Ataturk airport attack - second attempt
- Thread starter B.A.
- Start date
Double naught spy, and others, as applicable,
If you watch the video, you may notice the TIME spent assessing and analysing the situation. I'm not knocking the cop's decisions in this extremely stressful situation and I'm fully aware of my own after the fact hindsight point of view.
More than twenty seconds passed between the bg being shot and his detonating the device. He is clearly seen fiddling about his clothing (although this could also be at least partly due to his injuries).
THAT is what leads me to believe there was no dead switch.
The cop spent over ten seconds assessing the situation before making a run for it.
I think it's strange that my Monday morning quarterbacking is so much criticized on a forum that regularly goes on and on about fantasy scenarios incredulous to most of us when this was a real life situation caught on film.
BTW his fellow officer didn't fare as well with another one of the terrorists nearby, when he questioned him and got shot for his troubles without getting the chance of putting up a fight, but possibly alerting colleagues, our hero featured above included, to the SHTF. Also on cctv.
BA
If you watch the video, you may notice the TIME spent assessing and analysing the situation. I'm not knocking the cop's decisions in this extremely stressful situation and I'm fully aware of my own after the fact hindsight point of view.
More than twenty seconds passed between the bg being shot and his detonating the device. He is clearly seen fiddling about his clothing (although this could also be at least partly due to his injuries).
THAT is what leads me to believe there was no dead switch.
The cop spent over ten seconds assessing the situation before making a run for it.
I think it's strange that my Monday morning quarterbacking is so much criticized on a forum that regularly goes on and on about fantasy scenarios incredulous to most of us when this was a real life situation caught on film.
BTW his fellow officer didn't fare as well with another one of the terrorists nearby, when he questioned him and got shot for his troubles without getting the chance of putting up a fight, but possibly alerting colleagues, our hero featured above included, to the SHTF. Also on cctv.
BA
B.A. it is not the Monday morning quarterbacking that is the issue. You've decided that a kill shot should have been taken to prevent the explosion. You may be right, based on the video. We've simply pointed out that the police officer assessed the situation, and acted based on his training and experience. Shooting a downed shooter in the head is not SOP. Whether or not it should be is a political decision, not a tactical one.
What does a deadman switch look like??
and even IF you are expert in demolitions enough to know, how can you count on recognizing it in a homemade explosive vest?? AND doing it in less time than it takes to type this??
The common deadman switch found in movies/tv (some kind of trigger that goes off when released) isn't the only way to do it.
The bad guy IS a bomb, he's down (not mobile) and if he can't get to a weapon (doesn't have another on him), isn't going to shoot anyone, so the smart play is to get out of the area, and hopefully out of the blast range.
and to the OP, posting copyrighted material is forbidden, posting a link TO that material is not.
Double Naught Spy
New member
BA, the issue isn't Monday morning quarterbacking, but analysis itself and the conclusions you drew from it.
You have repeatedly stated that you have watched the video several times. You have commented on how things can be clearly seen. You have counted the seconds to help make your determination.
You have said you don't think there was a deadman switch because of the timing and how the terrorist can be clearly seen fiddling about his body. It is a very blurry video. What is clear to be seen?
Was it clear enough that you saw the terrorist getting shot or did you just see the terrorist fall to the ground? Did you see the cop get shot? He was shot, you know? He did survive, something you apparently did not know.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-SURVIVED-bomb-blast-recovering-hospital.html
What is in the terrorist's hands at the time? Can you see that?
What was the status of the officer's gun? Had it been damaged in the exchange of gunfire? Was he out of ammo?
What you seem to be failing to understand is that the officer's decision cannot be based on after-the-fact, multiple viewings of the situation. YOU determined that there was no deadman switch. You apparently think that the officer should have been able to arrive at the same conclusion, hence we was wrong for running away. But you didn't make that decision in real time like he did and you could not see what he was seeing. What you also fail to realize is that if he made the wrong assessment and there was a deadman switch, killing the terrorist would have resulted in his immediate death...since he was standing at point blank range, as you noted.
Now, what is the prudent decision for a person who hopes to remain alive? Shoot the terrorist in the head and maybe blow up immediately or evacuate the area?
Remember, there are no do-overs. You don't get to have the foresight of watching the video many times and counting clock seconds to determine what will happen. You have to decide on the fly, in real time, and if you guess wrong, BOOM!
You have repeatedly stated that you have watched the video several times. You have commented on how things can be clearly seen. You have counted the seconds to help make your determination.
You have said you don't think there was a deadman switch because of the timing and how the terrorist can be clearly seen fiddling about his body. It is a very blurry video. What is clear to be seen?
Was it clear enough that you saw the terrorist getting shot or did you just see the terrorist fall to the ground? Did you see the cop get shot? He was shot, you know? He did survive, something you apparently did not know.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-SURVIVED-bomb-blast-recovering-hospital.html
What is in the terrorist's hands at the time? Can you see that?
What was the status of the officer's gun? Had it been damaged in the exchange of gunfire? Was he out of ammo?
What you seem to be failing to understand is that the officer's decision cannot be based on after-the-fact, multiple viewings of the situation. YOU determined that there was no deadman switch. You apparently think that the officer should have been able to arrive at the same conclusion, hence we was wrong for running away. But you didn't make that decision in real time like he did and you could not see what he was seeing. What you also fail to realize is that if he made the wrong assessment and there was a deadman switch, killing the terrorist would have resulted in his immediate death...since he was standing at point blank range, as you noted.
Now, what is the prudent decision for a person who hopes to remain alive? Shoot the terrorist in the head and maybe blow up immediately or evacuate the area?
Remember, there are no do-overs. You don't get to have the foresight of watching the video many times and counting clock seconds to determine what will happen. You have to decide on the fly, in real time, and if you guess wrong, BOOM!
Double naught spy,
Thanks for the additional information and input. Judging by it, you may well be right and I may well be wrong.
It's nice to see a tactics and training thread end in agreement. If only by admission of assumptions.
I still don't think there was a dead switch though.
BA
Thanks for the additional information and input. Judging by it, you may well be right and I may well be wrong.
It's nice to see a tactics and training thread end in agreement. If only by admission of assumptions.
I still don't think there was a dead switch though.
BA
Slowpoke Rodriguez
Inactive
This is an interesting scenario that one should be aware of.
On the face of it, it would be out of policy (and probably illegal) to use lethal force on a subject that was downed and disarmed, but the suicide vest is something to check for nowadays, I suppose.
If you saw the subject wearing explosives, it could be reasonable to use lethal force to prevent them from triggering the device. I don't know about deadman switches and possibly time or command detonating devices, so probably the best course of action would indeed be to clear the area.
I will train to consider the possibility of explosive vests, then make an immediate decision. Immediately clearing the area is probably the way to go.
The Turkish cop did a good job, and I hope he survived.
On the face of it, it would be out of policy (and probably illegal) to use lethal force on a subject that was downed and disarmed, but the suicide vest is something to check for nowadays, I suppose.
If you saw the subject wearing explosives, it could be reasonable to use lethal force to prevent them from triggering the device. I don't know about deadman switches and possibly time or command detonating devices, so probably the best course of action would indeed be to clear the area.
I will train to consider the possibility of explosive vests, then make an immediate decision. Immediately clearing the area is probably the way to go.
The Turkish cop did a good job, and I hope he survived.
Old Bill Dibble
New member
IDK, bears kill only a couple of dozen people a year around the world. Suicide attackers are way ahead of them with numbers killed well into the thousands and wounded well into the tens of thousands. Bears have a limited range of movement and habitat that is outside of contact with most people. Suicide attackers can be literally anywhere there is a target.
Your average American is much more likely to have dealt with a suicide attacker or mass shooter (normally also a suicide attacker) at some point than with a charging bear. When you throw in the millions of Americans that served in Iraq and Afghanistan it really firms up.
2damnold4this
New member
Thanks for the link DNS. I wondered whether the officer survived. It seemed from the video that he had time to get away and I'm glad he did.
Old Bill, I hear you. But while more Americans have faced mass shootings and terrorists than bears I doubt that more of us have had to make split second decisions about dead man switches- here in the United States. Obviously that equation changes dramatically for those who served in combat.
Old Bill Dibble
New member
That is true. Most people are going to do the smart thing an run as quickly as their feet will carry them in the other direction away from any attack. That strategy may or may not work for terrorists but it won't work with a bear at all.
If he's wearing an explosive vest I wouldn't consider him unarmed. If he's conscious and fiddling with it I think the cop would certainly be justified in shooting him. I think we'd all agree that if he was down and reaching for a gun it would be the same thing. It's all about ending the threat.
Just so there's no misunderstandings, I don't think a person is morally or legally justified in shooting an assailant who's down and out of the fight. When the threat is over, I'm over.
Slowpoke Rodriguez
Inactive
I agree. My point was, you can't just use lethal force on a subject that is disarmed and down peremptorily UNLESS there is probable cause that they continue to pose a threat, like having explosives.
I think it is relevant as a training point, because as there have been several incidents of ISIS inspired shooters in the US and mass shooters tend to be suicidal. I'm not saying it is likely, but it is certainly something to consider.