-6427.


Also note it appears this grand report is the culmination of studying a grand total of 43 offenders and 50 cops.


Gee, that's some kind of sampling.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 2:45:45 PM EST
this report has be bounceing on the net for a few months now..both as an FBI study and as a study from another source I cant remember who it was but i emailed then to ask because their other violence reports looked more technical....i havent gotten an answer I also emailed the FBI asking for source info on the study...no answer yet...but because of the way it is written it sound like some person wrote this report without any real knowledge...its a fraud someone needs to send it to snoopes
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 2:47:30 PM EST

Originally Posted By CMOS:
Translation:

* Guns are bad.
* Criminal psychopaths can shoot guns too.





CMOS


You didn't read the article, did you?
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 2:53:44 PM EST
also we as gun nuts we can out shoot most LEO's but most LEO's can out shoot criminals..because we might go to the range and practice a lot more than cops...now cops usually go to the range 2 times a year...not all cops but some go more...now the average criminal may go shooting once in their lives.....then go commit a crime....I know I am making a big generalization but with few exceptions I bet I'm closer than that report
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 2:55:12 PM EST

Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
Agencies need to spend a LOT more time and money on combat training.




That is not going to be popular with the "Militarization of the Police" crowd here.


Not true, not true at all. I don't want cops to be placed at a lethal disadvantage in terms of training. More combat training, especially shooting and grappling would go far to prevent officers from being killed.

Also (at least from my perspective):

If more cops actually knew how to use the weapons they were issued, there would be much less need for SWAT-type units.

It seems like some basic situational awareness training is more needed anyway.
Link Posted: 2/26/2007 2:55:34 PM EST

Originally Posted By HermanSnerd:
I recently read a very good book by Gabe Suarez titled "The Combative Perspective: The Thinking Man's Guide to Self-Defense".

This book is all about mindset, and is very informative, and easy to read.

To paraphrase one part of the book, Gabe says that you must assume that your adversary is bigger than you, stronger than you, armed better than you, and more proficient with his weapon than you are.

When you are training, if you envision yourself going up against an emaciated scrawny crackhead with a dull pocket knife as the type of "bad guy" that you will encounter on the street, you will be underestimating your enemy. This false idea of what the bad guy's abilities are can get you killed.

The book is well worth reading, and I highly recommend it.

Link to Book



Gabe may have a point, but I refuse to give any money to a fraud and perjurer. YMMV.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top