Man stabs cop to death before armed civilian stops him.

[trackskippy]

I wasnt really sure where to put this, so here it landed.

Main thing here I think, is it emphasizes the Tueler Drill, which seems to be lost on, and/or widely misunderstood by a lot of people, and just how quickly things can go wrong. It also very much emphasizes, what you carry, how you carry it, and how realistic you are in being prepared to get it out and going, in some sort of realistic time frame. And with all "that" going on.

When you consider the cop is wearing an open and easily accessible gun, and on top of that, one that is better suited for allowing you to solve things, more things anyway, and then you see what went on here, where does that put those who insist on carrying sub to sub-sub optimal guns for the task at hand, and in sub-optimal ways?

The clip may be disturbing for some, as reality often is, so be aware.

Tragic: Bodycam Footage Shows Man Stabbing Police Officer to Death Before Armed Civilian Stops Him

redstate.com

The civilian who stops him after the fact is off-screen until the very end. You hear them verbally going back and forth and then some shooting but that's it. No idea beyond that other than he was supposedly legally armed and unfortunately for the cop, just a skosh late.

 

[MEHavey]

When seconds count . . . .

 

[trackskippy]

That, and preprogramming your brain to make the best use of them, about sums it up.

 

[Derek Zeanah]

If this is what I think it is, don't watch the footage. The police officer approached, bad guy drew a big knife, cop tried to run, and failed.

You don't wanna see the body cam footage.

 

[trackskippy]

Yea, I did say it was disturbing, and it is, but I also think a lot of people need to see disturbing to actually "get it". Reality sux, and tends to be a better educator than the paper statistics that we are constantly fed and thrown around.

And the warning stands, but this is just a part of all this. At least on the real-world side.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

Cop arrived and was making initial contact with a person he thought was the person who called 9-1-1 about a trespasser, however the person was the trespasser, who was mentally disturbed.

Instead of backpedaling when the attacker suddenly rushed at him with the knife, which caused the officer to trip and fall, the officer should've immediately run to his left, which would've caused the attacker to run past him. This would've bought the officer time to draw and shoot.

The attacker was savage and ruthless.

 

[JohnKSa]

The attacker was maybe 2 arms lengths away when he first telegraphed his intent. I don't know that there was anything the cop could have done to make him miss on his first attack. Even with sideways movement, the guy could have probably reached out and gotten him rather than just going past him.

I think the cop's only chance was to commit to being cut, try to save his life by movement and by sacrificing his weak hand/arm while using his other to shoot the attacker as many times as possible. I don't think he ever got his gun out.

I feel sorry for the citizen who responded. And of course for the cop and his family.

 

[fastbolt]

... the officer should've immediately run to his left, which would've caused the attacker to run past him. This would've bought the officer time to draw and shoot.
...

How did you arrive at the theory that the suspect would've run past the officer?

Why wouldn't he have simply turned and continued forward to deliberately track the officer's movements, continuing to rush him and then repeatedly stab/slash him, anyway?

Distance is your friend when facing someone with a blade. Asking for the suspect to identify himself (even as the RP) - as well as displaying their hands - before approaching very close is a practical and useful tactic. BTDT. (Sure, in situations where the environment conditions may constrain your movements, tactics have to adapt, and that happened to me when someone tried to kill me with a large fixed blade knife ... before I was a cop. I was luckier to be able to have more control over situations when facing suspects with blades in later years as a cop.)

 

[Milt1]

Tragic happening! I don't know why the PO wasn't more alert as he should have been on high alert until he figured out who this guy was.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

How did you arrive at the theory that the suspect would've run past the officer?

Why wouldn't he have simply turned and continued forward to deliberately track the officer's movements, continuing to rush him and then repeatedly stab/slash him, anyway?

Distance is your friend when facing someone with a blade. Asking for the suspect to identify himself (even as the RP) - as well as displaying their hands - before approaching very close is a practical and useful tactic. BTDT. (Sure, in situations where the environment conditions may constrain your movements, tactics have to adapt, and that happened to me when someone tried to kill me with a large fixed blade knife ... before I was a cop. I was luckier to be able to have more control over situations when facing suspects with blades in later years as a cop.)

It's not a "theory". It's a proven defense against a knife attack.

You move off the X at a 90 degree angle perpendicular to the line of attack. The attacker doesn't expect the movement and is unable to react effectively in time (OODA Loop stuff). His momentum carries him past where you were standing.

Another variation is the tactical J, in which you move at a 45 degree angle off the line of attack.

 

[.38 Special]

...where does that put those who insist on carrying sub to sub-sub optimal guns for the task at hand, and in sub-optimal ways?

I don't think this story supports that point at all. Rather, it illustrates the idea that sometimes you just aren't going to be able to get to your gun, regardless of how it is carried or how many rounds it holds. If your defensive training extends no further than gun training, then you are not very well trained.

(That is not, by the way, a dig at the officer or at any THR members, but rather a general observation.)

 

[trackskippy]

It certainly shows we all need other skills, like grappling type skills, etc. I know this is a gun forum and all, and a gun will always be the answer, but that isn't reality and just haveing a gun doesn't make you armed.

Those sorts of other skills "might" give you the opportunity to gain some distance and be able to get to your gun, and then what you chose, how you choose to carry it, and your actual ability to use it, especially under some stress will make a difference.

Can you quickly clear and shoot the gun from how you carry it, or are you running around struggling and trying to get it out of your pocket, or maybe forgetting what the gun of the day is and where you put it today, etc?

 

[Shawn Dodson]

When you consider the cop is wearing an open and easily accessible gun, and on top of that, one that is better suited for allowing you to solve things, more things anyway, and then you see what went on here, where does that put those who insist on carrying sub to sub-sub optimal guns for the task at hand, and in sub-optimal ways?

A solid hit to the bad guy's heart or a great vessel is going to take time to have an effect (10-15 seconds).

SC Trooper Mark Coates collapsed to the pavement 20 seconds after he was hit by a .22 LR fired from a mini-revolver. The bullet cut a great vessel in his chest.

What you hit is more important than what you hit with.

The problem that appears to be happening more often in real-life, as opposed to during training, is reliable semiauto pistols experiencing a stoppage, presumably caused by a poor grip on the pistol due to the need to unexpectedly draw in haste under the stress of a life-or-death attack. Smaller pistols may be more prone to malfunctioning because of a compromised grip.

 

[trackskippy]

What you hit is certainly important, as is knowing why. COM is basically just a dumbed down version of that. How many here were paying attention in biology class (other than the parts of that hot girlie "you" were in love with in the seat next to you ) can off the top of your head, name the major organs/structures, ect, where they are in the body, why would you target them, if you could, and which ones will shut things down the quickest? Guns, knives, leverage/breakage, or whatever.

All we ever seem to hear is "Shoot COM" mantra (and you don't have to wait for the command this time ). And it seems a lot of people didn't get the "quickly repeat as necessary if you go that route" memo on that either.

 

[Bill_in_TR]

What threads like this reenforce in my mind is that no matter what your firearm is and no matter how well trained you are no one knows for certain how they will react in the stress of a life or death confrontation.

 

[trackskippy]

What threads like this reenforce in my mind is that no matter what your firearm is and no matter how well trained you are no one knows for certain how they will react in the stress of a life or death confrontation.

I think youre right. We're all human, and have the normal, daily human issues and whatever. One stupid little thing can screw you up in all directions and you're basically functioning on auto pilot. Who knows what part of all this you might be in when someone or something else wants to add to your day?

I also think the more you educate yourself, work hard at improving yourself as much as you can, and in as many different ways as you can, and continue to do so (there really is no end to it, you don't get a prize or diploma, just scars and creaky things ), you're going to be in a better place than someone who gets a little basic training, thinks the gun will solve everything, and that's that, their all good.

Of course, either way there, add a phone you just cant Iive without into the mix, and all bets are off!

 

[.38 Special]

How many here were paying attention in biology class (other than the parts of that hot girlie "you" were in love with in the seat next to you ) can off the top of your head, name the major organs/structures, ect, where they are in the body, why would you target them, if you could, and which ones will shut things down the quickest? Guns, knives, leverage/breakage, or whatever.

I can, actually. Ex-paramedic and instructor...

The question, of course, is whether I could actually hit them under stress. In that cop's shoes, if I had managed to get a gun out I'd have been shooting at whatever I could get to!

 

[Sistema1927]

This incident shows that bad things sometime happen, and there is almost nothing that we can do to stop them. The only positive in this whole mess is that the State of New Mexico doesn't have to spend money on a trail for this miscreant due to the actions of the bystander.

 

[fastbolt]

It's not a "theory". It's a proven defense against a knife attack.

You move off the X at a 90 degree angle perpendicular to the line of attack. The attacker doesn't expect the movement and is unable to react effectively in time (OODA Loop stuff). His momentum carries him past where you were standing.

Another variation is the tactical J, in which you move at a 45 degree angle off the line of attack.

I have some passing familiarity with self defense, including defenses against edged weapons, and that includes 'angular movement off the X' in response to an attacker's initial movement/attack. I was learning that stuff at the beginning of the 70's when I first started my study and involvement in the martial arts. Back then some dojo's even used real blades with lots of masking tape on the edges, or some renegade dojo maybe even bare blades, although the smart ones were using toy rubber knives, wooden training blades or plastic bats.

The decades of DT, after I entered LE, didn't show anything particularly new, and most of what was being taught was ... simple. The bad guys in fights didn't always seem to know what they were expected to do, or if they did, they didn't often seem inclined to cooperate.

The thing about learning a 'technique' that relies upon an opponent (attacker) acting a certain way, is that you can't guarantee that an attacker is going to know they're supposed to act in a certain manner throughout the entirety of their action. Sure, it's common across many arts to hope that if an attacker really commits themselves to a movement, and you can time it right, their momentum and balance may become something you can use to your advantage. I've met some guys who ended up behind bars who were basically skilled in some different martial arts, too. (By 'basically skilled' I mean they were brown belts or had a lower black belt.)

Rather than get too close too quickly, especially if you don't know who's who in the zoo upon your initial arrival, it's safer to try and maintain some semblance of a working distance between you, to give you time.

Distance becomes your best friend if facing blades, pointy things and impact weapons. I've had to face those things at close and not-so-close distances, and not-so-close has always been my preference, given my druthers.

I absolutely HATE to learn (let alone see in the BWC video) cops get killed, or even seriously injured, by such attackers because they got too close, too quickly, and were able to overwhelm the cop.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

When you consider the cop is wearing an open and easily accessible gun, and on top of that, one that is better suited for allowing you to solve things, more things anyway, and then you see what went on here, where does that put those who insist on carrying sub to sub-sub optimal guns for the task at hand, and in sub-optimal ways?

One does not, and in fact CANNOT be "perfectly armed", "perfectly carrying", or "perfectly alert and attentive" for every possible contingency at all times.

We ought to carry what and how we do based on a reasonable assumption of our potential needs as well as the many other factors which may drive what we can carry and how we can carry it.

Along with that we should train and practice. We should also understand how to be alert enough to assess our environment in order to appropriately adjust our state of readiness.

And don't forget...we should also be intelligent enough to avoid circumstances we have recognized as having the potential to become dangerous.

In circumstances like this, we're more likely to get far more benefit out of brainstorming tactics and methodologies OTHER than what firearm to carry and how to carry it.

 

[Phaedrus/69]

Tragic. Much of the time a "good guy with a gun" thinks the cops will almost magically be able to instantly ID them as the good guy; this video shows why making such an assumption can have tragic consequences. A cop can't just roll up and start shooting obviously as they'd kill far more innocent people than suspects. Since you can't easily tell which is which this video shows why cops can sometimes seem overly caution in their interactions with citizens.

 

[JohnKSa]

One does not, and in fact CANNOT be "perfectly armed", "perfectly carrying", or "perfectly alert and attentive" for every possible contingency at all times.

Correct.

I don't think any level of training or skill will guarantee a defender emerges from this kind of encounter unscathed. Nor even that would ensure survival a high percentage of the time.

But I do think it's quite easy to set yourself up for guaranteed failure in a difficult self-defense situation and I see a lot of people embracing that approach.

 

[trackskippy]

One does not, and in fact CANNOT be "perfectly armed", "perfectly carrying", or "perfectly alert and attentive" for every possible contingency at all times.

We ought to carry what and how we do based on a reasonable assumption of our potential needs as well as the many other factors which may drive what we can carry and how we can carry it.

Along with that we should train and practice. We should also understand how to be alert enough to assess our environment in order to appropriately adjust our state of readiness.

And don't forget...we should also be intelligent enough to avoid circumstances we have recognized as having the potential to become dangerous.

In circumstances like this, we're more likely to get far more benefit out of brainstorming tactics and methodologies OTHER than what firearm to carry and how to carry it.

As a base rule, Ive always tried to carry what I shoot best with and practice regularly, as the basis for the gun I choose to carry. This is all part of a package deal, which includes things like, training, regular, realistic practice, as best as possible, to continue to learn, hopefully, improve, and at least try and maintain things (even when the body and brain seem to have different ideas ). Each part of that is important to the whole.

If you can maintain something similar, with what you chose to carry, using guns I consider to be second and third line backup guns, great, your choice, and more power to you, but I see those guns as just that, and while I do regularly practice with them as well, I know, at least for me, there is a pretty big difference in things between them. And even there, the gun I ended up choosing as a backup, and many seem to consider too big for that, is a Glock 26, as its fills that role best, for me. Its one of those rare smaller guns, that is more like a full size gun, and in many respects.

Personally, I think it best to keep the choice of guns here to a very limited few, give them the most attention, and try our best, not to get caught up in a gun for every reason or season.

But you're right, you cant be "perfectly armed" 100% of the time, and sometimes you have to fall back on lesser things, and at least try and keep that as seldom as possible. Ive been doing this on a daily basis for a good long time now, and haven't found doing so to be much of a chore, but I try my best to do so, have always made it just a part of everyday life, so its part of the norm, and it can be work and challenging at times.

I don't care how smart we might think we are either, we never seem to be as smart as we think we are. Ive lived and worked both, in places from very rural to inner cities, and have seen basically the same sort of thing in all of them at some point. Anytime something "bad" happened, the common denominator has always been "people", so what do you do, if where you are, is where you have to be, regardless of whose choice or what reason it is that put you there?

Deal the best you can and hope you're somewhere close to the better side of the curve in what you've done to prepare, and embrace Mr Murphy.

 

[shafter]

This is why speed matters. If the cop was mentally prepared for the possibility of assault and had a sub one second draw from a duty holster he likely would have made it out alive. Very few train for this.

People will say he got too close but the unfortunate reality is we live in a world where people get too close all the time and there's nothing we can do about it, especially as a cop.

 

[trackskippy]

I think something often missed or not even thought of, is the fact that you might have no other option but to run to the threat rather than away from it. It might be the only "best" solution, in a list of bad ones. Kind of like running from a dog. Either way, you're going to get chewed on, but at least you have a better chance of fighting with some control and purpose. You get taken down, and now you're just a play toy. Sometimes, the best defense is a strong offense.

And as far as proximity goes, we are almost always going to be on the back or reactionary side of the curve here, and not much you can do about it. What went on above clearly shows that, and why it is very important to have as good and varied a base to draw from should it be needed.

Another bad thing here, for us anyway is, that we are always told we have to operate within specific ROE, and I think we are being conditioned to not act in our own best interests because of it sometimes.

Yes, I understand the law aspect of things, but there is paper law and living reality and intuition. Do you die because you were afraid to act, because you might get in trouble? Or do follow your gut, and act, even if its not "by the letter" lawful yet?

Dont let the lawyers get you killed unnecessarily.