San Francisco Two Bullet Rule

[Trooper224]

I've got family and in-laws in California. They're on their own, because I'm never going back.

[WobblyPossum]

Some poor officer is going to fire twice, lower his/her weapon prematurely on a suspect not immediately incapacitated by two rounds, and get shot by the suspect while assessing. This article makes my brain hurt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hambo]

The way I see it the SF coppers have two options.

1-The rule says you have to evaluate after two rounds but it doesn't say how long that evaluation has to be. BOOMBOOM, very brief pause, BOOMBOOMBOOM.

2-Roll out and ignore all crime that might lead to a shooting.

[Chuck Haggard]

I'd be going straight to the Jeff Cooper two shots, evaluate, head shot paradigm.................

[JM Campbell]

I'd be going straight to the Jeff Cooper two shots, evaluate, head shot paradigm.................

Hmmmm, sounds like a class we were in.

HiTS First Responder, good times.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

[GJM]

Next iteration is two round magazines.

[PD Sgt.]

I would predict a massive decline in proactive policing in 3-2-1.... This is probably one of the worst decisions by a police administration regarding force and officer safety I can recall. Ever.

Additionally, while I am not familiar at all with the CA state mandated pistol qual for LE, I imagine it has strings longer than two shots. I wonder if these clowns will now require officers to execute this evaluative pause on the course in order to "train like they fight."

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Same vein:

http://www.policeone.com/use-of-forc...XKTWSfd2lLdh8V

Seems a California thing. Anyway - Bond Arms in TX might compete for derringer contracts in CA?

There is a real issue here but are the discussions more driven by politics?

[Dagga Boy]

There is a ton of "wrong" to go around. First and foremost....every single shot fired by not only by a police officer, but every single law abiding person in America when using justifiable lethal force should be evaluated and assessed.....every single one. People have been on the "burn the witch" philosophy with how we run our program because we have tried to address issues with how people are trained. This includes, a heavy emphasis on shooting far faster than you can assess and react, running muzzles over non shoots with no penalty or care, shooting every time a gun is out of the holster, shooting till empty, lack of an emphasis on emotional control, teaching programs based on panic and fear, no emphasis on post shooting conduct and habit building, etc. Well, this is the result, and it is predictable. On the other side, we have a total failure of leadership of most police departments and government politicians and mangers to properly train police officers for proper application of force, and especially lethal force. The idea that some manger or lawyer can write down a response in a policy that flies totally in the face of what is reasonable from a use of force standpoint, and either impossible or train, or typically a total refusal to train is despicable.

Most know we train with limited round shooting, immediate movement to the head with a failure to stop (no lowering of the firearm as originally taught), heavy emphasis on hits to vital areas and a heavy emphasis on accountability and responsibility for every single round fired. We know for a fact this works to keep officers not only accountable, but highly successful when lethal force is used. Unfortunately...it requires a good degree of dedication and work from all parties involved....leadership, training staff, and line officers. The failure to dedicate to that work really lies at the feet of supervision, both political and administrative. These are usually the first to abdicate their responsibility.

This SF policy will be a total failure. This is a result of decades of failure. This stuff places all the responsibility in the wrong place. By the way, SFPD has a very good firearms staff, both line and their supervisor. Unfortunately, they have a total fricking disaster for leadership and management at the highest levels, and their politicians are essentially criminal in their conduct.

I volunteer at a rural department to run a firearms program for a group or their officers. I had an incident yesterday with an officer that puts a spotlight on all that is wrong with LE training. It was his first day with us. He could not do a tactical reload, something we mandate prior to holstering post shooting. His gear was set up wrong (Pincus would have been proud), he was a disaster with all reloads, and had some serious issues with other fundamentals. This is a very experienced solid cop. He came from a very large department to this small agency as sort of a last job before retirement. Great guy who has been a victim of crap training. We talked about various issues, and I am always interested in where they come from as this guy was a gigantic training scar. The issue with how to do reloads...every place he has worked (both huge and small) do annual qualification with no real training after the academy. His prior place always shot till empty before reloading. Essentially, he has been forced to shoot till empty everytime he has been at the range since the academy. What sort of scar do you think that leaves? Once they go empty, reloads are done almost administratively. Emphasis was only on "passing". Guy has never been taught about things like "grip" or "follow through". He shot well enough to hit a gigantic silhouette most of the time. He was considered "a good shooter" because he could simply qualify with a passing score once a year on a course where you shot till empty every time the gun came out of the holster and 70% of the rounds hit the gigantic silhouette. This is why we have horrific issues with how police apply lethal force.

[Erick Gelhaus]

Nyeti & I were typing at the same time if there is any overlap.

Additionally, while I am not familiar at all with the CA state mandated pistol qual for LE, I imagine it has strings longer than two shots. I wonder if these clowns will now require officers to execute this evaluative pause on the course in order to "train like they fight."

Outside of the academy setting, there is no single state mandated qual in California L/E. Reading the local articles on this it doesn't appear to just be in qualification, it looks to be any string of fire. So, not three rounds to the body or a Bill Drill or ... you can create your own drill that would not meet this standard.

Chuck, my recollection of the story is when Jeff Cooper started teaching the Mozambique it was two shots to the chest, lower the pistol & assess, then come back up for the head shot. A short time later, some active & experienced guys from L.A. came back with the modification of two rounds to the chest, assess by seeing what was or wasn't behind the front sight at that point, and go to the head if necessary.

From the bad days of shoot two & holster ... Had a co-worker who was dealing with a scissor weilding mentally ill subject. It deteriorated to deadly force. He fired two rounds and holstered then she stabbed him. He had to draw & fire another two rounds to end it.

There are other himan factor issues that I'm not sure were even considered wit this ... hit rates under stress, amygdala hi-jack, inability to count rounds, etc.

Legally, the idea of any set number of rounds being unreasonable on its face should have been buried and forgotten after Plumhoff v. Rickard (570_US, 2013). Now, when an officer fires a third round for any number of reasons there may well be legal issues for the officer (first & foremost) and the agency over this.