LAPD Hostage Killing 06/16/2018

[Wayne Dobbs]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrBoIWNnbhU

So here we have a situation that resulted in killing a genuine hostage. Using deadly force was completely justified, but you have to wonder that if there was time to get a beanbag shotgun out, why wouldn't somebody get a patrol rifle out instead of pistols? Next, you see the effects of what I've called "contagion fire" for years in firearms training and that you can train out (or at least show the effort). One fired and they all fired and loosed about 18 rounds, killing the turd and the hostage. This one will be a game changer for sure and not likely in a positive way.

[HCountyGuy]

This isn’t likely to help with some of the stupid things going on in CA regarding changing UOF guidelines.

I wondered the same thing about getting a rifle in to play in this incident when I viewed it. Didn’t want to MMQB it too hard but there were some serious screw-ups that could’ve been avoided with a little bit of sense added in to the equation.

[KeeFus]

Why didn't the female leave instead of just standing there, in essence lending herself to become a hostage?

Not trying to play the blame game but if I saw a suspect with a knife and a chair approaching police and they (the police) were armed with various weapons that were pointed in my direction, I'd un-ass the area. Once the bean-bag rounds were fired and had little effect the suspect started backing up and that's when he took her hostage.

At any rate, a lot to learn from in regards to training.

[TCinVA]

Why didn't the female leave instead of just standing there, in essence lending herself to become a hostage?

Not trying to play the blame game but if I saw a suspect with a knife and a chair approaching police and they (the police) were armed with various weapons that were pointed in my direction, I'd un-ass the area. Once the bean-bag rounds were fired and had little effect the suspect started backing up and that's when he took her hostage.

At any rate, a lot to learn from in regards to training.

People frequently do dumb shit in the midst of a very dangerous situation. Playing looky-loo when the police show up is one of the common ones.

I remember being in a college class one time when a member of the local SWAT team showed up at the door and told us all we had to leave immediately. I grabbed my shit and started moving...everyone else sat there asking what was going on. The instructor, bless her pea-pickin' heart, actually argued with the dude. I understood what it meant when dudes with body armor and machine guns showed up and were breathlessly telling you to get the fuck out.

Also note that she had a walker. Could she have done more to put herself out of the danger zone? Sure...but this is an older woman who apparently has mobility issues.

The officers were handed a shit sandwich on this one...but I have to think that more aggressive action when a dude with a knife is moving in the direction of an innocent with a walker who is backed against a wall would have been the appropriate call.

Then again, society as a whole doesn't give a shit about teaching officers the appropriate times to escalate force in the interest of preventing an outcome like this, so...

Ultimately the responsibility lies in the hands of the person pulling the trigger whether they've been trained to the level of that awesome responsibility or not. Most police departments are simply not going to train their personnel up to the level necessary to properly deal with the kinds of problems they are going to be asked to solve. Ultimately it's up to the officers themselves to recognize this and do something about it.

It shouldn't be that way, of course, but it is that way.

Police, of course, are not unique in this. Many employers do not adequately train or prepare their employees to handle the problems that come with the job and it's on the employee themselves to acquire the necessary skills on their own time. Policing just carries with it dire life-altering consequences for that deficiency.

[KeeFus]

Police, of course, are not unique in this. Many employers do not adequately train or prepare their employees to handle the problems that come with the job and it's on the employee themselves to acquire the necessary skills on their own time. Policing just carries with it dire life-altering consequences for that deficiency.

^^^^QFT!

[TCinVA]

This is a brilliant argument for a policy that allows deploying a long gun when the officers are sent to a call on armed people in close proximity to others of the public.

The pistol is a reactive weapon...the gun you reach for when you didn't reasonably suspect there was going to be a lethal threat.

When you know going in that there's a dude with a lethal weapon in proximity to others he is threatening, a long gun makes all kinds of sense.

In this instance an officer armed with a good shotgun loaded with Federal Flight Control and some decent training could have pretty easily peeled that dude off of the hostage and effectively neutralized him with one shot.

[blues]

A patrol rifle is what immediately came to mind. (Perhaps loaded with something akin to the Hornady TAP Urban round for less barrier penetration.)

[feudist]

A patrol rifle is what immediately came to mind. (Perhaps loaded with something akin to the Hornady TAP Urban round for less barrier penetration.)

And still, in 2018, the majority of Patrol officers still don't have access. We're lucky to have 1 or 2 on shift.

[blues]

And still, in 2018, the majority of Patrol officers still don't have access. We're lucky to have 1 or 2 on shift.

I don't know if that's an issue with the department involved in the current circumstance...but clearly that is an issue for other departments and agencies. Seems very backward thinking in today's environment.

[andre3k]

We just had an FBI regional SWAT team kill the hostage during a rescue at a stash house of illegals. Made the local news for a day or two and it wasn't even a blip on the national news.

[blues]

We just had an FBI regional SWAT team kill the hostage during a rescue at a stash house of illegals. Made the local news for a day or two and it wasn't even a blip on the national news.

You're right. First I've heard of it.

[VT1032]

Random thought, but does LAPD actually issue or allow patrol rifles? I could be totally off base on this, but I was under the impression that their regular patrol guys got shotguns and maybe some of the supervisors got rifles at best.

[Doc_Glock]

Also note that she had a walker. Could she have done more to put herself out of the danger zone? Sure...but this is an older woman who apparently has mobility issues.

The officers were handed a shit sandwich on this one...but I have to think that more aggressive action when a dude with a knife is moving in the direction of an innocent with a walker who is backed against a wall would have been the appropriate call.

Then again, society as a whole doesn't give a shit about teaching officers the appropriate times to escalate force in the interest of preventing an outcome like this, so...

Good analysis. In today's political climate there is a hesitancy to escalate force appropriately until it is too late. Then the moment is past and he has a knife to an innocent's throat.

[WobblyPossum]

I thought the officer whose body cam footage they played first (the driver who drew his pistol to cover his passenger who drew the LL shotgun) did a great job by closing the distance with the bad guy as soon as he saw the bad guy go for the woman. His camera footage showed he advanced to about three yards and placed himself in a great position to engage the bad guy's exposed head. I have no knowledge about which officer's bullets went where but this officer set himself up for as close to a perfect shot as he could get in this situation.

I agree with the previous posters regarding sympathetic fire. The positions of the bad guy and the hostage in relation to the positions of the other officers made for the shots available to those other officers more difficult. It's possible that they fired only because the first officer fired.

[jlw]

I sent a video of this incident out to all of our people and reminded them that they have rifles, and I included a cautionary note on contagion fire.

On the positive side, I pointed out that officers didn't set themselves up in a cross fire, and one of the guys made a transition from LL to pistol when the situation changed.

[TC215]

We just had an FBI regional SWAT team kill the hostage during a rescue at a stash house of illegals. Made the local news for a day or two and it wasn't even a blip on the national news.

Are you talking about the one in January? If so, that was a little different....the kidnapping victim grabbed an agent's rifle during entry and was pulling on it when he got shot.

I fully acknowledge there could have been another more recently that I'm not aware of.

[Wayne Dobbs]

Random thought, but does LAPD actually issue or allow patrol rifles? I could be totally off base on this, but I was under the impression that their regular patrol guys got shotguns and maybe some of the supervisors got rifles at best.

There are hundreds of Colt patrol rifles in play at LAPD.

[Coyotesfan97]

We had designated shooters on SWAT IAT for as long as I can remember. One or maybe two Officers are told they are the shooters. Everyone else knows they don’t shoot. We’ve removed a probationary Officer for not following this order.

Trying to do this on a Patrol IAT is a goatfuck. All the new Officers think they should shoot too. If the Sergeant on scene is turned on and usually a former SWAT guy it gets enforced. If he’s the newly promoted Sergeant you get the WTF look for telling him it needs to be set.

Frankly our problem is too many Patrol rifles. Everyone wants to deploy a rifle and they don’t like getting told to put it away and get a beanbag. It’s a better issue than not having them but it’s a chore telling guys I don’t need another rifle I need someone hands free to handcuff.

[TGS]

There are hundreds of Colt patrol rifles in play at LAPD.

What does that actually mean in terms of prevalence in cruisers though? Hundreds of patrol rifles for an organization the size of LAPD doesn't sound like very much to me. :confused:

[Hambo]

There are hundreds of Colt patrol rifles in play at LAPD.

Outside of Metro who has them? Patrol supervisors used to have them, but have they issued them to patrol officers?

[Hambo]

It's just one guy's opinion, but this could have worked with pistols IF they had a designated shooter or shooters. Work the angle, get close, and do it.

[Dave Williams]

What a terrible scenario, lots of lessons and learning points. I have been in charge of a hostage scenario, and it is dicey indeed. I really have a ton of respect for LAPD, I think the Officers there really have the ability to become good shooters, with ammo , the ability to carry a gun of your choice, and practice available, and monetary incentive to shoot well, something not all that common around the country.

In my training with Larry Mudgett, former LAPD SWAT, he told the tale of a hostage situation at the Mexican consulate in LA. The situation was Officers on scene had the hostage taker at gunpoint. Someone arrived on scene "who knew how to shoot", a Sergeant who just left Metro for promotion. He thumbcocked his 4506, advanced on the hostage taker, and shot him in the head. There is a helicopter video of that incident I've seen. Mudgett has had ~360 students in gunfights. In his training surgical accuracy is stressed. In my own personal training I don't shoot at anything bigger than a B8.

[Wayne Dobbs]

In my training with Larry Mudgett, former LAPD SWAT, he told the tale of a hostage situation at the Mexican consulate in LA. The situation was Officers on scene had the hostage taker at gunpoint. Someone arrived on scene "who knew how to shoot", a Sergeant who just left Metro for promotion. He thumbcocked his 4506, advanced on the hostage taker, and shot him in the head. There is a helicopter video of that incident I've seen. Mudgett has had ~360 students in gunfights. In his training surgical accuracy is stressed. In my own personal training I don't shoot at anything bigger than a B8.

There's lots of wisdom in that practice of shooting at small zones under operational speed pressure. It's a practice that produces excellent street results. As for the former Metro Sgt. who made that hostage rescue shot, when questioned about his decision and ability to make the shot, he simply said, "I've made that shot thousands of times". And he had, as a very serious shooter and practitioner of his craft.

[GardoneVT]

It's just one guy's opinion, but this could have worked with pistols IF they had a designated shooter or shooters. Work the angle, get close, and do it.

Problem comes back to TCinVAs point about training.

Ultimately , being a proficient shooter costs money. Doesn’t matter what profession the person is, being able to deliver a headshot period- to say nothing about a headshot from a handgun at range in a hostage situation- requires a level of skill that is above the willingness of most agencies to fund.
Somewhere in the upper floors of every urban uniformed agency HQ is a dude or dudette with an Excel spreadsheet showing the macabre cost benefit of training officers vs eating a lawsuit or a dead hostage/team member periodically. Not going to comment on the morality of the choice, but I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Someone did the math and determined the marginal and direct cost of the occasional dead hostage was lower then paying the additional staff payroll and ammo bill for training officers to resolve such a situation.

-Edit- this post is already too long, but it’s relevant to note also that agency culture plays a big role here. DB has expressed before how several agencies have cultures which discourage officers from being proficient shooters. A member who gets good enough to perform in incidents like this risks being marginalized by the team and the management if they view gun proficiency as a “bad thing”. Hollywood makes it seem like hostage rescuers get positive credit for their actions- but in real life , it’s usually the opposite. If members feel like the bosses will toss them to the wolves if they take action, it’s going to have consequences in situations like these.

[Wayne Dobbs]

Somewhere in the upper floors of every urban informed agency HQ is a dude or dudette with an Excel spreadsheet showing the macabre cost benefit of training officers vs eating a lawsuit or a dead hostage/team member periodically. Not going to comment on the morality of the choice, but I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Someone did the math and determined the marginal and direct cost of the occasional dead hostage was lower then paying the additional staff payroll and ammo bill for training officers to resolve such a situation.

I believe that statement is absolutely true and I also believe in my black and white moral mind that those selfsame folks should burn in Hell for that stance if you lose an officer or citizen over it.

[TGS]

Ultimately , being a proficient shooter costs money. Doesn’t matter what profession the person is, being able to deliver a headshot period- to say nothing about a headshot from a handgun at range in a hostage situation- requires a level of skill that is above the willingness of most agencies to fund.

I'm not disagreeing with you, I just want to add some nuance:

"Funding" is a crutch. Even with funding, most LEOs at a given agency will not take advantage.

My agency has pretty decent pistol training in the academy well above what you can expect at an average police academy, and even more in follow on courses we have to take. We also have a 3 day pistol course that (atleast with the cadre who taught mine) is every bit as good as any private sector training I've attended, and each student is allotted 3000 rounds for the 3 days with a student:instructor ratio of 3:1 and only ever shooting at that ratio.

IIRC, we purchase somewhere between 20-30% over baseline ammunition amounts to issue as practice ammo. In the national capital region, we also have weekly proficiency fires at one of 4 different locations.....all you need to do is sign up. In addition, at qual they bring out a case of ammo to hand out to shooters. My last qual we had 8 people doing our full 5-gun qual, and the instructors brought out a full 1000 round case to hand out as proficiency ammo.

Not wanting to hog it all, I took my 2-box quota and waited until everyone had their turn before I indulged my gluttony for seconds. Guess how much of that 1000 round case I ended up taking? 950 rounds.

In current LE culture, an agency literally can't give away ammo to its LEOs. They won't take it, because they don't care. So when I hear "funding" being used as an excuse to why LEOs aren't as good as we hope they would be, it's something that slightly irritates me. Not that YOU are irritating me...….what irritates me is that LEOs don't give a shit, and until they do then all the funding in the world won't fix a cultural issue.

There are precious few PDs with cultures that still value shooting. Some of our instructors are super passionate about making agents the best gunfighters they can (we have two in particular that are phenomenal), but some others just want to blow through the course of fire and get out early themselves, and the old retired guys are typically more interested in being obnoxious old fucks mentally/emotionally stuck in the past. It's at all levels.

[Wayne Dobbs]

I'm not disagreeing with you, I just want to add some nuance:

"Funding" is a crutch. Even with funding, most LEOs at a given agency will not take advantage.

My agency has pretty decent pistol training in the academy well above what you can expect at an average police academy, and even more in follow on courses we have to take. We also have a 3 day pistol course that (atleast with the cadre who taught mine) is every bit as good as any private sector training I've attended, and each student is allotted 3000 rounds for the 3 days with a student:instructor ratio of 3:1 and only ever shooting at that ratio.

IIRC, we purchase somewhere between 20-30% over baseline ammunition amounts to issue as practice ammo. In the national capital region, we also have weekly proficiency fires at one of 4 different locations.....all you need to do is sign up. In addition, at qual they bring out a case of ammo to hand out to shooters. My last qual we had 8 people doing our full 5-gun qual, and the instructors brought out a full 1000 round case to hand out as proficiency ammo.

Not wanting to hog it all, I took my 2-box quota and waited until everyone had their turn before I indulged my gluttony for seconds. Guess how much of that 1000 round case I ended up taking? 950 rounds.

In current LE culture, an agency literally can't give away ammo to its LEOs. They won't take it, because they don't care. So when I hear "funding" being used as an excuse to why LEOs aren't as good as we hope they would be, it's something that slightly irritates me. Not that YOU are irritating me...….what irritates me is that LEOs don't give a shit, and until they do then all the funding in the world won't fix a cultural issue.

There are precious few PDs with cultures that still value shooting. Some of our instructors are super passionate about making agents the best gunfighters they can (we have two in particular that are phenomenal), but some others just want to blow through the course of fire and get out early themselves, and the old retired guys are typically more interested in being obnoxious old fucks mentally/emotionally stuck in the past. It's at all levels.

I'd be there fighting you for that practice ammo!

[GardoneVT]

I'm not disagreeing with you, I just want to add some nuance:

"Funding" is a crutch. Even with funding, most LEOs at a given agency will not take advantage.

My agency has pretty decent pistol training in the academy well above what you can expect at an average police academy, and even more in follow on courses we have to take. We also have a 3 day pistol course that (atleast with the cadre who taught mine) is every bit as good as any private sector training I've attended, and each student is allotted 3000 rounds for the 3 days with a student:instructor ratio of 3:1 and only ever shooting at that ratio.

IIRC, we purchase somewhere between 20-30% over baseline ammunition amounts to issue as practice ammo. In the national capital region, we also have weekly proficiency fires at one of 4 different locations.....all you need to do is sign up. In addition, at qual they bring out a case of ammo to hand out to shooters. My last qual we had 8 people doing our full 5-gun qual, and the instructors brought out a full 1000 round case to hand out as proficiency ammo.

Not wanting to hog it all, I took my 2-box quota and waited until everyone had their turn before I indulged my gluttony for seconds. Guess how much of that 1000 round case I ended up taking? 950 rounds.

In current LE culture, an agency literally can't give away ammo to its LEOs. They won't take it, because they don't care. So when I hear "funding" being used as an excuse to why LEOs aren't as good as we hope they would be, it's something that slightly irritates me. Not that YOU are irritating me...….what irritates me is that LEOs don't give a shit, and until they do then all the funding in the world won't fix a cultural issue.

There are precious few PDs with cultures that still value shooting. Some of our instructors are super passionate about making agents the best gunfighters they can (we have two in particular that are phenomenal), but some others just want to blow through the course of fire and get out early themselves, and the old retired guys are typically more interested in being obnoxious old fucks mentally/emotionally stuck in the past. It's at all levels.

It’s a leadership question, ultimately. We can’t expect everyone to be hung ho about shooting, any more then every cop should be gung ho about writing reports or how printer toner works. But ultimately the priorities of an agency are set by management, and management always funds what matters. If , hypothetically, management views it’s better for their careers and agency budget to have cops losing gunfights to thugs they’ll fund their agency accordingly. If the management conversely values their teams lives over media perception, they’ll motivate folks accordingly. Talk’s cheap- what they fund and encourage shows what matters to the bosses.

“Free day off to any officer who clears a perfect Dot Torture on this months quals”. Even the grumpy and uncaring like days off, no? While I’ve never served a day in a LE uniform, I’d guess those memos in the LAPD probably say “Free Day Off for anyone who takes racial bias training”.

[TCinVA]

In current LE culture, an agency literally can't give away ammo to its LEOs. They won't take it, because they don't care. So when I hear "funding" being used as an excuse to why LEOs aren't as good as we hope they would be, it's something that slightly irritates me. Not that YOU are irritating me...….what irritates me is that LEOs don't give a shit, and until they do then all the funding in the world won't fix a cultural issue.


It's tough to make people who are pretty sure it will never be them having to really fight unfuck their thinking and make better choices.

For years Ken Hackathorn had weekly range time available to guys from the agency he was a reserve in...and nobody on his department availed themselves of the opportunity to go out to Ft. Harmar and do some training with the guy.

This is one of the reasons why regular joe training classes are often refreshing to people who trained LE and military people...because the regular joes who shell out their own money to show up to a class at least have some level of buy-in to show up. It's one of the reasons why Tom Givens can take someone who has never used a holster before and get them passing the FBI qual almost at the instructor level in a 3 day class whereas the actual FBI struggles to get everybody through it with weeks of training.

Just as most citizens think lethal violence is something that happens rarely and only to other people, shitloads of cops live with the same delusion. It usually takes personal experience with tragedy, narrowly avoiding tragedy, or some excellent leadership (rarer than hen's teeth in any organization, sadly) to change that.

[KeeFus]

I'm not disagreeing with you, I just want to add some nuance:

"Funding" is a crutch. Even with funding, most LEOs at a given agency will not take advantage.

My agency has pretty decent pistol training in the academy well above what you can expect at an average police academy, and even more in follow on courses we have to take. We also have a 3 day pistol course that (atleast with the cadre who taught mine) is every bit as good as any private sector training I've attended, and each student is allotted 3000 rounds for the 3 days with a student:instructor ratio of 3:1 and only ever shooting at that ratio.

IIRC, we purchase somewhere between 20-30% over baseline ammunition amounts to issue as practice ammo. In the national capital region, we also have weekly proficiency fires at one of 4 different locations.....all you need to do is sign up. In addition, at qual they bring out a case of ammo to hand out to shooters. My last qual we had 8 people doing our full 5-gun qual, and the instructors brought out a full 1000 round case to hand out as proficiency ammo.

Not wanting to hog it all, I took my 2-box quota and waited until everyone had their turn before I indulged my gluttony for seconds. Guess how much of that 1000 round case I ended up taking? 950 rounds.

In current LE culture, an agency literally can't give away ammo to its LEOs. They won't take it, because they don't care. So when I hear "funding" being used as an excuse to why LEOs aren't as good as we hope they would be, it's something that slightly irritates me. Not that YOU are irritating me...….what irritates me is that LEOs don't give a shit, and until they do then all the funding in the world won't fix a cultural issue.

There are precious few PDs with cultures that still value shooting. Some of our instructors are super passionate about making agents the best gunfighters they can (we have two in particular that are phenomenal), but some others just want to blow through the course of fire and get out early themselves, and the old retired guys are typically more interested in being obnoxious old fucks mentally/emotionally stuck in the past. It's at all levels.

On the giving away ammo statement...it's true. We received a new chief last year and he has amped up the firearms training considerably. We have added two open range days a month and its the same 4 or 5 people showing up every session. Not that they aren't getting anything out of it because we work on different things, dependent on the officer. In my current position I have made a conscious effort to teach combat shooting techniques to the scant few that show up...most just aren't interested.

I have mentioned to them John Hearn's statement: "It's not the odds, its the stakes" to no avail. Its a mindset that I have never been familiar with and these newer officers have it bad.

[Peally]

Some days a part of me regrets not getting into LE work just because I can actually shoot and enjoy it, and running a police range sounds like a fun way to make some cash.

Shortly after I look at all the other parts of the job and I'm somewhat glad I didn't, but for a moment that regret is there ;)

[TGS]

“Free day off to any officer who clears a perfect Dot Torture on this months quals”. Even the grumpy and uncaring like days off, no? While I’ve never served a day in a LE uniform, I’d guess those memos in the LAPD probably say “Free Day Off for anyone who takes racial bias training”.

Funny enough, a warrant officer at Quantico's USMC Weapon's Training Battalion told me one time that the USMC's affection for marksmanship started in the early 1900s, when leadership took stock that we were terrible shots and offered incentive pay for any Marine qualifying at expert level or above.

So I guess that's where funding could play a part...if you made it incentivized over a course of decades so that the culture generally valued shooting. Several old practices incentivized it......honor grads at various schools being presented with custom-built sidearms, special pay, etc.

I got Distinguished Expert at FLETC along with another P-F.com member in my class, and we got an atta'boy letter. That doesn't incentivize good performance for people who aren't gunning for it to begin with.

[TCinVA]

Its a mindset that I have never been familiar with and these newer officers have it bad.

A friend of mine's son just got hired on a Sheriff's department not too far away.

His father and I were discussing LE hiring these days and his son said "They're looking for a very different kind of person these days, dad." His father retired as a police officer.

"Yeah..." I said "Except the bad guys haven't gotten any less violent or willing to kill someone in a uniform or an innocent member of the public. Violent crime is as prevalent today as it has ever been. If you believe that there aren't shitloads of people who would be perfectly happy to bash your fucking skull in on the side of some lonely road the second they think they can get away with it, keep fucking dreaming."

[mongooseman]

I know there were three officers firing at the same time, but it struck me that the rate of fire seemed high, to be shooting at a relatively small target. Especially with so much at stake.

[GardoneVT]

I know there were three officers firing at the same time, but it struck me that the rate of fire seemed high, to be shooting at a relatively small target. Especially with so much at stake.

http://gifimage.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/joker-here-we-go-gif-3.gif

[mongooseman]

"Yeah..." I said "Except the bad guys are more violent and willing to kill someone in a uniform or an innocent member of the public...."

There ya go: Fixed it for you.

[TCinVA]

and running a police range sounds like a fun way to make some cash.

Trying to make thoroughly uninterested people behave responsibly with a firearm...especially when it's nigh unto impossible to discipline some of them because of "diversity" concerns...is not really a lot of fun.

To give you some flavor of how it works, I was present at Blackwater when they had a contract to do training for ship defense for the naval base nearby. At lunch I had a chat with one of their instructors, a NSWG dude who was picking up money teaching at BW during some down time.

He had to use very specific terminology (high center mass, not "head") and describe things like a proper shooting stance in a way that wouldn't be potentially "offensive" to female sailors. (Legs shoulder width apart, for example, could be construed as sexist)

Running a range for a government agencies and contracts has rarely been described as "fun" by anyone I know of who did it. YMMV.

[mongooseman]

http://gifimage.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/joker-here-we-go-gif-3.gif

Sounded like controlled aimed fire to you?

[blues]

^^^I would never have believed, (back in the day), that "political correctness" could and would become the insidious cancer that has devoured many a fine department and agency if I hadn't seen and experienced it myself.

Common sense was the baby thrown out with the bath water.

[nwhpfan]

Maybe 1 cop should let the others know if somebody has to shoot, that they will be the shooter. As I understand in the knife hostage situation, the perp started killing her so they had to act.....with the hope of saving her.

People are moving a lot in this situation. A lot more than people think and a lot more than is often duplicated with a paper hostage target. A inch makes all the diference.

It is an extreme high level of skill to hit the upper A zone on a moving target from even 5 yards away.

As for a rifle, at this distance, would not be my choice. Would limit perifphial, mobility, transitions.

I would expect the accuracy capability of a rifle and handgun at 7 yards to be neutral.

[HCountyGuy]

A friend of mine's son just got hired on a Sheriff's department not too far away.

His father and I were discussing LE hiring these days and his son said "They're looking for a very different kind of person these days, dad." His father retired as a police officer.

"Yeah..." I said "Except the bad guys haven't gotten any less violent or willing to kill someone in a uniform or an innocent member of the public. Violent crime is as prevalent today as it has ever been. If you believe that there aren't shitloads of people who would be perfectly happy to bash your fucking skull in on the side of some lonely road the second they think they can get away with it, keep fucking dreaming."

So many LEAs looking for the perfect on paper hires that have never had to deal with a serious problem and/or have no experience to lend to decision making in the field. Hell when I got put out of the hiring process for the agency I was an Explorer at because I “didn’t fit their desired psychological profile” I knew it was because they’re not looking for somebody willing to dominate a violent criminal with violence of their own. The Major who told me to apply wasn’t fond of having to drop me because of such BS, but the Chief and Mayor there are a bit out of touch with reality anyway.

Too many departments want to let firearms training, or any UOF training for that matter, take a backseat to “sensitivity training”. Who the hell cares why Dindu is trying to stab or shoot victim A or Officer B? At that point the only effective communication is to overcome their violence with your own. Let the actions talk and quit pleading for reasoning from someone who doesn’t give a rat’s ass about anything but their street cred.

Society in general needs to get off this “violence is bad no matter what” zero tolerance crap. It’s parroted by those who have never had to deal with violence due to those who go out and combat the violent criminals to keep them away from the doorstep of those privileged morons.

[TCinVA]

Maybe 1 cop should let the others know if somebody has to shoot, that they will be the shooter.

The kind of coordination required to make that happen is massive and not easily achieved by patrol officers who aren't training together regularly to make that happen.

Getting people to respond appropriately under lethal levels of stress is difficult as hell and requires shitloads of training.



I would expect the accuracy capability of a rifle and handgun at 7 yards to be neutral.

The handgun can get the job done at 7 yards.

The typical person shooting one, however...

A long gun is much easier to get a clean, fight-stopping hit with, especially when you are talking about entangled problems like this one.

[TCinVA]

Society in general needs to get off this “violence is bad no matter what” zero tolerance crap.

"Violence is never the answer!"

The fuck it ain't.

Sometimes violence is the best answer.

[HCountyGuy]

"Violence is never the answer!"

The fuck it ain't.

Sometimes violence is the best answer.

Brings to mind Tim Larkin’s teachings.

“Violence isn’t always the answer. But when it is, it’s the only answer.”

[JHC]

I know there were three officers firing at the same time, but it struck me that the rate of fire seemed high, to be shooting at a relatively small target. Especially with so much at stake.

I don't see how insufficient training infuses an individual with the belief that they can make high speed low probability shots. If anything it should reinforce their suck.

If they shot while he was out in front of the woman, with "just a knife" they'd have been crucified I suppose.

[41magfan]

I'm not going to critique their response or tactics other than to make the observation that all or most of those officers lacked the skill necessary to attempt those shots at that speed. I'm not convinced a rifle would have yielded a better result when you consider the issue of offset coupled with a similar level of trigger snatching.

[HCountyGuy]

Maybe 1 cop should let the others know if somebody has to shoot, that they will be the shooter. As I understand in the knife hostage situation, the perp started killing her so they had to act.....with the hope of saving her.

People are moving a lot in this situation. A lot more than people think and a lot more than is often duplicated with a paper hostage target. A inch makes all the diference.

It is an extreme high level of skill to hit the upper A zone on a moving target from even 5 yards away.

As for a rifle, at this distance, would not be my choice. Would limit perifphial, mobility, transitions.

I would expect the accuracy capability of a rifle and handgun at 7 yards to be neutral.

I’m not sure the dynamics of the situation were very conducive to establishing the “designated shooter” on-site.

As for your thoughts on a rifle in the situation, I would have to disagree. With the right optic, you’re not going to lose any peripheral view. As for mobility, out in the open maneuvering with a rifle ain’t hard. As for transitioning, are you talking switching targets (there was only one) or switching tools? If the latter, the person with the rifle is on the rifle, period. If something else needs to be used, let the others handle it.

And in regards to shooting a handgun or rifle accurately at that distance, a rifle is always going to be easier to shoot. It’s not a matter of the tool’s precision, but the user.

Wasn’t there a hostage save not long ago where an officer popped the dipshit in the head with a load of Federal Flight Control?

[TCinVA]

I’m not sure the dynamics of the situation were very conducive to establishing the “designated shooter” on-site.

As for your thoughts on a rifle in the situation, I would have to disagree. With the right optic, you’re not going to lose any peripheral view. As for mobility, out in the open maneuvering with a rifle ain’t hard. As for transitioning, are you talking switching targets (there was only one) or switching tools? If the latter, the person with the rifle is on the rifle, period. If something else needs to be used, let the others handle it.

And in regards to shooting a handgun or rifle accurately at that distance, a rifle is always going to be easier to shoot. It’s not a matter of the tool’s precision, but the user.

Wasn’t there a hostage save not long ago where an officer popped the dipshit in the head with a load of Federal Flight Control?

https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b7a_1519440723

[nwhpfan]

I see more of an issue with people who set the bar too low; the lack of quality training; and unqualified instructors.

Cops divying up responsiblities, assigning tasks in tactical situations is fairly routine.

[andre3k]

Are you talking about the one in January? If so, that was a little different....the kidnapping victim grabbed an agent's rifle during entry and was pulling on it when he got shot.

I fully acknowledge there could have been another more recently that I'm not aware of.That's the one I'm talking about.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[Hambo]

They won't take it, because they don't care.

Sad, but true.


Even the grumpy and uncaring like days off, no?

That's why they burn sick time.


We had paid monthly range time. Double bonus, right? Paid to shoot other people's ammo. On a good day 25% might have come out. Overall the average was probably much lower.

[nwhpfan]

I’m not sure the dynamics of the situation were very conducive to establishing the “designated shooter” on-site.

As for your thoughts on a rifle in the situation, I would have to disagree. With the right optic, you’re not going to lose any peripheral view. As for mobility, out in the open maneuvering with a rifle ain’t hard. As for transitioning, are you talking switching targets (there was only one) or switching tools? If the latter, the person with the rifle is on the rifle, period. If something else needs to be used, let the others handle it.

And in regards to shooting a handgun or rifle accurately at that distance, a rifle is always going to be easier to shoot. It’s not a matter of the tool’s precision, but the user.

Wasn’t there a hostage save not long ago where an officer popped the dipshit in the head with a load of Federal Flight Control?

I'm just talking about my preference based on my own capabilites and experience; and the challenges I would expect to face in such a situation; 5 yards?. Somebody else may have a different take based on their experience and their capabilites.

[Wayne Dobbs]

I'm just talking about my preference based on my own capabilites and experience; and the challenges I would expect to face in such a situation; 5 yards?. Somebody else may have a different take based on their experience and their capabilites.

I work hard on pistol shooting and am a solid shooter (others here will verify that), but even though that's a doable pistol shot, I would ALWAYS use a rifle if there was time to deploy one and one was available. As has been stated, a rifle will forgive the trigger yanking that a pistol won't. And, you can designate roles and restrictions if there's some training and common sense in play. If they know to deploy a deadly force officer with a less lethal system, you can designate shooter(s) for situations like this. It's not rocket science, but solid teamwork and discipline.

[psalms144.1]

Every agency has issues. Let's be completely serious - most agencies are cash strapped and struggling to make ends meet. We want our officers/agents to have quality training, but that costs money, and, possibly more importantly, TIME. How many hours per week/month/year are you going to take what percentage of your officers off the street to train? Then factor out folks on leave, sick leave, away for formal training/education and you can rapidly run out of folks to do the primary mission of responding to calls, investigating crimes, etc.

The only way to break that paradigm is to increase manning, so you can eat more folks at the range/shoot house/driving course/writing classes/whatever on any given day/shift and still cover the mission. Guess what's the MOST expensive part of any LE agency? Personnel. Getting more qualified people into the ranks is so freaking tough that my agency, which has at any given time about 4,000 folks competing for vacancies, can't keep our billets filled. And guess what happens at the end of every FY when we're under strength? We get reduced in manning...

So, really, is it any wonder that MOST supervisors are more worried about response times/report timeliness than marksmanship and tactics?

I'm NOT excusing any of this thought process - if I were King of the Universe, shit would be WAY, WAY different. But, I'm not, so I have to live with the shit hand I'm dealt.

I'm saying this as a 18 year Federal LE firearms instructor, defensive tactics instructor, and driving instructor. And, I spend about 8 hours a month, total, doing anything training related - 4 hours of which is driving to the training site, preparation, etc. The other 192 hours a month that I work, I'm expected to be making cases and turning in good paper on a timeline.

So, how do we fix this? Frankly, never gonna happen, because the folks that pay our salaries (hint - I'm talking about the tax payers and city/state/federal politicians) don't give a fuck about our training, unless/until it DIRECTLY affects them.

Wow - that was a rant. So, on the shooting in question, I'm 98.99% certain that current political climate made those officers hesitant to use force, which DIRECTLY led to the deaths of the subject and his hostage. The right force aggressively applied earlier would have stopped him before he got back into arm's reach of the hostage. Still a shit situation, though - LOTS of issues with "backstop and beyond" in that scenario...

[Erick Gelhaus]

Random thought, but does LAPD actually issue or allow patrol rifles? I could be totally off base on this, but I was under the impression that their regular patrol guys got shotguns and maybe some of the supervisors got rifles at best.

They allow personally owned patrol rifles. They have a solid program.

[Erick Gelhaus]

Outside of Metro who has them? Patrol supervisors used to have them, but have they issued them to patrol officers?

Yes and they even allow personally owned patrol rifles for officers.

[HCountyGuy]

When budget constraints prevent adequate UOF training, that’s one thing. It’s a whole different thing when said training is de-prioritized for “cultural sensitivity” or “ending racial bias” training.

[41magfan]

Just a side note:

The 800 lb gorilla in the room is the fact that much of the "urgency" of the situation was largely created by the manner of their response. A fair number of people are casually standing around in very close proximity to the knife guy until the PoPo shows up, which leads me to believe this wasn't that big of a deal (in their minds at least) up to that point. When the guns come out and the shouting starts, they scurry like rats obviously but up to that point, the scene was nothing resembling chaos.

I've been on calls like this many times where the dynamic of ratcheting things up or down was somewhat under my control, based on my response to the situation. Keeping things low key initially (no shouting, no aggressive movements, etc) will quite often let you create some element of containment and with it some good angles of fire. With that your options (lethal and non-lethal) can then be put to effective use if it becomes necessary.

Taking charge and maintaining control of a situation doesn't often have to take place in any particular time frame so creating an exigency where one does not otherwise exist is NOT the way to stay ahead of the curve.

[nwhpfan]

I work hard on pistol shooting and am a solid shooter (others here will verify that), but even though that's a doable pistol shot, I would ALWAYS use a rifle if there was time to deploy one and one was available. As has been stated, a rifle will forgive the trigger yanking that a pistol won't. And, you can designate roles and restrictions if there's some training and common sense in play. If they know to deploy a deadly force officer with a less lethal system, you can designate shooter(s) for situations like this. It's not rocket science, but solid teamwork and discipline.

I put a priority on being able to accurately observe the actions of people involved and the location of body parts. I also take into consideration the possibility of closing, going hands on, or going to contact. People can set up drills with a rifle or pistol using UTM’s and come to their own conclusions for themselves on which works better for them. I think I've seen a video of you shooting - but it might have been a revolver. If you are more comfortable with a rifle in this situation, you are better to make that decision than anyone else.

[nwhpfan]

I've been on calls like this many times where the dynamic of ratcheting things up or down was somewhat under my control, based on my response to the situation. Keeping things low key initially (no shouting, no aggressive movements, etc) will quite often let you create some element of containment and with it some good angles of fire. With that your options (lethal and non-lethal) can then be put to effective use if it becomes necessary.

Taking charge and maintaining control of a situation doesn't often have to take place in any particular time frame so creating an exigency where one does not otherwise exist is NOT the way to stay ahead of the curve.

100%

And much of the training, especially FOF is unrealistic or doomsday scenarios. Or you have roll-players that don't act like "actual" drunk people with mental illness. I cannot agree with you more with your statement regarding your own experience.

[jnc36rcpd]

I frequently read criticism by advocacy groups of police shouting commands at the mentally ill to drop weapons or get on the ground. I suspect there is some truth to that based on my interactions with mentally ill subjects. The approach suggested by 41magfan has a lot of validity.

The problem, in general and in this case, is the actual approach. Officers approaching closer than shouting distance are probably approaching the charge-and-reach range of the offender. One counter would be to have lethal and less-lethal weapons drawn, but that raises the possibility of amping up the offender.

That said, realistic training is the key, but creating and running realistic scenarios like this is much more difficult and time-consuming than many departments are willing to fund--until the media deems the next OIS inappropriate.

[Totem Polar]

To take on one of the spin-off discussions going on in this thread directly, this idea of some good percentage of cops not being assed enough to take advantage of free training that could save lives (including theirs) is not a cop thing, it’s a people thing.

Last year the secretary in a dept I work with sent out a notice that the institution (university) was offering free first aid training. It turned out it was 20+hours, and included a pretty good overview, including TQ use, AED hands-on, etc. I didn’t know how good it would be at the time, I just saw "free first aid training" and signed right the fuck up.

You know who else signed up out of 45+ eligible people? Just the secretary who sent the email. So it was me and her taping the contacts on the AED training dummy and then doing damage to resusca annie after doing all the online stuff.

The upshot is that I now have an AED bolted to the wall right outside my office, and free access to all sorts of surplus bandages and stuff from the accident prevention people, just because I bothered to show up.

Anyhoo... back to experts talking about LE training priority. I’ll go back to lurker mode. Well, I’ll go back as soon as I post this link here for the umpteenth time it’s been posted here over the years by folks, because TC just reminded me of it. And the essay always makes me happy:

http://www.jack-donovan.com/axis/2011/03/violence-is-golden/



"Violence is never the answer!"

The fuck it ain't.

Sometimes violence is the best answer.

[Chuck Haggard]

A few thoughts;

Violence solved Hitler. I love to tell the "violence is never the answer" folks that one and watch their reaction.


One can not count on officers to attend training off the clock, they must be made to train hard while on the clock. This is driven by the leadership and instructors. If the troops aren't trained it's a leadership failure, period.

Shooting at the classic "hostage target" on the range and shooting at real people are two very different things. In hundreds of runs through scenarios in FoF I've noted that coppers who try to lay off a few yards and make a head shot very often shoot the hostage, due to the bad guy pulling the hostage into the officer's bullet/s. The same dynamics that Dr Lewinski so famously explained as to why suspects often get shot in the back are at play here.
The solution is team tactics and a contact or near contact headshot.

[Lon]

The solution is team tactics and a contact or near contact headshot.

This is pure gold. When he moved to the women and put the knife to her neck I kept thinking as I watched it “close the gap and contact shot”.

I do think that the current political climate, especially in Cali, played a part in what happened.


The 800 lb gorilla in the room is the fact that much of the "urgency" of the situation was largely created by the manner of their response. A fair number of people are casually standing around in very close proximity to the knife guy until the PoPo shows up, which leads me to believe this wasn't that big of a deal (in their minds at least) up to that point.

I’m gonna have to disagree with you on this. Don’t forget people are fucking stupid. You’re talking about the same people that would more than likely walk right through your felony traffic stop.

Taking a lower urgency approach I can see and totally agree may be appropriate if it was just a man with a knife call. But not when you’re told he’s stabbed someone already and you can see at least 2 handicapped folks well within striking distance of bad guy. I give them huge props for going with the bean bag gun to start and to LAPD for having them readily available to Joe Patrol Guy. Feel bad for those dudes. Hope they don’t get sacrificed on the altar of political expediency.

[11B10]

This is pure gold. When he moved to the women and put the knife to her neck I kept thinking as I watched it “close the gap and contact shot”.

I do think that the current political climate, especially in Cali, played a part in what happened.



I’m gonna have to disagree with you on this. Don’t forget people are fucking stupid. You’re talking about the same people that would more than likely walk right through your felony traffic stop.

Taking a lower urgency approach I can see and totally agree may be appropriate if it was just a man with a knife call. But not when you’re told he’s stabbed someone already and you can see at least 2 handicapped folks well within striking distance of bad guy. I give them huge props for going with the bean bag gun to start and to LAPD for having them readily available to Joe Patrol Guy. Feel bad for those dudes. Hope they don’t get sacrificed on the altar of political expediency.



Lon, I agree with your thoughts, but I fear that in today's "it's gotta be the cop's fault" atmosphere, you just know these guys are in for a rough time. Logic and common sense need not apply.

[GardoneVT]

Lon, I agree with your thoughts, but I fear that in today's "it's gotta be the cop's fault" atmosphere, you just know these guys are in for a rough time. Logic and common sense need not apply.

Let the games begin:

https://www.google.com/amp/www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-hostage-claim-20180801-story.html%3foutputType=amp

Summary: hostage’s family are filing suit against the city, and are further alleging the knife wound from the hostage taker wasn’t life threatening.

[STI]

Summary: hostage’s family are filing suit against the city, and are further alleging the knife wound from the hostage taker wasn’t life threatening.

I have a serious curiosity how lawyers like this one representing the family can go to sleep at night with what they've done.

[Sigfan26]

I have a serious curiosity how lawyers like this one representing the family can go to sleep at night with what they've done.

Can you clarify a bit more on the statement?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Paul D]

Questions for LEO's. In this situation when both the suspect and hostage are clearly down and no longer an active threat, what is the typical medical protocol? I can understand handcuffing the suspect and wait until EMS arrives. How about the hostage? Do you start immediate medical care (be it applying pressure or deploying a TQ?) or wait for EMS because usually that is not SOP due to lack of any medical training?

[blues]

I have a serious curiosity how lawyers like this one representing the family can go to sleep at night with what they've done.

They hang upside down in their closets like all the other bloodsucking vampires.







(No offense intended toward the many fine attorneys on this forum. I've had the pleasure of working with many fine attorneys on both sides of the courtroom.)

[Lon]

Questions for LEO's. In this situation when both the suspect and hostage are clearly down and no longer an active threat, what is the typical medical protocol? I can understand handcuffing the suspect and wait until EMS arrives. How about the hostage? Do you start immediate medical care (be it applying pressure or deploying a TQ?) or wait for EMS because usually that is not SOP due to lack of any medical training?

I think a lot of it depends on the level of training the LEOs have had. Most agencies around here still provide only basic first aid training to their guys. They MAY have some TQ training, but that’s it.

More “progressive” agencies, which I think my agency falls in this category, provide the equipment and training that goes beyond just throwing on a TQ. Each of our officers are trained to use everything in our GSW/trauma kits and would be expected to use them on anyone that was injured. I would be extremely pissed if my guys did nothing but stand around and wait for a squad. Especially for the hostage. They should be getting treated and it may be a “load n go” if the squad was more than a minute or two away.

[STI]

Can you clarify a bit more on the statement?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The premise from the article as I read it is that the family deserves compensation because the lady would have survived the throat cutting if she weren't shot, according to the opinion of a doctor at the hospital. Other details in the article say that the lawyer is advancing the idea that the responding officers turned it into a fast moving situation and thus they are responsible for the fact that shooting was necessary at all, and hence responsible for the lady being shot.

Last I checked that's called victim blaming.

The situation was definitely a shit sandwich, and so was the result - at the same time I don't think it's reasonable to accuse LAPD of being responsible for the results here. I think the lawyer's platform is unethical and I don't understand how he'd be okay with his own morals or lack thereof, advancing this as his argument in court.

[Sigfan26]

The premise from the article as I read it is that the family deserves compensation because the lady would have survived the throat cutting if she weren't shot, according to the opinion of a doctor at the hospital. Other details in the article say that the lawyer is advancing the idea that the responding officers turned it into a fast moving situation and thus they are responsible for the fact that shooting was necessary at all, and hence responsible for the lady being shot.

Last I checked that's called victim blaming.

The situation was definitely a shit sandwich, and so was the result - at the same time I don't think it's reasonable to accuse LAPD of being responsible for the results here. I think the lawyer's platform is unethical and I don't understand how he'd be okay with his own morals or lack thereof, advancing this as his argument in court.

Got it. Makes sense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Erick Gelhaus]

Questions for LEO's. In this situation when both the suspect and hostage are clearly down and no longer an active threat, what is the typical medical protocol? I can understand handcuffing the suspect and wait until EMS arrives. How about the hostage? Do you start immediate medical care (be it applying pressure or deploying a TQ?) or wait for EMS because usually that is not SOP due to lack of any medical training?

Today, with some/many agencies having adopted TCCC and issued the related equipment, there's an expectation that as soon as one can approach safely - that they do and begin treating the victims, hostages, suspects, etc. CalPOST is now pushing TCCC instead of 1st Aid; however in the med area I do not know what LAPD patrol officers are taught.

[andre3k]

Plenty of free training is available is you know where to look. I especially like the Regional Counter Drug centers. They dont offer weapons training but the narcotics related classes and TCCC courses will apply to most officers. I took a five day search warrant execution class at RCTA free of charge. Turned out to be five days of room clearing, searching, and breaching using sims. Skills that any officer can use. I would never get five days of in depth training like that at my agency. Your housing and food is also covered for classes at RCTA.

[Coyotesfan97]

Questions for LEO's. In this situation when both the suspect and hostage are clearly down and no longer an active threat, what is the typical medical protocol? I can understand handcuffing the suspect and wait until EMS arrives. How about the hostage? Do you start immediate medical care (be it applying pressure or deploying a TQ?) or wait for EMS because usually that is not SOP due to lack of any medical training?


Priority of Life
1 Victim
2 Uninvolved Citizen
3 Officer
4 Suspect

I’d separate the victim from the suspect, suspect is handcuffed, I’d treat the victim the best I could, Suspect waits for another Officer or EMS. The victim gets my full attention and whatever medical kit I need to treat him/her. I’ve got quite a bit stored in my Tahoe. The suspect gets whatever another Officer can provide.

I start whatever immediate first aid I can provide whether it’s atourniquet, halo, or combat gauze. I don’t wait for EMS.

[11B10]

Let the games begin:

https://www.google.com/amp/www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-hostage-claim-20180801-story.html%3foutputType=amp

Summary: hostage’s family are filing suit against the city, and are further alleging the knife wound from the hostage taker wasn’t life threatening.


Excuse me, if I am understanding this - read it somewhere, the bg was moving the knife in a "sawing motion." So, the knife wound wasn't "life threatening" - YET! Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[Hambo]

This is pure gold. When he moved to the women and put the knife to her neck I kept thinking as I watched it “close the gap and contact shot”.

I thought this video was of a different shooting, so I saw it cold in the link. My first thoughts when they pulled up and drew pistols were, "You've got a lot of people in the line of fire."

As far as contact shots go, if they'd saved the hostage, it would be the suspect's family crying that LAPD executed him.

[JHC]

https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b7a_1519440723


Irving, TX 2016


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LqMg1Bk1HU&feature=youtu.be

[Wayne Dobbs]

Irving, TX 2016


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LqMg1Bk1HU&feature=youtu.be

That one is in my and Darryl's backyard (about three miles from his home) and that one was a Patrol response also. Bit of a different ending from a very busy and fairly solid PD.

[lwt16]

Not only do we not train nearly enough for this, but there is the aspect of officers being too prideful to ask for help from solid shooters to improve their skills behind the sights. I have been known for years at my agency as "the guy" to go see for FREE help. I have, for years, offered to help anyone if they could work around my free time and provide their own ammunition.

Only a few have took me up on the offer.....and then it was only when they were facing losing their shields from lack of qualifying.

This situation.....training for this takes time and money for ammo. Nobody wants to pay for it and nobody wants to practice as they would have to clean their guns, they might sweat a little, others might see how pathetic they run a gun, etc. None of this will change in the future.....at least not in my neck of the woods.

I try to get out of the car on every "armed subject" call with the rifle in hand. I and just a few others are of that mindset. We are in the process of equipping every sworn cop with a rifle but we don't have optics for the night time guys/gals. We are in the process now of remedial rifle training to teach people to flip up their rear sight as at the last qual, nobody was hitting anything and after days and days of this, some instructor figured out they weren't flipping up the rear sight and just using the front post.

As far as medical treatment, I'm sure most here would try to do something for the hostage but again....we rarely train in such endeavors. So it would be, more than likely, a hosed up attempt unless one of our more savvy guys showed up.

This video..........this video right here......is why I lay out my own cash to train. This is why I'll drop to the deck and do push ups to failure (pushing 49 years of age) and then engage targets with an elevated heart rate. This video is why I'll go shoot in downpours, blistering cold, or punishing heat.

I don't want to have to dive into something like this, believe me. But I don't choose what comes across the radio and I want to be ready if, God forbid, it does come my way.

That way, I'll be confident in my abilities to put rounds in eye sockets rather than an 8 inch circle or the head part of a Q target. My room for error in tenths rather than inches.

I've got too many mirrors in my house to put one in a hostage. It could still happen to me too even though I put a grand worth of ammo down range per year and train hard on my own dime and time. I pray it doesn't.

Terrible. I hated seeing that lady soak up a round and fall. It motivates me to buy more B8 repair centers and spend the 300.00 I have saved up on more ammo rather than a new pistol.

Regards.

[Wayne Dobbs]

A few thoughts;

Violence solved Hitler. I love to tell the "violence is never the answer" folks that one and watch their reaction.


One can not count on officers to attend training off the clock, they must be made to train hard while on the clock. This is driven by the leadership and instructors. If the troops aren't trained it's a leadership failure, period.

Shooting at the classic "hostage target" on the range and shooting at real people are two very different things. In hundreds of runs through scenarios in FoF I've noted that coppers who try to lay off a few yards and make a head shot very often shoot the hostage, due to the bad guy pulling the hostage into the officer's bullet/s. The same dynamics that Dr Lewinski so famously explained as to why suspects often get shot in the back are at play here.
The solution is team tactics and a contact or near contact headshot.

This....

[Wayne Dobbs]

Not only do we not train nearly enough for this, but there is the aspect of officers being too prideful to ask for help from solid shooters to improve their skills behind the sights. I have been known for years at my agency as "the guy" to go see for FREE help. I have, for years, offered to help anyone if they could work around my free time and provide their own ammunition.

Only a few have took me up on the offer.....and then it was only when they were facing losing their shields from lack of qualifying.

This situation.....training for this takes time and money for ammo. Nobody wants to pay for it and nobody wants to practice as they would have to clean their guns, they might sweat a little, others might see how pathetic they run a gun, etc. None of this will change in the future.....at least not in my neck of the woods.

I try to get out of the car on every "armed subject" call with the rifle in hand. I and just a few others are of that mindset. We are in the process of equipping every sworn cop with a rifle but we don't have optics for the night time guys/gals. We are in the process now of remedial rifle training to teach people to flip up their rear sight as at the last qual, nobody was hitting anything and after days and days of this, some instructor figured out they weren't flipping up the rear sight and just using the front post.

As far as medical treatment, I'm sure most here would try to do something for the hostage but again....we rarely train in such endeavors. So it would be, more than likely, a hosed up attempt unless one of our more savvy guys showed up.

This video..........this video right here......is why I lay out my own cash to train. This is why I'll drop to the deck and do push ups to failure (pushing 49 years of age) and then engage targets with an elevated heart rate. This video is why I'll go shoot in downpours, blistering cold, or punishing heat.

I don't want to have to dive into something like this, believe me. But I don't choose what comes across the radio and I want to be ready if, God forbid, it does come my way.

That way, I'll be confident in my abilities to put rounds in eye sockets rather than an 8 inch circle or the head part of a Q target. My room for error in tenths rather than inches.

I've got too many mirrors in my house to put one in a hostage. It could still happen to me too even though I put a grand worth of ammo down range per year and train hard on my own dime and time. I pray it doesn't.

Terrible. I hated seeing that lady soak up a round and fall. It motivates me to buy more B8 repair centers and spend the 300.00 I have saved up on more ammo rather than a new pistol.

Regards.

We need to bottle and sell this attitude and practice of being ready for hard times. You clearly are unqualified for any boss positions in most American LE agencies today with an attitude like that and that's plain wrong. All of this de-escalation and pandering to various idiot fringe special interest groups is starting to be paid for in the blood of cops and citizens alike. It's going to go on for some time and this time, I wonder if the pendulum will swing back?

[lwt16]

You clearly are unqualified for any boss positions in most American LE agencies today


Thank God.

Regards.

[Jason M]

Not only do we not train nearly enough for this, but there is the aspect of officers being too prideful to ask for help from solid shooters to improve their skills behind the sights. I have been known for years at my agency as "the guy" to go see for FREE help. I have, for years, offered to help anyone if they could work around my free time and provide their own ammunition.

Only a few have took me up on the offer.....and then it was only when they were facing losing their shields from lack of qualifying.

This situation.....training for this takes time and money for ammo. Nobody wants to pay for it and nobody wants to practice as they would have to clean their guns, they might sweat a little, others might see how pathetic they run a gun, etc. None of this will change in the future.....at least not in my neck of the woods.

I try to get out of the car on every "armed subject" call with the rifle in hand. I and just a few others are of that mindset. We are in the process of equipping every sworn cop with a rifle but we don't have optics for the night time guys/gals. We are in the process now of remedial rifle training to teach people to flip up their rear sight as at the last qual, nobody was hitting anything and after days and days of this, some instructor figured out they weren't flipping up the rear sight and just using the front post.

As far as medical treatment, I'm sure most here would try to do something for the hostage but again....we rarely train in such endeavors. So it would be, more than likely, a hosed up attempt unless one of our more savvy guys showed up.

This video..........this video right here......is why I lay out my own cash to train. This is why I'll drop to the deck and do push ups to failure (pushing 49 years of age) and then engage targets with an elevated heart rate. This video is why I'll go shoot in downpours, blistering cold, or punishing heat.

I don't want to have to dive into something like this, believe me. But I don't choose what comes across the radio and I want to be ready if, God forbid, it does come my way.

That way, I'll be confident in my abilities to put rounds in eye sockets rather than an 8 inch circle or the head part of a Q target. My room for error in tenths rather than inches.

I've got too many mirrors in my house to put one in a hostage. It could still happen to me too even though I put a grand worth of ammo down range per year and train hard on my own dime and time. I pray it doesn't.

Terrible. I hated seeing that lady soak up a round and fall. It motivates me to buy more B8 repair centers and spend the 300.00 I have saved up on more ammo rather than a new pistol.

Regards.

And sadly this essential mindset cultivated into a professional LE way of life garners negative attention from administration. This doesn’t mean a change in practice for the individual but it does mean that other officers aren’t exposed to him/her as much during on the clock training. It sets the stage for the special interest PC narrative to become the prevailing message resulting in the inevitable decrease in combative mindset/skill set.

[blues]

The last few posts regarding mindset and preparedness reminded me of how few people used the agency provided gym facilities even when allotted time to do so during their work week.

I'll be 66 this year and I feel guilty when I miss a lifting session...or conditioning session for that matter. And no one is paying me to do it. I do it because I've been doing it for over 40 years and it's part of my DNA.

I can't count how many years I've been looking at LEOs around the country that don't look like they could run further than the counter of the nearest burger joint.

If there are no standards, how can they be enforced?

[psalms144.1]

I've told these stories before, but it bears repeating on cops/agents and training:

1. Agent #1 - young, fit, former military. Tells me I'm training my agents "wrong" because I'm demanding MORE accuracy from them. "Any hit on paper is a good hit" - this is what he was told at his basic (FLETC). He informs me if we're not wearing full kit, and running from piece of cover to piece of cover while shooting "fast," I'm setting agents up to die on the streets. Also, apparently, all gunfights start immediately after doing pushups. We're a plain clothes investigative federal agency. Except for 90+ guys on our part time tactical team, no one is even issues kit or a long gun. But, because he doesn't want to put in the work of being able to hit a 3x5 on demand for a valid CNS shot, I'm doing it wrong. Because YouTube, you know.

2. Agents #2, #3, and #4 - not young, not fit. Fail qualification REPEATEDLY (two of them even before we increased our passing score from 210 to 240). In accordance with instruction, I notified their supervisors, who are supposed to: (1) document the failure in their personnel file and (2) put them on a 90-day remediation including weekly firearms training until they can qualify. None of these agents were ever written up, none of them ever remediated. They did requalify with another instructor who's grading system is "more forgiving," and miraculously went from shooting 180-190 out of 300 to 240+.

3. By policy, we're required to dedicate one 8-hour training day per year (sigh) to Force on Force training. This policy went into effect in 2012. It's now 2018, and I have been provided precisely FUCK ALL equipment to conduct FOF training (safety equipment, training weapons/ammunition, etc). I was told there was one (1) Red Man suit available for role player wear, if I want to drive 7 hours to pick it up...

Have I mentioned that I'm WELL within 2 years of punching out?

[psalms144.1]

If there are no standards, how can they be enforced?Our Physical Fitness Test (semiannual) is PARTICIPATORY. That means if someone shows up, gets in the front leaning rest, then rolls over onto their back to start the situp, then walks/crawls 1.5 miles, they've met the requirements. There are standards, but, because of the way our hiring process works, they can't be enforced. And, it's too hard to change the PDs into actual standards, so, nothing changes.

In the past 10+ years, I've repeatedly offered the following suggestions:

PT - Score and Excellent in all 4 events - 8 hours off; score Very Good or better in all 4 events - 4 hours off

Qualification - Score 300 on qual - 8 hours off; Above 270 - 4 hours off

Know what I've been told? That's too much incentive, and we can't afford to give people that much time off. BUT, we'll give them all the sick leave they need when they're out with heart attacks, etc...

[blues]

Know what I've been told? That's too much incentive, and we can't afford to give people that much time off. BUT, we'll give them all the sick leave they need when they're out with heart attacks, etc...


Too much incentive for the (probably less than a) handful of folks who might actually accept the challenge and rise to it. That's just sad.

Any excuse is a good excuse to do nothing.

[mongooseman]

Not only do we not train nearly enough for this, but there is the aspect of officers being too prideful to ask for help from solid shooters to improve their skills behind the sights. I have been known for years at my agency as "the guy" to go see for FREE help. I have, for years, offered to help anyone if they could work around my free time and provide their own ammunition.

Only a few have took me up on the offer.....and then it was only when they were facing losing their shields from lack of qualifying.

This situation.....training for this takes time and money for ammo. Nobody wants to pay for it and nobody wants to practice as they would have to clean their guns, they might sweat a little, others might see how pathetic they run a gun, etc. None of this will change in the future.....at least not in my neck of the woods.

I try to get out of the car on every "armed subject" call with the rifle in hand. I and just a few others are of that mindset. We are in the process of equipping every sworn cop with a rifle but we don't have optics for the night time guys/gals. We are in the process now of remedial rifle training to teach people to flip up their rear sight as at the last qual, nobody was hitting anything and after days and days of this, some instructor figured out they weren't flipping up the rear sight and just using the front post.

As far as medical treatment, I'm sure most here would try to do something for the hostage but again....we rarely train in such endeavors. So it would be, more than likely, a hosed up attempt unless one of our more savvy guys showed up.

This video..........this video right here......is why I lay out my own cash to train. This is why I'll drop to the deck and do push ups to failure (pushing 49 years of age) and then engage targets with an elevated heart rate. This video is why I'll go shoot in downpours, blistering cold, or punishing heat.

I don't want to have to dive into something like this, believe me. But I don't choose what comes across the radio and I want to be ready if, God forbid, it does come my way.

That way, I'll be confident in my abilities to put rounds in eye sockets rather than an 8 inch circle or the head part of a Q target. My room for error in tenths rather than inches.

I've got too many mirrors in my house to put one in a hostage. It could still happen to me too even though I put a grand worth of ammo down range per year and train hard on my own dime and time. I pray it doesn't.

Terrible. I hated seeing that lady soak up a round and fall. It motivates me to buy more B8 repair centers and spend the 300.00 I have saved up on more ammo rather than a new pistol.

Regards.

I could have pretty much wrote the above. The only difference is that our people, especially prepping for the academy, have been willing to come out to the range. Some of our jail personnel that aren't certified, but just want to become proficient have spent a few sessions at the range with me. It's likely that I'll be at the range anyway, so I don't mind passing what little I know on.

I'm at a small department (around 30 sworn) and I shoot more on my own than the rest of the department combined. About four years to full retirement and it's a 50/50 that I'll make it.

[Hambo]

This is a two part problem. On the civilian side, most of the time they want Officer Happy Face doing lip sync challenge in his cruiser, saving puppies, and buying homeless people lunch. Then when the shit hits they want a hard man who can shoot to Delta standards. In the PD you have slackers who want the benefits and are afraid to get in fights, plus a few officers who hunt trouble but then get hammered by admin.

The solution is to have unarmed happy officers driving around in Geek Squad cars looking for fun opportunities to interact with the public, and hard cases with guns hunting real trouble. You would lose a few Geek Squad officers to random violence, but at least they wouldn't make anyone unhappy or shoot the wrong people.

:D Have a happy day! We hope you enjoyed your police service!

[blues]

^^^I like your style, Hambo. :cool:

[BehindBlueI's]

In current LE culture, an agency literally can't give away ammo to its LEOs. They won't take it, because they don't care. So when I hear "funding" being used as an excuse to why LEOs aren't as good as we hope they would be, it's something that slightly irritates me. Not that YOU are irritating me...….what irritates me is that LEOs don't give a shit, and until they do then all the funding in the world won't fix a cultural issue.

Recent conversation:

That Guy (TG): I wish we could go the range any time and practice, not just a few hours here and there.
Me: You can shoot pretty much any Friday all day until 3p.
TG: Yeah, but *any* day.
Me: If you call they can usually let you shoot during lunch at in-service or recruit training. Sometimes after hours if it's just recruits.
TG: Yeah, but any time.
Me: They at least give us free practice ammo and make it as easy as they can given the volume of shooters they deal with. I'm out there most Fridays. I've never seen you at the range.
TG: *shuts up*

[lwt16]

One other aspect of this comes to mind.....at least on a personal level.

Over the last 23 years, I could have shot a lot of people. I never did even though I would have been justified in all of them.

I think what carried me through all of that was my absolute, indisputable aggression and quickness to do violence on my fellow man. Once the situation was handled....either by verbal commands with my mean voice, or by going hands on once it was safe to do so.......I was just as quick to "turn it off" and go back to normal.

That aggression.........we don't "hunt" that in people who show up to try out for the gig like we used to. I often tell people that were I to apply now the same way I applied at my first agency, I would probably have not been hired.

But policing often requires aggression and a gutter rough way of talking and carrying one's self. Those on the streets don't respect nor do they understand anything else as that is quite often all that they have known their entire lives. Pulling up and asking "Sir, please do " this and that.....just doesn't translate like "UP AGAINST THE BRICKS MOTHERSCRATCHER!"

The last guy I dealt with that I could have shot was a call of a white guy sleeping in the back of a SUV. My partner and I show up, partner flanks the guy's SUV, while I go around back to get a bead on the guy. The complainant had stated he had a needle sticking out of his arm and that there was a "big knife" next to him.

I clear the open hatchback and see the guy passed out. Right arm with a dirty needle in it, left hand underneath him. Big giant machete with a saw back on it.....right next to that hidden arm. My partner covers him while I holster up and take my collapsible baton, holding it upside down, and I give him a good rap on his ankle bone with it to wake him from his stupor.

Guy pops up..........hand still concealed beneath him.

Me: "Show me that hand, butthole! Do it now!"

Him: no response as he looks to the left and sees my partner's Glock pointed at his skull.

Me: "SHOW ME THAT HAND NOW CORKSOAKER!"

Him: nothing

Well, at this point, since I am old and too close to retirement to get needle nor machete stuck....I grab both ankles and snatch his narrow tail out the back window as he screams for help. I'm over six foot and 230 pounds and he was methed up about 160 soaking wet.

He flies out the back window to the ground/pavement below with a sickening thud. The baggie of meth he was clutching to wasn't a weapon after all and once he was cuffed up, I went right back to "Okay, what is your name sir?" as I was needing that for the warrant check.

My point of that story is that the new guy's body cam footage is just the opposite. Lots of "Please do this" times 10 and nothing happening but the bad guy getting bolder and bolder. That's what the department wants. Until something bad happens and a hostage goes down.

The way I was taught was to have a hardness about you, to handle business that needs to be handled, and to make it so the next cop that deals with the guy won't have anything but pleasantness shown to him or her by the guy. It's a lost art.....and it's not likely to ever come back since our rookies have "performance anxiety" when it comes to having their body cam footage reviewed.

So being violent, at least in my experience, without being abusive has saved far more people from being shot by my sidearm. The Lord has blessed me with the ability to know when to turn it on and more importantly, especially in this day and age....when to turn it OFF. There's no need for abuse nor heavy handedness once the cuffs are on.

There's also no sport in that. It's no way to treat people.

But, if someone is going to hurt me or someone else, I'm going to hurt them first and with full strength.......in policy.

It's worked well for 23 years.

Regards.

[Totem Polar]

All this talk of push ups to failure at 49, and lifting and PT at 49-66 makes me point out that walker lady McNoshoot was reportedly 49. I didn’t expect that. I don’t want to beat up the victim in all of this, but it’s possible that sticking around while a large EDP rants and waves a bloody kitchen knife isn’t the first bad life decision she’s made.

Of course, there could be a lot more to her story, and I certainly don’t know. I’m just saying that 49 surprised me.

[lwt16]

Lots of people 49 and younger that can't get around like they used to.

My wife (RN) reminds me of that often when I whine about how bad my hands hurt after 3 or 4 hundred rounds of pistol shooting.

On the flip side, lots of times I've been on scenes rifled up and bystanders coming up to me asking if I can sign their fix it ticket. Morons.

[STI]

I don’t want to beat up the victim in all of this, but it’s possible that sticking around while a large EDP rants and waves a bloody kitchen knife isn’t the first bad life decision she’s made.

Agreed, morning quarterback mode engaged -

She could have drastically changed the engagement by moving towards the line of cops and directly away from the suspect, even at walker speed, during the time where bean bags were being used. Would have given a lot more room and options for Chuck's rush/contact shot solution as well.

[HCountyGuy]

Over the last 23 years, I could have shot a lot of people. I never did even though I would have been justified in all of them.

I wish more people understood that when they cry out about how police are trigger-happy murderers. I surmise that if the police shot everyone they had complete justification to do so, you’d probably need a news channel devoted 24/7 to covering those incidents.

[parkerjake]

I appreciate this thread. Lots of thoughtful info here. Ultimately, I believe we, as citizens and taxpayers, get the policing we demand. Unfortunately, those on the fringe who complain loudest get the most attention, especially when lawsuits are involved. So, this question: what can we as informed citizens do to turn this trend around? I am grateful for the work cops do, and I for one don't expect them to be social workers.

[blues]

Over the last 23 years, I could have shot a lot of people. I never did even though I would have been justified in all of them.


I wish more people understood that when they cry out about how police are trigger-happy murderers. I surmise that if the police shot everyone they had complete justification to do so, you’d probably need a news channel devoted 24/7 to covering those incidents.

Well said, gentlemen.

I think about this a lot when I go over in my mind the multiple occasions on entries, arrests or chases where I might have, (legally), but didn't because I still felt in control. (Usually narcotics related...as we didn't respond, even on the joint task forces, to the same call outs as the locals would ordinarily...unless assisting.)

Even going hands on and rolling around, I once told a partner I saw about to crown the miscreant with a radio, "Don't!" and "I got this".
He backed off and I had less paperwork and explaining in court to do.

Other times, if time and circumstance allowed I handed my gun to my partner in case the guy I was going to approach got the better of me in a tussle.

And once I just tossed the cuffs to the guy and told him to put 'em on because he was way too big for me and I'd shoot him before giving him a chance to crush me. He just laughed and put 'em on and the situation got somewhat defused.

There are lots of tools available but you have to know which ones you are comfortable working with. Not being the biggest baddest MF around I'm glad to have been able to find some that worked for me during 20+ years in NYC and South FL.

[HCountyGuy]

And once I just tossed the cuffs to the guy and told him to put 'em on because he was way too big for me and I'd shoot him before giving him a chance to crush me. He just laughed and put 'em on and the situation got somewhat defused.

See now that kind of negotiating is a bit of a lost art. Verbal Judo at it’s finest!

[Chuck Haggard]

Ref the idea that the coppers ramped this one up, it's my understanding that they were called because dude had already stabbed somebody.

[STI]

Ref the idea that the coppers ramped this one up, it's my understanding that they were called because dude had already stabbed somebody.

I believe the 911 call was from staff at the church building who witnessed him cutting his girlfriend.

[blues]

See now that kind of negotiating is a bit of a lost art. Verbal Judo at it’s finest!

Fortunately it worked. I told him I didn't want to have to shoot him. He looked in my eyes and believed me. The thing I found out over the years was that being brutally honest (yet respectful) worked for me. Interestingly, I've had some of them stand up in court and tell the judge that they were treated fairly and respectfully by me. It was a good feeling, especially considering the source and the circumstances.

I'd tell them what was going to happen if they fucked with me or tried to escape or injure me during transport. (I was often alone with a defendant in the middle of the night transporting after an arrest. We had no cages in our unmarked vehicles so I cuffed them in back and had them sit up front with me, gun on my support hand side.)

I did the same during interrogations, but there I used whatever I could to outwit them, which usually led to a confession.

It really just comes down to what works. I was a good shooter, especially during my SRT days, but not the best. I was a better than average fighter, but far from the best (or the biggest). Quick thinking was usually my best ally...and a belief that I could accomplish my mission.

All that said, I've never worked with the sorts of monsters many of you in uniform have had to roll up on. I've arrested murderers, but they weren't psychopaths or sociopaths. So, I never forget that there is a large matter of degree involved...and luck. Some we make, and some we are subject to.

[Kukuforguns]

I have a serious curiosity how lawyers like this one representing the family can go to sleep at night with what they've done.

Do you really want an answer to that or are you just frustrated?

[STI]

Do you really want an answer to that or are you just frustrated?

Mine was a rhetorical question and frustrated

[willie]

Is it true that a big lard ass fat guy might be very strong and therefore hard to handle?

[blues]

Is it true that a big lard ass fat guy might be very strong and therefore hard to handle?

Doesn't that go without saying? (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2014/dec/04/i-cant-breathe-eric-garner-chokehold-death-video)

[lwt16]

Is it true that a big lard ass fat guy might be very strong and therefore hard to handle?

They greasy so that don't help either. lol

The skinny, wiry, meth and crack head females are the ones I hate. Wiggle right out of cuffs, fight like vikings, hard to deal with without hospitalizing them.

Good look in someone's eyes usually was a good crystal ball of telling what was coming.......regardless of size.

[TC215]

Good look in someone's eyes usually was a good crystal ball of telling what was coming.......regardless of size.

Along with how much of their clothes they've removed.

[Hot Cereal]

Along with how much of their clothes they've removed.

Truth. Naked man= roll your sleeves up.

This incident looks a lot like sympathetic fire. It is sad and unfortunate the hostage was killed by LAPD bullets. To me, this incident stresses the importance of training, good equipment (pistol and sights), and knowing how to communicate. I need to watch the body cam again and listen more closely for their communication.

This incident also drives home how incredibly stupid it is to allow people who can only score 70% on painfully easy qualification courses to carry a gun. When I watch quals and see people with 3,4 or 5 rounds off target and it looks like a shotgun hit the target, yet somehow they scored 92% I get sick to my stomach. I don't know these guy's qual scores, but it would be interesting to find out.

[txdpd]

Breezed through the thread.

The woman in the video was on a walker, her being there probably has less to do with being dumb and a whole lot more to do with lack of mobility.

There's a fine line between hostages and human shields, it's all about the outcome that the bad guy decides.

That said, it was suspect with a knife holding an old woman hostage. Either commit to doing something or back off, the bad guy was anchored in place with that hostage. If he wanted to attack officers with the knife, he's not going to be able to take her along as a shield.

[parkerjake]

One thing I'm curious about in this video, as well as others I've seen, is why the officer keeps repeating "drop the knife?" Even after the perp is bleeding out on the ground, the officer repeats, "drop the knife." I can say with experience from dog training that repeating a command (sit, stay, down, whatever) gets you nowhere. The dog realizes he can safely ignore the command. On the other hand, if a command is given once, and if there is a consequence for not obeying, the dog catches on very quickly and does what is expected. Now, I realize that people aren't dogs, and maybe there's no relevance to dog training, but I suspect that an immediate consequence for non compliance would have produced an entirely different outcome in this case. The question is how to enforce compliance, and that relates to the timing of the command, the proximity of the person issuing the command to the perp, and, above all, to the issue of exactly what will you do if the command is disregarded. The point is that to keep repeating the command is the least effective solution.

[Wayne Dobbs]

One thing I'm curious about in this video, as well as others I've seen, is why the officer keeps repeating "drop the knife?" Even after the perp is bleeding out on the ground, the officer repeats, "drop the knife." I can say with experience from dog training that repeating a command (sit, stay, down, whatever) gets you nowhere. The dog realizes he can safely ignore the command. On the other hand, if a command is given once, and if there is a consequence for not obeying, the dog catches on very quickly and does what is expected. Now, I realize that people aren't dogs, and maybe there's no relevance to dog training, but I suspect that an immediate consequence for non compliance would have produced an entirely different outcome in this case. The question is how to enforce compliance, and that relates to the timing of the command, the proximity of the person issuing the command to the perp, and, above all, to the issue of exactly what will you do if the command is disregarded. The point is that to keep repeating the command is the least effective solution.

There are a couple of possible answers to repeating commands over and over:

1. The guy is simply "stuck in the loop" after a traumatic event and his brain isn't running cognitively anymore. John Hearne can articulate that issue well.
2. LE folks are taught to repeat commands over and over for the stage play they're in. The various cameras in play, both LE's and the public's, are recording what is hopefully, your attitudes of trying to gain compliance. The problem is as you stated, that repeating commands that aren't heeded, is quite useless and makes your responses to force compliance less effective and focused.

And finally, I think your concept of immediately using an appropriate level of force on somebody who is clearly illegal in their actions and non compliant to lawful orders is where we should be. I think it's cleaner and certainly would get communicated in the turd community that actions have consequences, and quickly. I'll go even further and say that if you have an asshole involved in a high level assault, just take the action without using commands, especially in deadly force scenarios. That's very old school and not modern, but these issues have remained the same for literally thousands of years in the human race. Modern technology and training aren't really doing much good against pure old cave man deadly conduct.

Back in the 60s and 70s, the Dallas PD began what were the equivalent of the NYPD Stakeout Squad's ops against armed robbers. Their findings were that issuing a challenge to an in progress robber resulted in a gunfight. Not issuing a challenge to those same assholes resulted in a shooting. There's something to be learned there, I think.

[41magfan]

In my opinion (based on my experience), the best use of a verbal challenge (practically, tactically and legally) is when a person's intent may be in question, i.e. everyone that might be holding a weapon isn't necessarily an existential threat. Outside of that, it's a wasted effort and too often just ends up being a needless distraction.

I think it's safe to say my take on that is obviously the minority view.

[OlongJohnson]

I've never been an LE, but I did live in the LA area for just shy of two decades. "Contagion fire" is so prevalent in OIS stories that make the news in that area that it's widely assumed by civilians to be approved protocol. One wonders whether growing up with that idea for the 15 years or so of memory-forming sentience that precedes the academy creates a default in the lizard brain.

[blues]

And finally, I think your concept of immediately using an appropriate level of force on somebody who is clearly illegal in their actions and non compliant to lawful orders is where we should be. I think it's cleaner and certainly would get communicated in the turd community that actions have consequences, and quickly. I'll go even further and say that if you have an asshole involved in a high level assault, just take the action without using commands, especially in deadly force scenarios. That's very old school and not modern, but these issues have remained the same for literally thousands of years in the human race. Modern technology and training aren't really doing much good against pure old cave man deadly conduct.

Wayne, it's quite refreshing to my ears to hear this perspective being advocated.

In the early days of my training this was considered acceptable practice and was the mindset instilled by the trainers at various academies and advanced courses.

We hadn't yet learned the more advanced "run away" technique.

[SoCalDep]

Training is one thing... Actually paying attention, giving effort, maintaining skill, and building mindset are much more influential on performance.

Without getting too deep into the details prior to sufficient amounts of coffee, our academy trains that commands are important but over-used in most cases. We train to use simple commands ("Don't Move!") in a loud, firm, but IN CONTROL tone and repeat them once. If you don't shut up, you can't process information and the situation effectively. We also train that when it's time to shoot it is NOT time to be issuing commands... If you think the commands will work, why are you shooting? I know of several agencies that train to yell "Drop the gun" every time they shoot in training. Drives me nuts.

This is not to say one shouldn't issue commands if feasible, and issuing commands following the shooting to gain compliance once the threat is stopped is certainly important because the ultimate goal is to gain control.

[GardoneVT]

There are a couple of possible answers to repeating commands over and over:

1. The guy is simply "stuck in the loop" after a traumatic event and his brain isn't running cognitively anymore. John Hearne can articulate that issue well.
usands of years in the human race. Modern technology and training aren't really doing much good against pure old cave man deadly conduct.


We circle back to the agency management. When the public is better prepared to use violence then the police are, it’s not the officers’ fault- it is the bosses’. Until the folks with gold on their uniforms are held accountable, this will not change.

[Redhat]

Training is one thing... Actually paying attention, giving effort, maintaining skill, and building mindset are much more influential on performance.

Without getting too deep into the details prior to sufficient amounts of coffee, our academy trains that commands are important but over-used in most cases. We train to use simple commands ("Don't Move!") in a loud, firm, but IN CONTROL tone and repeat them once. If you don't shut up, you can't process information and the situation effectively. We also train that when it's time to shoot it is NOT time to be issuing commands... If you think the commands will work, why are you shooting? I know of several agencies that train to yell "Drop the gun" every time they shoot in training. Drives me nuts.

This is not to say one shouldn't issue commands if feasible, and issuing commands following the shooting to gain compliance once the threat is stopped is certainly important because the ultimate goal is to gain control.

*DELETED*

Quoted wrong post

[Redhat]

Wayne, it's quite refreshing to my ears to hear this perspective being advocated.

In the early days of my training this was considered acceptable practice and was the mindset instilled by the trainers at various academies and advanced courses.

We hadn't yet learned the more advanced "run away" technique.

Do you (or Wayne) think giving continuous commands when it's time to act divides the attention too much when there might be more important things to concentrate on?

[Hambo]

Wayne, it's quite refreshing to my ears to hear this perspective being advocated.

In the early days of my training this was considered acceptable practice and was the mindset instilled by the trainers at various academies and advanced courses.

So much so that I recall one trainer saying that anything after three ignored commands was begging the suspect to quit. That's probably why my blood pressure rises when I see officers giving endless unheeded commands. If the suspect wants to call your bluff, he should find out what happens next.

[blues]

Do you (or Wayne) think giving continuous commands when it's time to act divides the attention too much when there might be more important things to concentrate on?

I'm going to defer for the most part to the uniforms who have or had to deal with this on a day in, day out basis.

For example, on SRT we were constantly calling out to one another whether a zone was hot or not, (or similar, these techniques changed over the years), and if a subject was encountered they were given orders and if they weren't complied with immediately they went down by force and were flexicuffed. There wasn't time lost to repeated commands. It was more or less wham, bam, thank you ma'am.

On the street, we were sometimes backed up by uniforms but mostly it was just us, and any other state, local and federal working with us, all in plain clothes. In those cases I occasionally found myself one on one with either a target who had fled, or otherwise was encountered in the absence of backup...

...I know for a fact that in one or more instances I called for the subject to show me his hands more than once, and in at least one case that comes to mind I was already putting early pressure on the trigger when he went to his pockets for some unknown and unexplained reason. Finally, he realized it was not going to end well for him and he came out empty handed and that was the end of it.

So, I don't think it's necessarily a problem to repeat a command in a more aggressive fashion as long as one doesn't get caught up in a loop of doing so and not prepare for or initiate the next sequence of action required. I always tried to be thinking ahead and preparing for what might be necessary in the event things took a turn for the worse.

As I say, this is an area that the P.D. and sheriff's deputies would run into more routinely than we would on a daily basis so I think they're in a better position to answer from sheer number and volume of encounters.

[Wayne Dobbs]

Do you (or Wayne) think giving continuous commands when it's time to act divides the attention too much when there might be more important things to concentrate on?

Absolutely. When it's time to talk, talk. When it's time to fight, fight.

[blues]

Absolutely. When it's time to talk, talk. When it's time to fight, fight.

Better answer. In many less words.

[Lon]

There are a couple of possible answers to repeating commands over and over:


Awesome post.

We’re doing active shooter training for our agency and the local SO next week and I guarantee we will have guys that go into vaporlock and keep repeating ineffective commands instead of taking Tuco Ramirez’ advice:

28684

[Redhat]

Absolutely. When it's time to talk, talk. When it's time to fight, fight.

I got a chuckle out of this...essentially the same thing my Grandfather taught me when I was about 6 years old.

I did notice, back in the day when I attended UoF training, I always felt more prepared to act when I wasn't the one giving commands.

[txdpd]

The real reason for loud repeated verbal commands, isn't compliance from the suspect, it's so that nearby witness can hear the police giving repeated verbal commands.

The same people that now complain about the police yelling at people, are the same types that used to complain that the police were beating suspects into custody without giving them verbal commands. It's not secret that it doesn't work, but when you tailor training to appease the fringe elements of society, you get predictable results.


Another good reason is that in an actual physical fight people have a tendency to hold their breath, you can't yell and hold your breath.

[Reid Henrichs]

Guys,

I did a breakdown of the situation via video released by the LAPD. The point is not to criticize or deride the LEOs, as I am a former one myself. I wanted people--both LE and non-LE-- to learn the mistakes, analyze their OWN shooting capabilities, good tactics (and there are some in this video) bad tactics, and what their line will be when confronted by a bad guy with a blade. This is not an armchair quarterback deal. I simply wanted to give others some information about what some options are in the event they are in a similar situation.

I do not envy the boys in blue in this incident. And I understand their hesitation in today's climate. I also understand firearms handling rule#4, and this situation really drives that home. It also drives home speed vs. accuracy. This incident may prompt a new drill in class. Hope some here can get some value from the vid. Have a good weekend guys.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLGzjqXvhAY

[jnc36rcpd]

I think there is an argument for repeated commands that falls well short of being caught in a loop. As referenced, we want to establish that we have issued the commands for witnesses and recording devices. More importantly, however, suspects may have some degree of auditory exclusion or simply not hear or understand us due to environmental conditions, poor hearing, or language barriers. (Of course, the way to make anyone understand English is to keep repeating what was said louder.:rolleyes:)

I don't think there is an absolute number of commands that should be mandated (which would be pretty foolish) and I think if the suspect has not obeyed the first several commands, he or she is unlikely to obey the next ten or twenty. I also think there are times to take action without warning or after a single command.

On one occasion, on of my shift mates was dealing with a disruptive and annoying handcuffed prisoner who was, however, not resistive or assaultive. When he told the prisoner to "Quiet down! I'm not going to tell you again!", I immediately commented "Yes, you are." The officer considere that for a moment and then remarked "Yeah, you're right, Sarge. I guess I am."

[Sherman A. House DDS]

I think there is an argument for repeated commands that falls well short of being caught in a loop. As referenced, we want to establish that we have issued the commands for witnesses and recording devices. More importantly, however, suspects may have some degree of auditory exclusion or simply not hear or understand us due to environmental conditions, poor hearing, or language barriers. (Of course, the way to make anyone understand English is to keep repeating what was said louder.:rolleyes:)

I don't think there is an absolute number of commands that should be mandated (which would be pretty foolish) and I think if the suspect has not obeyed the first several commands, he or she is unlikely to obey the next ten or twenty. I also think there are times to take action without warning or after a single command.

On one occasion, on of my shift mates was dealing with a disruptive and annoying handcuffed prisoner who was, however, not resistive or assaultive. When he told the prisoner to "Quiet down! I'm not going to tell you again!", I immediately commented "Yes, you are." The officer considere that for a moment and then remarked "Yeah, you're right, Sarge. I guess I am."

John Murphy says something in his classes to the effect of, “Nobody in the history of calming down has actually ever calmed down when someone tells them, repeatedly, to CALM DOWN!” That’s pretty true, and the same could go for the myriad of LE commands we give.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jnc36rcpd]

True. I agree that calmer commands generally work better in most cases. You're more understandable and appear, to both the bad guy and the public, to be in command. You also can amp up the aggressiveness as needed.

[John Hearne]

"Stuck in a loop" makes a lot of sense by way of explanation. I'd also offer that it may be an inability to develop any other option. If the officer's subconscious evaluates the shooting problem and contrasts it with the officers known skills, it may reach the conclusion - we can't do this. In light of no shooting option, or anything else, the subconscious just leaves the verbal response running.

[blues]

"Stuck in a loop" makes a lot of sense by way of explanation. I'd also offer that it may be an inability to develop any other option. If the officer's subconscious evaluates the shooting problem and contrasts it with the officers known skills, it may reach the conclusion - we can't do this. In light of no shooting option, or anything else, the subconscious just leaves the verbal response running.

Interesting. Incorporating fear of the consequences into that loop would seem to fit as well.

[John Hearne]

Interesting. Incorporating fear of the consequences into that loop would seem to fit as well.

At the risk of sounding utterly conceited, anyone with a serious interests in these topics really needs to hear my 8 hour talk. It's the most current research as well as a pretty solid model for how the mind works. It sounds long but, the presentation moves along fast enough to keep you engaged.

If you are a "why" person, you will love it. If you aren't, not so much. Some sick people have sat for multiple sessions without significant brain damage.

[Wayne Dobbs]

At the risk of sounding utterly conceited, anyone with a serious interests in these topics really needs to hear my 8 hour talk. It's the most current research as well as a pretty solid model for how the mind works. It sounds long but, the presentation moves along fast enough to keep you engaged.

If you are a "why" person, you will love it. If you aren't, not so much. Some sick people have sat for multiple sessions without significant brain damage.

And I'm one of the sick ones. The presentation is full of excellent and useful information. If you carry a gun or teach folks who do, you must hear John's presentation.

[Rex G]

No audio or video recording exists, to remind me how many commands I issued, in June 1993. I do not remember saying anything, though I remember the visual part well enough. One colleague’s official statement reported that I said “BACK OFF” and “DROP THE KNIFE,” before the shot, with no indication I repeated anything. I do remember using “BACK OFF” on previous occasions, so that part adds up.

I will emphasize, I did not recall saying anything to the actor. I wonder if some officers are consciously unaware that they have issued the commands, and therefore repeat them? I do believe it would be fixable, with training, which is why I am bringing it up.

Edited to add: I removed some details from my original version of this post. Even though it was been over 25 years, I decided I would rather not present a newer, and therefore, more-easily-searchable, narrative.

[BehindBlueI's]

No audio or video recording exists, to remind me how many commands I issued, in June 1993. I do not remember saying anything...

I had a similar incident, although audio did exist. I would have went to IA and testified I said nothing if I hadn't listened to my own audio first. Our conscious brain is busy with lots of other things, so the subconscious runs the trained response for other tasks that aren't deemed as critical to survival. In another incident that culminated in a shooting I did not give any commands and did so purposefully. I could hear other officers giving commands but couldn't fully process them due to auditory exclusion, made the decision to not give any commands in case mine conflicted with theirs.

[LtDave]

In my one and only shooting, I heard nothing that came over the police radio once the shooting started. I was shocked how much radio traffic there had been and I was totally unaware of it. My Sergeant was also on scene throughout the whole incident and it was if he disappeared, so focused on the bad guy I was.

[BehindBlueI's]

In my one and only shooting, I heard nothing that came over the police radio once the shooting started. I was shocked how much radio traffic there had been and I was totally unaware of it. My Sergeant was also on scene throughout the whole incident and it was if he disappeared, so focused on the bad guy I was.

I've mentioned before that I was so focused on the guy I had just shot that when an officer I had known for years, on and off duty, tugged on the shoulder of my armor and I looked at him but did not recognize him. I let him move me a few feet to the side because I saw the uniform and accepted he was a good guy. I didn't know it was him who'd moved me until several days later when he stopped by my house to check on me.

[JAD]

At the risk of sounding utterly conceited, anyone with a serious interests in these topics really needs to hear my 8 hour talk. It's the most current research as well as a pretty solid model for how the mind works. It sounds long but, the presentation moves along fast enough to keep you engaged.

If you are a "why" person, you will love it. If you aren't, not so much. Some sick people have sat for multiple sessions without significant brain damage.

I’ve trained a lot, for a hobbyist, with some incredible guys. Hearne’s eight hours is among the most valuable I’ve received.

[John Hearne]

I’ve trained a lot, for a hobbyist, with some incredible guys. Hearne’s eight hours is among the most valuable I’ve received.

That's another $20 I owe you - I"m not sure I can keep this up. :)

Seriously thought, thanks, I appreciate it.....

[OldRunner/CSAT Neighbor]

I’ve trained a lot, for a hobbyist, with some incredible guys. Hearne’s eight hours is among the most valuable I’ve received.

I'm w/ JAD, been very fortunate to train under some of the best IMO but only caught John @ my one & only Rangemaster/Polite Society get together, which was the last one in Memphis. Sat. thru 8 hours & would do it again, now if only DB & Wayne could entice you to visit them for a HITs presentation, I'd be on it like a fat kid on cake.

[Duces Tecum]

Don’t forget people are fucking stupid.

Sig line.

[TQP]

And I'm one of the sick ones. The presentation is full of excellent and useful information. If you carry a gun or teach folks who do, you must hear John's presentation.

I found the information to be applicable to firefighting as well. I think it would be useful for any profession/activity where you're operating under a similar level of life threat.

I have only seen the presentation once (PEP4), but this thread did prompt me to pull out the handout material and start reading it again. So far I am not more brain damaged than I was when I started. YMMV.

[GyroF-16]

I'm w/ JAD, been very fortunate to train under some of the best IMO but only caught John @ my one & only Rangemaster/Polite Society get together, which was the last one in Memphis. Sat. thru 8 hours & would do it again, now if only DB & Wayne could entice you to visit them for a HITs presentation, I'd be on it like a fat kid on cake.


Oh, yeah...

Sign me up if that can be arranged.

[Dave Williams]

http://internationaltacticalmedia.com/?p=1530&utm_source=Newsletter+-+August+2018&utm_campaign=August+%2718+newsletter&utm_medium=email

[HCountyGuy]

http://internationaltacticalmedia.com/?p=1530&utm_source=Newsletter+-+August+2018&utm_campaign=August+%2718+newsletter&utm_medium=email

What a shameless business plug that was for them...

[Dagga Boy]

What a shameless business plug that was for them...

In most cases, yes. In their case, they have done epic training on those resolutions in that area, for that agency and with multiple successes. Like most folks like Scotty, they were tossed like bath water post retirement, training discounted and standards previously established lowered or removed and the results of those decisions have come to pass. Scotty has dedicated a lifetime training that agency with an unbridled passion and used equipment he developed for training at ITTS to train officers for success in difficult problems. This is not a case of some dude with a training school commenting on something they don’t really know about and the “what I would do” syndrome rearing it’s ugly head. My training on those hostage systems taught by the same folks resulted in the successful resolution to several hostage situations when that info was passed down to my people.
As far as the media. Scotty is the go to for many media outlets in LA and he has done exemplary work in helping pass on the complexities and realities of police use of force. It is a voice in an area where it is hard to get positive LE outlooks. It has taken a lot of work for establishing a decent relationship with the press in this regard.

My take....want to think it is a bad action and not take the training from ITTS, then that is a choice. From someone who has sweated that hostage rack and difficult hostage scenarios at ITTS, I ll will gladly take the open spot.

[HCountyGuy]

In most cases, yes. In their case, they have done epic training on those resolutions in that area, for that agency and with multiple successes. Like most folks like Scotty, they were tossed like bath water post retirement, training discounted and standards previously established lowered or removed and the results of those decisions have come to pass. Scotty has dedicated a lifetime training that agency with an unbridled passion and used equipment he developed for training at ITTS to train officers for success in difficult problems. This is not a case of some dude with a training school commenting on something they don’t really know about and the “what I would do” syndrome rearing it’s ugly head. My training on those hostage systems taught by the same folks resulted in the successful resolution to several hostage situations when that info was passed down to my people.
As far as the media. Scotty is the go to for many media outlets in LA and he has done exemplary work in helping pass on the complexities and realities of police use of force. It is a voice in an area where it is hard to get positive LE outlooks. It has taken a lot of work for establishing a decent relationship with the press in this regard.

My take....want to think it is a bad action and not take the training from ITTS, then that is a choice. From someone who has sweated that hostage rack and difficult hostage scenarios at ITTS, I ll will gladly take the open spot.

Fair enough, perhaps I spoke out of turn.

My apologies.

[Pit]

S Reitz, like many of us old heads, is probably "let down" by his department's abandoning of the training based on lessons learned. The current managers at many law enforcement agencies discount these standards as "the old days". Instead they adopted new "minimum standards" so everyone "qualified". Like a participation trophy.

But Reitz may be hesitant to poor mouth the department to the public as the troops are trying to do the best they can with little backing from management. There are very few leaders left in many mid - large agencies. Politics has corrupted many a department. Job assignments and promotions are based on perceived loyalty vs. ability. My opinion based on observation.

As S. Reitz stated - "Students cannot train to a minimal standard and expect positive results when an entirely different and significantly upgraded standard is required." However that is the expectation from their bosses.

JW

[Dagga Boy]

Fair enough, perhaps I spoke out of turn.

My apologies.

A lot of outfits have tried to capitalize on bad situations with no real experience or expertise, so in most cases you would have been right. I just wanted to set the record straight that this wasn’t one of those cases. I can guarantee the underlying motivation of ITTS’s statement was really to get working cops up to his place to work hard at things like the hostage rack that is, like real life, very difficult and hard to negotiate. Better to know what your capabilities are and be confident and tested than to find out the hard way that it ain’t like tv and movies.

[GardoneVT]

What a shameless business plug that was for them...

In his book and other interactions with the media long before this exact event, Reitz has made this point before.

[Erick Gelhaus]

http://internationaltacticalmedia.com/?p=1530&utm_source=Newsletter+-+August+2018&utm_campaign=August+%2718+newsletter&utm_medium=email

I have zero issue with his commentary. Have been a student of his several times and have hunted down his thoughts on various incidents previously. His reference to the consulate event has significant foundation based on training with him. He's right.

[Dagga Boy]

I ll make this simple as I generally stayed out of this thread for a reason. This kind of stuff is an abject failure of leadership on multiple levels. The first starts at the political and administrative levels of government and police agencies as an absolute failure to train. Lowering standards and convincing everyone that “minimums” are perfectly acceptable for the demands of the job is criminal level incompetence-period. The stresses and demands on today’s cops are over the top with near perfection level expectations of utopian conflict resolution minus the needed training for those demands. The next failure is personal leadership in figuring out that the no cop left behind training standards is unacceptable at a personnel level and fixing it on your own. Both parties share in the blame. One for simply failing at the most basic aspect of command and leadership and the other for believing that those folks who set agency training standards have your best interest at heart.

I would often get off graveyard shift, drive an hour to ITTS, pay to train all day and go back to work. It sucked, it was not how it should be, but my “minimum standards” differed greatly from my bosses and co workers.

[Hambo]

I would often get off graveyard shift, drive an hour to ITTS, pay to train all day and go back to work. It sucked, it was not how it should be, but my “minimum standards” differed greatly from my bosses and co workers.

I'm a little slow, so it took me a long to time understand that most people are perfectly OK with being mediocre, or even incompetent, at what they do. A friend of mine joked that anything over 70% was wasted effort, but that's the unspoken credo of a lot of people.

[HCountyGuy]

A friend of mine joked that anything over 70% was wasted effort, but that's the unspoken credo of a lot of people.

I think 70% is being generous for some folks, and that problem mentality is everywhere. I’ve encountered those folks in every job I’ve been at: clock in, do the minimum, clock out. I’ve called those folks out (not individually, but as a group) at company feedback meetings and you can watch the problem people roll their eyes and start getting defensive. “It’s just a job” mentality also tends to intersect with “I deserve more” which is laughable and insulting to me.