What if...

Status
Not open for further replies.
That is excellent advice. While we don't discuss ethnicity and race issue for themselves, I would suggest that readers of minority groups take this as even extra caution. I made that point in an article in the USCCA magazine on the effect of appearance in gun issues a few years ago. There may be higher risk of misinterpretation in such incidents, I'm sad to say. Quite a bit of research suggesting such with various caveats on conditions and training.
I would be very interested to read that article, could you please either post or PM me a link?
 
Actually it does, it's something of a sarcastic introduction saying I can't imagine myself in the situation.
"Doing hypotheticals", either conceptually or physically is the best way to train for the real thing. Hypothetical scenarios are the entire basis for force on force, live fire shoot house, CQB, SUT, etc., etc. training. If, in your training, you stop at techniques and never progress to tactics, you've severely and unnecessarily handicapped yourself.
 
LOLz. So now you have a gun and a day glow yellow flag.

That just means all the cops shoot you first.
Sorry sir,but I do believe that ALL LEO's are smart enough to at least LOOK really hard prior to shooting one who is marking them self.

But please do as you see fit,I will do the same.
 
Would you run away if it's in your church or other house of worship? That's actually what I was thinking of, not something like a concert.
leave slower than everyone else. and when the sob points the gun at you, shoot em.

also, teach people how to duck.

murf
 
I do believe that ALL LEO's are smart enough to at least LOOK really hard prior to shooting one who is marking them self.
The question then becomes, "How do you then account for Blue-on-Blue shootings?"...when officers are in full uniform or wearing raid jackets/vests with large identifying letters.
 
Sadly, only half. And I've been to the funerals to prove it.

For half of them, the pistol solves every problem when they're afraid.
*** = really ?

If your were even 50 % correct that would account for about a few THOUSAND blue on blue dead EVERY YEAR.

26 years on the job,and a 'bit' of gun play too.

NEVER had to duck a brother or sisters fire.

And I know a few THOUSAND fellow officers that are very likely to post in all sorts of forums and FB if there was even close to the numbers your suggesting.

Taught firearms and D/T for 22 or those years [ less for firearms ] and your all being either silly or clownish if you post such drivel.
 
The question then becomes, "How do you then account for Blue-on-Blue shootings?"...when officers are in full uniform or wearing raid jackets/vests with large identifying letters.
Between 750 & 850 THOUSAND officers in the USA.

PLEASE DO tell me exactly how many are shot dead or wounded yearly.

The number is too far from even a percentage to post.

Goodnight.
 
Between 750 & 850 THOUSAND officers in the USA.
You're trying to use stats improperly. You shouldn't compare the number involved in friendly fire to the total number of officers, but to the total number of officers involved incidents involving firearms (shootings)

PLEASE DO tell me exactly how many are shot dead or wounded yearly.
The number is too far from even a percentage to post.
There were 44 firearm related deaths among LEO in 2017. Of those 4 were the result of friendly fire...that looks like about 10%...and it doesn't include any officers that were only injured (because that isn't collected)
 
No, I'm back in the US. A friend of mine was mugged, beat up the mugger and chased him off. Called the cops. Then mugger returns with ''friends''. Big scuffle, cops arrive and shoot him, the victim.

I never said blue on blue. There's a problem with LEO's going to the gun any time they feel threatened. Where in the past they'd be more likely to use a club, mace, etc.etc. It coincides with a lack of training, or professional skill, often. It's a scary job, you can't just start slinging lead on a whim.

Think about it. How many unarmed people are being shot? Kids? Victims being shot by the cops they called? Innocent bystanders in the background?

It's becoming an epidemic. I get that less people want to be cops lately, and you get stuck working with some schmucks. But I'm going to get my pistol holstered and back to concealed before they show up.

And I'm sure as heck not going to draw attention to myself. Beat feet and get as much distance as I can . You can deal with the cops minutes later, whenever things are calmer. Everyone looks like a bad guy in a gunfight, when the fuzz shows up.

A yellow Miss America pageant sash isn't going to prevent that. It sucks, but I have no confidence that more than half the Leo's out there, are going to figure that one out under stress.
-------------
Another anecdotal story. Reporter in a near by local pre court hearing room at the courthouse, kind of setting, is a bit of a known trouble maker. Officer in the room lets him know that there's no cameras allowed and calmly takes the camera away.

Reporter goes ape, cold cocks the officer. The other officer is 3 feet away and incoming. Officer 1, ducked, now getting popped on top the head, draws his pistol and start spraying lead nearly taking out the other officer and two ladies in the court.

Sure he was getting beat enough to warrant it, but the correct choice was to withstand that until his help, only two seconds away could jump in. Oddly, nobody was hurt. Just another example where a pistol just isn't the magic problem solver that people think it is.
 
Last edited:
Yep, a clear shot at the perp.

Then there is this: "But behind the shooter are innocent people and nowhere you can move eliminates this problem."

What happens when/if a bullet misses the perp or exits the perp and hits someone in the crowd behind him? You will be working for someone else all your life when the civil lawsuit is done.

My duty is to protect my loved ones and myself. i did not sign on to protect the world from nutcase shooters. i'm gone.
 
Last edited:
You're trying to use stats improperly. You shouldn't compare the number involved in friendly fire to the total number of officers, but to the total number of officers involved incidents involving firearms (shootings)


There were 44 firearm related deaths among LEO in 2017. Of those 4 were the result of friendly fire...that looks like about 10%...and it doesn't include any officers that were only injured (because that isn't collected)
I do not agree with your limiting of the stat's.

According to all here [ or most ] ALL cops are shooting up every where and everyone.

So all officers are part of the statistic.

And in general I find all who say such drivel,have no clue what the job is REALLY like.

And live in a world I do not respect.
 
So all officers are part of the statistic.

And in general I find all who say such drivel,have no clue what the job is REALLY like.

And live in a world I do not respect.
So you do not respect that belief and characterize it was clueless...and you still insist on using the same number to justify your belief as opposed to the number of officers who are actually involved in shootings?

Do you see the credibility disconnect here?
 
So you do not respect that belief and characterize it was clueless...and you still insist on using the same number to justify your belief as opposed to the number of officers who are actually involved in shootings?

Do you see the credibility disconnect here?
NO, the general statements here are that ALL LEO's are trying to shoot as many "citizens" as possible.

And a few point out very questionable situations [ that are third hand at least ] to make their point about trigger happy and reckless officers.

To include ALL !that wear a badge.
 
Yep, a clear shot at the perp.

Then there is this: "But behind the shooter are innocent people and nowhere you can move eliminates this problem."

What happens when/if a bullet misses the perp or exits the perp and hits someone in the crowd behind him? You will be working for someone else all your life when the civil lawsuit is done.
Like I said before, there is a major disconnect here about how everyone is defining a "clear" shot. If there is anything more than a tiny chance that you will miss, I would not call that a "clear" shot. A quality expanding hollow point is unlikely to pass through a human torso, and if it does, it's very unlikely to retain enough energy to cause significant damage to someone else.

My duty is to protect my loved ones and myself. i did not sign on to protect the world from nutcase shooters. i'm gone.
This, of course, is your right. Personally, I know myself well enough to know that if my loved ones were safe, and I had the opportunity to save lives by taking the shot in question here and I didn't take it, I would second guess and regret that decision for the rest of my life. That's a personal decision though, obviously. It's good to think about it now, rather than when the **** is hitting the fan.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top