Let's discuss the North Hollywood shootout
- Thread starter Glockeroo
- Start date
Double Naught Spy
New member
It isn't an issue of optimism or pessimism. It is an issue of reality.
Have ever ordered a large group of shooters to concentrate their fire on a single specific target?
I have, and it does get results.
I've never seen an incident where every shooter missed.
The law of averages prevails....the more lead directed at a single target, the greater the odds that the target will get hit.
Interesting question but not exactly applicable...
Here's the correct question.
Have you ever ordered a large group of pistol shooters (dispersed over a fairly large area and mostly employing concealment, not cover) to concentrate their fire on a moving target the size of a human head at 75+ yards while the group was taking automatic weapons fire?
Double Naught Spy
New member
easyG, it doesn't matter if they were going to shoot one at a time or en masse because they were unable to hit what they were needing to hit. They can all miss together or all miss separately. It doesn't matter when the shooters are all have aim points that are wrong. That seems to have been the crux of the problem. The POA did not equal the POI.
Good. Now the problem. If you have 50 shooters shoot individually 10 rounds each or 50 shooters shoot 10 rounds each en masse, note that the amount of lead TOWARD the target is the same amount. So the averages DO NOT CHANGE. Of course, if you can explain to me how the math behind your law of averages and so that there is a statistical difference, I would like to see it. Of course, the "law of averages" isn't an actual mathematical law in the first place. It is a layman's assumption about how things function in the world.
So, the are all going to still miss because of the numerous reasons noted above in the thread about the fact that they needed to make head shots, they had moving targets, most were shooting at distances several times what they qualified at, were firing from unfamiliar body positions, had no idea of how much drop was involved, had no idea how much to lead their targets, etc.
Good. Now the problem. If you have 50 shooters shoot individually 10 rounds each or 50 shooters shoot 10 rounds each en masse, note that the amount of lead TOWARD the target is the same amount. So the averages DO NOT CHANGE. Of course, if you can explain to me how the math behind your law of averages and so that there is a statistical difference, I would like to see it. Of course, the "law of averages" isn't an actual mathematical law in the first place. It is a layman's assumption about how things function in the world.
So, the are all going to still miss because of the numerous reasons noted above in the thread about the fact that they needed to make head shots, they had moving targets, most were shooting at distances several times what they qualified at, were firing from unfamiliar body positions, had no idea of how much drop was involved, had no idea how much to lead their targets, etc.
Chance
The chance of a lucky (unlucky for the criminal) bullet from the boat anchor pistols the Police had, dropping on to the roadway in front of them, and skipping in to an unprotected ankle, was a more realistic scenario.
The result of a frontal hit in an ankle you rely on to keep you upright would have been very traumatic, and most probably would have stopped the moving and shooting right there. A head shot would have been more of chance now, ricochets being easier to predict.
The chance of a lucky (unlucky for the criminal) bullet from the boat anchor pistols the Police had, dropping on to the roadway in front of them, and skipping in to an unprotected ankle, was a more realistic scenario.
The result of a frontal hit in an ankle you rely on to keep you upright would have been very traumatic, and most probably would have stopped the moving and shooting right there. A head shot would have been more of chance now, ricochets being easier to predict.
Double Naught Spy
New member
If you can't aim well enough to hit a head on a person, then how the heck are you going to be able to aim well enough to get a ricochet to go where you want in order to be able to hit a much much smaller object at the same fairly extreme distances we are talking about?
In the Miami-FBI shootout, Platt was hit with a shotgun blast to his feet including hitting his left ankle, but he certainly didn't go down from the impacts.
In the Miami-FBI shootout, Platt was hit with a shotgun blast to his feet including hitting his left ankle, but he certainly didn't go down from the impacts.
Last edited:
Information first, guns second.
People have talked about communication systems ("comms"). what they have not addressed is the fact that in this case, and I would expect many others, the responding officers had little to no real idea of what was going on as they responded.
I remember an interview with the dispatcher. She said that she was receiving many officers reporting the same officer down. It wasn't until time had passed that she realized that many officers were reporting many DIFFERENT officers down. The situation was confused. Confusion cost time. Confusion probably delayed the proper response (SWAT with rifles).
Ideally, there would be a UAV overhead giving a video feed to officers in some sort of command area. All officers would be equipped with a version of Blue Force Tracker. The communication system would be improved. Oh, and the bad guys would be nice enough to notify the police that they are going to commit a crime so all this stuff can be set up, and taxpayers don't mind footing the massive bill.
Heroic officers raced into an unknown situation mainly with the knowledge that fellow officers were hurt. WOW.
As for the weapon side, different hardware may or may not have helped. I disagree with heavy calibers for urban patrol. Too much going on for the officer to have the additional worry of "how many brick walls/homes will this thing penetrate", not to mention recoil. It is my OPINION, that a carbine type platform (for ease of deployment from a vehicle) would increase the effective range of the officers. As to caliber, something akin to .223 rem / 5.56x45mm would seem to be a good choice. But all this costs money.
I view the post-shooting switch to .40S&W as a "feel good" measure at best, but the increase of rifles in patrol cars will probably be beneficial in the long run.
Very Respectfully,
Matt
People have talked about communication systems ("comms"). what they have not addressed is the fact that in this case, and I would expect many others, the responding officers had little to no real idea of what was going on as they responded.
I remember an interview with the dispatcher. She said that she was receiving many officers reporting the same officer down. It wasn't until time had passed that she realized that many officers were reporting many DIFFERENT officers down. The situation was confused. Confusion cost time. Confusion probably delayed the proper response (SWAT with rifles).
Ideally, there would be a UAV overhead giving a video feed to officers in some sort of command area. All officers would be equipped with a version of Blue Force Tracker. The communication system would be improved. Oh, and the bad guys would be nice enough to notify the police that they are going to commit a crime so all this stuff can be set up, and taxpayers don't mind footing the massive bill.
Heroic officers raced into an unknown situation mainly with the knowledge that fellow officers were hurt. WOW.
As for the weapon side, different hardware may or may not have helped. I disagree with heavy calibers for urban patrol. Too much going on for the officer to have the additional worry of "how many brick walls/homes will this thing penetrate", not to mention recoil. It is my OPINION, that a carbine type platform (for ease of deployment from a vehicle) would increase the effective range of the officers. As to caliber, something akin to .223 rem / 5.56x45mm would seem to be a good choice. But all this costs money.
I view the post-shooting switch to .40S&W as a "feel good" measure at best, but the increase of rifles in patrol cars will probably be beneficial in the long run.
Very Respectfully,
Matt
Last edited:
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Ideally, there would have been a A-10 or a B-2.
Having a rifle in the car is reasonable. Suggesting that cars start carrying those portablle UAVs is getting a little extreme. Too much second guessing of obscure strategies beyond having rifles, IMHO.
Tommy Vercetti
New member
LAPD was armed with Berettas in any video you can find on the shootout
not Glocks
not Glocks
The original post asked what LAPD had learned- they now have ar-15s enough said on that.
the police did the best they could with what they had. And my hats off to all of them. All of the marksmen in favor of head shots at 50+ yards with standard service sidearms should have no problem getting sponsorship as factory shooters.
Try this drill sprint 100 yards neal down behind you cover and try to hit a silhouette target at 50 yard in under 10 seconds – then try it with one of your friends cracking of rounds out of his AR while you are trying to fire. It’s a real eye opener..
Trying to place a precise shot when your heart is pounding, your adrenaline is flowing, breathing heavily. Is hard at best.
the police did the best they could with what they had. And my hats off to all of them. All of the marksmen in favor of head shots at 50+ yards with standard service sidearms should have no problem getting sponsorship as factory shooters.
Try this drill sprint 100 yards neal down behind you cover and try to hit a silhouette target at 50 yard in under 10 seconds – then try it with one of your friends cracking of rounds out of his AR while you are trying to fire. It’s a real eye opener..
Trying to place a precise shot when your heart is pounding, your adrenaline is flowing, breathing heavily. Is hard at best.
guntotin_fool
New member
well thats a helpful comment,
What it all shows is that had someone had a .22 rifle, they might have been able to stop it much faster. Not that a .22 is a man stopper, but a rifle of any caliber increases your hit probability 10 fold over a hand gun in a fighting situation. instead of giving every cop a M4, give seargants a 3030 carbine or a .243 bolt and the situation is over. M4s are marginal man stoppers now, and no where the in the house stopper that a 12 gauge is.
Even if they had used slugs, or had them available, the impact from a 12 gauge slug even thru body armor, is going to HURT, and its going to slow you down fast.
But a model 94, with a peep sight, is going to make that 50 yard head shot all day long, and that will end the fight.
What it all shows is that had someone had a .22 rifle, they might have been able to stop it much faster. Not that a .22 is a man stopper, but a rifle of any caliber increases your hit probability 10 fold over a hand gun in a fighting situation. instead of giving every cop a M4, give seargants a 3030 carbine or a .243 bolt and the situation is over. M4s are marginal man stoppers now, and no where the in the house stopper that a 12 gauge is.
Even if they had used slugs, or had them available, the impact from a 12 gauge slug even thru body armor, is going to HURT, and its going to slow you down fast.
But a model 94, with a peep sight, is going to make that 50 yard head shot all day long, and that will end the fight.
pfch1977 said:
The goal of LE is to contain the situation to reduce the risk of civilian casualties. You'll see this in most incidents involving firearms. A domestic violence where the spouse says the other has a firearm, results in police containing the offender in the house and evacuating surrounding homes whilst they surround and contain the person.
Letting perps armed with FA weapons flee and pursuing with helicopters is problematic. One does not know their motivation or psychological bent. They could easily drive to a local school and open fire along the fence-line at kids outdoors. Or they could stay far enough ahead of ground units to enter a parking structure, switch cars and escape altogether (now you have FA-armed crazies loose). Once they spot the heilo, they could start shooting random cars they pass to create massive traffic jams to block trailing ground units. That'll look swell with "film at eleven".
In normal situations, police have found that the more officers present, the less likely suspects are to shoot it out with police. That's because they know they are likely to die by gunfire. Unfortunately, that dynamic changes if your perps are heavily body-armored and don't fear being shot at.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Again, we have a lot of after the fact 'expert and wise' advice. UAVs, retreat, heliocopters, homemade slugs, 22LRs, firing like a line of 18th Red Coats, if only Chuck Conners - the Rifleman was there with his lever action - blah, blah.
The officers acted bravely in a situation that they haven't faced before. It didn't go as well as if the Internet League of Heroes was there. It was a teachable moment, so to speak, and the lesson is not to have the LAPD equipped with a space station but for officers to have rifles in cars. Many departments have done this. Some, because of political correctness, haven't done this yet.
That's about all there is to the incident.
The officers acted bravely in a situation that they haven't faced before. It didn't go as well as if the Internet League of Heroes was there. It was a teachable moment, so to speak, and the lesson is not to have the LAPD equipped with a space station but for officers to have rifles in cars. Many departments have done this. Some, because of political correctness, haven't done this yet.
That's about all there is to the incident.