Dallas Police Officer Shooting - .223 fails to penetrate vehicle

[ServiceSoon]

Blackfork,
What do you know about police work? What qualifies you to make those statements? If you don't wish to post your bona fides in public you may PM me with them.

Jeff

Hey Jeff. Did you just watch "Thank You for Smoking?" Great movie with a lot of cliche's. One of those cliche's being the tactic you used above. Just busting your chops.

I don't agree or disagree with Blackfork. I do however think that law enforcement shouldn't be able to have any small arms that aren't available to the general public. I also think the constitution agrees with me, but SCOTUS and congress are a little confused about that right now. Isn't it amazing how easy it is to get threads off topic?

 

[Coronach]

The police aren't going to get in protracted shoot-outs and don't have any business with semi-auto OR certainly select fire weapons.

Do you own a television? Or, occasionally read a newspaper or internet newsblurbs? I'll be the first to say that the newsmedia is woefully inadequate when it comes to getting the details correct, but the idea that cops don't get involved in protracted gun battles is absurd, and should be adequately disabused by a little exposure to the news. I will, however, agree with you that select fire is a capability that is not needed in a patrol rifle.

Mike

 

[Wire]

Used to live in Plano. Worked at night. Lovely town.
Now I live in Memphis. Work all hours. Always have a gun.
As lame as Plano was, I always felt safe.
Yeah, I know, the police respond to calls, but not too many shopkeepers get murdered in the 750.

 

[BullfrogKen]

Blackfork said: I think .38 special lever guns ought to be about right. The police aren't going to get in protracted shoot-outs and don't have any business with semi-auto OR certainly select fire weapons.

Hmmm . . . Particular fellow I know carried an M1 Carbine during police work in the 70's. Good luck defending that statement with evidence Blackfork. Guys there also had M-16s during the race riots here in York. Hell . . . anyone remember departments buying Thompson's all those years ago?

Blackfork said:so he's qualified to carry a real gun in the city. Most policemen: No way

How about if those police said, "Me and my friends are qualified to carry guns in the city . . . anyone else, no way . . . including you . . . " How's that sound?


ServiceSoon, this is S&T. Folks get a lot less leeway when it comes to political statements here. Politics belong in L&P. They don't fit here, especially when it comes across like Blackfork offered it.


Getting back on track. . . .

I hunted groundhogs with a .308 Winchester bolt rifle. Before anyone thinks "overkill", I handloaded the rounds with 110 V-max. They penetrated all of about 6 inches on a hog. They'd never penetrate hard material well at all, like a door. Now who woulda thunk a .308 wouldn't penetrate a car door? Bullet construction matters. My .223 V-Max's performed about the same.

 

[BOONER]

HornadayTAP 308 110 grain.. Nice in the socom and 308 AR family

 

[Jeff White]

Strategies and Tactics is different then the other forums.

Service Soon,
Strategies and Tactics is a politics free zone here at THR. Posts are to be about the nuts and bolts of solving a problem. Anyone who wants can start a thread in Legal and Political or General Discussion about if the police or anyone else should carry a certain type of weapon. Those threads and posts are not on topic here and will be edited and the threads closed.

Since we deal with serious subjects here, anyone who expresses an expert opinion should be prepared to state their relevant experience that has developed this opinion. One way to avoid that is top post the source of information if it's not your own work.

Jeff

 

[BullfrogKen]

Booner, you do realize that the Hornady .308 TAP ammo is pretty much a V-max bullet, right? I was handloading that stuff when it was available only as a component before Hornady decided to take a varmint round, load it in house, and market it as a "police/tactical/urban/apartment dweller" appropriate round.


Go take that TAP round and put it through a groundhog. Or try it on a deer. Its essentially a varmint round. You can load it in a .300 Weatherby if you wanted to, it still won't do well against steel and glass.

 

[Jeff White]

Windshields are hard targets for any bullet. They are hard, laminated with plastic and often are curved.

I spent a day on the range shooting glass a couple of years ago. We shot everything from a HMMWV bullet resistant windshield to glass construction blocks.

12 gauge slugs and 45/70 were reliable, but even they were deflected somewhat. Farnum is right about doing better with M193 (55 gr ball) but based on my experiences that day, I wouldn't expect to do much better. The M193 I shot that day left parts of the jacket in the windshield and broke up. Even M855 with the steel penetrator didn't do all that well.

Until police departments start issuing M72 LAW antitank weapons, the officer on the street won't have anything he can reliably take out a car with. I don't expect to see that happen anytime in my lifetime.

If I had to shoot at someone through a windshield, I would use my handgun rather then the AR. If the circumstances allowed I would try to maneuver to a position where I could engage through the side or back glass. Windshileds are tough.

Tomorrow I will try to find the pictures from that day and post some of them.

Jeff

 

[Odd Job]

Look forward to seeing those, Jeff. Thanks.

 

[Lucky]

Jeff, I think the main points, which have been sanitized but already mentioned a couple time, is that it is NOT responsible to fire specially-designed penetrating ammunition in a crowded urban area.

Period.

That's THE reason for the bullet that was chosen, to avoid murdering innocent schmuks eating dinner in their un-armoured houses.

It was the department's logical pre-meditated well-thought-out choice. They chose those on purpose, being fully informed of what they do.

Why don't you support the police, Jeff?


When you alter your shooting range format to be a circle with the targets in the middle, maybe then over-penetration might start worrying you personally. Until then at least try, or pretend to try to empathize with those on the muzzle side of the rifle, who have the audacity to not want their employees shooting them.

And that's the final word - civil servants.


P.S. While you are suggesting a very very dangerous solution, the problem was already examined and solved decades ago - Tres Haute Vitesse.

...but then what if they didn't have the same terminal ballistics, would certain people fly up and be outraged that fragmenting or HP bullets were not used?

http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/THV.htm

 

[pcf]

Jeff, I think the main points, which have been sanitized from previous threads, is that it is NOT responsible to fire specially-designed penetrating ammunition in a crowded urban area.

Is it more responisible to fire 50+ rounds of less effective ammuniton in a shootout when 5 rounds of "specially-designed penetrating ammunition" could stop the same threat? Over penetration is bad, but having to fire excessive number of shots presents a much greater danger in my opinion.

 

[Jeff White]

Lucky said;

Jeff, I think the main points, which have been sanitized but already mentioned a couple time, is that it is NOT responsible to fire specially-designed penetrating ammunition in a crowded urban area.

Define specially designed penetrating ammunition. First we have to know what you're talking about. I don't think anyone has mentioned using any kind of specially designed penetrating ammunition. I am only aware of one 5.56x45 load that is designed to be armor piercing, that's M995. M995 has a tungsten core and isn't readily available even to the military. Last I checked it only came linked for use in the M249.

That's THE reason for the bullet that was chosen, to avoid murdering innocent schmuks eating dinner in their un-armoured houses.

It was the department's logical pre-meditated well-thought-out choice. They chose those on purpose, being fully informed of what they do.

Unfortunately there is as much ignorance about terminal ballistics among police administrators as there is on internet gun forums. They made a poor choice. There are better choices out there although I don't know of any 5.56 round that would be reliable against a windshield. A 5.56 is simply not a good choice for engaging a suspect in a vehicle.

When you alter your shooting range format to be a circle with the targets in the middle, maybe then over-penetration might start worrying you personally. Until then at least try, or pretend to try to empathize with those on the muzzle side of the rifle, who have the audacity to not want their employees shooting them.

Over penetration is one of the reasons that 5.56 carbines are replacing 12 gauge shotguns and pistol caliber carbines and submachine guns for police use. Even 5.56 ball will not over penetrate as much as most commonly used law enforcement handgun rounds. While 5.56 penetrates, it's most likely to break up and lose energy rapidly making it less likely to injure an innocent then the handgun and shotgun rounds.

P.S. While you are suggesting a very very dangerous solution, the problem was already examined and solved decades ago - Tres Haute Vitesse.

Engaging the target from a position that lets you maximize the potential of your equipment is a dangerous solution?

What would you suggest for engaging a suspect through a windshield?

Jeff

 

[Lucky]

Unfortunately there is as much ignorance about terminal ballistics among police administrators as there is on internet gun forums. They made a poor choice.

Although not provided in this thread, they substantiate their choice with logic and facts. The cartridge and rifle does what they set out for it to do. That is success, not failure.

A 5.56 is simply not a good choice for engaging a suspect in a vehicle.

Exactly - a poor choice. And who made the choice, at the time, to use that firearm with that cartridge on that target? That's right, the shooter. If they were ignorant as to the proper employment of the tool they were using, the only people who could be at fault are the guy who didn't know, and possibly someone who was supposed to tell them.

You use a wrench as a hammer and it'll sort-of work, but not as well as a hammer.

Define specially designed penetrating ammunition.

Ok let's rephrase that to specially chosen, for penetrating capabilities.

Over penetration is one of the reasons that 5.56 carbines are replacing 12 gauge shotguns and pistol caliber carbines and submachine guns for police use. Even 5.56 ball will not over penetrate as much as most commonly used law enforcement handgun rounds. While 5.56 penetrates, it's most likely to break up and lose energy rapidly making it less likely to injure an innocent then the handgun and shotgun rounds.

Now there's some of that mis-information you mentioned on gun forums.

Pistol and shotgun projectiles may penetrate more, in some substances, and at closer ranges, in some circumstances. But they slow down rapidly, and start off slower. This means they become less harmful much sooner, and gravity will pull them into the ground in a shorter distance too. I'm pretty sure you already know this, which makes it an academic debate.

As well, 5.56 ball's penetration capabilities increase the farther it goes. IIRC it's maximum penetration occurs at 600m, where it will pass through an entire bookshelf and the books on it. And, of course, the high velocity and b/c means that a flier can go several km.

I too like talking and reading about latest and greatest, and tacticool this and that, but in this case the only technology that would help would be a rifle bullet that would penetrate, but also slow down quickly.

And then people would be complaining about lack of wounding, and inability to engage targets farther away.

 

[Jeff White]

Although not provided in this thread, they substantiate their choice with logic and facts. The cartridge and rifle does what they set out for it to do. That is success, not failure.

An officer died because they chose their ammunition poorly. I would hardly call that a success.

Exactly - a poor choice. And who made the choice, at the time, to use that firearm with that cartridge on that target? That's right, the shooter. If they were ignorant as to the proper employment of the tool they were using, the only people who could be at fault are the guy who didn't know, and possibly someone who was supposed to tell them.

Have you seen their patrol rifle training program? I haven't. It's quite possible that the same administrators who chose the ammunition specifically because it didn't penetrate, never told the officers they armed with that ammunition what it's limitations were.

What does their policy manual say about shooting at vehicles? I don't know. I haven't seen it. Have you? Its impossible to say who is at fault. If the officers were trained to use their carbines to engage a vehicle then the administration is doubly at fault. Once for selecting ammunition that was unsuitable for duty use and again for training the officers to use it in that situation. Without seeing their training program and policy manual, it's impossible to tell.

Pistol and shotgun projectiles may penetrate more, in some substances, and at closer ranges, in some circumstances. But they slow down rapidly, and start off slower. This means they become less harmful much sooner, and gravity will pull them into the ground in a shorter distance too. I'm pretty sure you already know this, which makes it an academic debate.

The debate isn't about range, it's about penetration. Most police gunfights don't occur on rifle ranges or golf courses. They occur in urban areas or inside of structures. The chance of a round actually traveling far enough for gravity to pull it to the ground before it hits an intermediate barrier is pretty slim. What we are dealing with here is simple physics. Which is going to penetrate more and have the best chance of having enough mass left to injure someone after hitting an intermediate barrier?

http://www.olyarms.com/index.php?rootView=page&page=223articles

These articles will provide you with the information that you are missing.

As well, 5.56 ball's penetration capabilities increase the farther it goes. IIRC it's maximum penetration occurs at 600m, where it will pass through an entire bookshelf and the books on it. And, of course, the high velocity and b/c means that a flier can go several km.

Again, I have to ask you, what urban area are you going to shoot 600 meters in? There are very few places where you are going to make a 600 meter shot even out in the countryside. Is it your contention that a police department should only be armed with ammunition that is somehow deadly out to 25 meters yet harmless at 26 meters? It doesn't exist. The police need to be armed with ammunition that meets their mission requirements. Or are you saying that the police shouldn't have rifles? Before you answer, remember where you are. This is the Strategies and Tactics Forum and the only acceptable discussion is one of the actual capabilities of a rifle vs. whatever you suggest. Any political comment and the thread is done.

Jeff

 

[Vic303]

What about SS109? That ought to penetrate vehicles just fine, and well, the windshield thing is more dependent upon angle of impact I think. IIRC, if you are outside aiming in thru the windshield, aimhigh (assuming you are on level with the car) and if you are inside it, shooting thru the windshield, aim low.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

What about SS109? That ought to penetrate vehicles just fine, and well, the windshield thing is more dependent upon angle of impact I think.

SS109 doesn't penetrate any better than M193 until you get out past 300m or so. I've seen some claims that it actually penetrates less at close ranges due to its lower initial velocity. The "penetrator" is actually around a 4gr steel insert IIRC and doesn't do much to address the problem of the bullet fragmenting into tiny pieces on the angled, laminated glass. The penetrator part might go through the glass OK; but it will still deflect and a 4gr penetrator separated from the rest of the bullet is going to shed momentum very quickly.

However, either M193 or M855 (SS109) would have probably worked better here than a Winchester 55gr Silvertip.

 

[Jeff White]

Shooting through Glass

More later....These are shots to bullet resistant glass like you'd find in a bank teller cage.

 

[7677]

Patrol rifles and dash cams things sure have changed in the big D since I worked there. Then again things were starting to get bad when I left in 2002.

 

[tnieto2004]

I'd have to disagree with that. In Tyler, we had the guy who shot up the courthouse (and several police officers) with an AK47. He was finally brought down by officers with AR15s.

I remember that .. If I recall they had a S.W.A.T member on the front of a car finally bring the BG down .. I remember watching that on T.V

 

[TexasRifleman]

I remember that .. If I recall they had a S.W.A.T member on the front of a car finally bring the BG down

LOL. If you think Tyler, TX has budget for a dedicated SWAT team I got a bridge I'll sell you.

This is a regular officer with some extra tactical training, which was sort of the point that officers need these weapons. Most towns' SWAT team members are writing speeding tickets 10 minutes before the SWAT team is called.
They just put on a different jacket and hat.

Not every department has piles of money for vans full of SWAT operators to ride around town looking for trouble.

 

[tnieto2004]

You did read the part where I said "If I recall.." didn't you? The point was it was amazing that a man got on the front of the car ..

 

[BOONER]

One local Local team I Train, has to cover there own training ammo. They do what they can...

worst part is in the past year they have had 3 active shooter calls all involving long guns against them by the actors.

they are higly motivated and very active trainers and have a great record in gun battles

but there educated by there choices and they make and help make a lot of the ammo choices...... and they know holdover.........

 

[TexasRifleman]

You did read the part where I said "If I recall.." didn't you?

No no, don't misunderstand me. He was a SWAT guy, but most of the time they are just regular patrol officers.

Someone earlier was saying they didn't see the need for the average patrol officer to have these kinds of weapons.

My point, and what you mentioned, is that regular officers ARE the swat team most of the time.

 

[Redhat]

Maybe need to consider marked magazines in the kit with different type rounds.

A for cops with long guns...you have heard of the North Hollywood shoot out haven't you?

 

[tnieto2004]

No no, don't misunderstand me. He was a SWAT guy, but most of the time they are just regular patrol officers.

Someone earlier was saying they didn't see the need for the average patrol officer to have these kinds of weapons.

My point, and what you mentioned, is that regular officers ARE the swat team most of the time.

Gotcha!

Ya I like Dallas S.W.A.T the television show .. I realized when I saw it that they really are police officers with helmets .. I commend them for the stuff they do .. They deal with some real wacko's