New (to me) Shooting Technique - Comments?
- Thread starter gvf
- Start date
Or Sometimes You Use a Different Weapon:
From celebrated Police action in my hometown. The male officer's instincts told him he's never draw in time, and was perhaps too close to even clear the gun, so he grabbed the BG and hugged, taking all the remaining rounds himself to the point where he heard only the trigger clicking on empty - but saving his partners life. He came up in the heat of the moment with the only weapon available to him: his body:
From celebrated Police action in my hometown. The male officer's instincts told him he's never draw in time, and was perhaps too close to even clear the gun, so he grabbed the BG and hugged, taking all the remaining rounds himself to the point where he heard only the trigger clicking on empty - but saving his partners life. He came up in the heat of the moment with the only weapon available to him: his body:
stephen426
New member
Sorry to disagree, but there is a big difference between bravery and stupitidy. Charging at someone who is shooting at you rather than returning fire is insane at best. The closer you get, the less likely the shooter is to miss. If both officers were critically wounded, they could not help each other out. Maybe both would have been killed and the bad guy would have gotten away. I can understand risking your life for your partner, but it is senseless to risk both lives by taking inappropriate action.
This action was investigated by all concerned, and there was no hint that any other way would have been more appropriate - or POSSIBLE - to save his partner.
This transpired before you could count to 2 - when he made the leap - while his partner was being continuously shot - and this happened more than a year ago.
Now, far removed by time and space, you are sitting comfortably behind a computer- and YOU are so sure he did the wrong and crazy thing, when no other hint of that ever appeared subsequently?
This is the hubris of intellectualizing, of theory over reality.
Here is more, from America's Most Wanted where the officer on the Award for 2007:
Puleeeze: I didn't post this so there would be a general field-day on this LEO but to make a point already raised: reality dictates the action. He won a ton of heroism citations and awards. Why not just accept what those there and those investigating found -- and that he wasn't a fool. Or move on to something else which is another option. Lordy........
Last edited:
stephen426
New member
Am I glad that he alive? Certainly. Am I glad that he was able to save his partner? Certainly. Was there a more effective solution other than the one he took? Possibly. The outcome does not justify the technique. What if they had both been killed and the shooter got away? Would you still call it a good technique? When the poop hits the fan, I can understand instinctive responses. Proper training increases the likelihood that the instinctive response would be the appropriate one.
When they stoped the suspect, they should have had their hands on their weapons with any retention devices off. If they suspected he had a weapon, they should have had their guns drawn and at low ready. They were caught off guard and received multiple gun shot wounds as a result. Is it bravery because they were caught off guard but survived? I respect his bravery for willing to sacrifice himself for his partner, but truth is they could have both been killed that night. Had he had his gun out, do you think he would have shot the suspect or charged him? Monday night quarterbacking done.
That the way you did it when you saved your partners life?
(Sorry when I wrote that this was investigated by all concerned without a hint of an error made. I forgot you knew better. Really sorry.... as the officer will be when he finally learns he was wrong all this time...you alone got it)
stephen426
New member
I have nothing personal to gain from this arguement so you can take it as personally as you like. Failure to learn from past events lead to the same results. Other lives might be saved as a result. Had they followed proper procedures, it is even possible that Officer Parete would not be a quadrapalegic now. One officer should have been holding the suspect at gun point while the other should have restrained him. For both officers to have been within inches does not seem like proper procedure.
In the attachment you posted, the lieutenant said that they were "two young good cops". Could that mean inexperienced?
I was not there. I have not saved anyone's life. I can analyze a situation and learn from their mistakes though. Maybe you feel that Officer Andolina's response was the right one. Feel free to charge someone shooting at you. I personally, would rather return fire.
By the way, do you really think that it would be politically correct to say the officer screwed up after he tried to save his partner and was shot several times as well? Try asking, objectively, if any of their actions led up to that situation. Frankly, I have no idea why you are taking this so personally. Whatever.
What's the matter with you? I live here and I know police officer's and I know that this incident was investigated and no error was found on the part of either officer, - I've said it twice - but the opposite: the male officer was cited for heroism by the police agency - subsequently there were hundreds of opportunities to find errors from scores of other agencies, organizations nationally. Not a hint of anything but bravery
And you somehow deny this is true and insist such errors were made that the officer is, in fact, responsible for the life-long paralysis of his partner.
Do as you like, but don't wonder about the reaction to it.
stephen426
New member
On a personal note, I am sorry to hear about the officers being injured, especially since you know them personally. This is not an attack on them or their person, but a review of what could have been done better. Do pro athletes only watch the ESPN highlights showing their best moves, or do they review the games they got spanked on to see how they could have improved? I hope other officers learned from the situation and I hope they approach suspects more carefully. By the way, I said that it is possible that the outcome could have been different, rather than saying Officer Andolina is responsible for Officer Parete's injuries.
By the way, I am not questioning Officer Andolina's response once he was in that situation. I am saying maybe it was possible to avoid being in that situation by being better prepared for it.
I think we are thread jacking this so you can start a new thread if you like. Heck, you could probably even start a poll to see if anyone could find fault with the officers' actions. I seriously doubt that I am the only one who believes that they could have done things differently and that the outcome could be different. If you do decide to start a thread, we can continue this there. Like I said, I have nothing to gain from "being right" so lets call this thread jack over.
matthew temkin
Moderator
The old time gunfighters--Applegate, Fairbairn, and some of the old time cops who trained me in the early 1980's--advised getting off the first shot ASAP.
As it was explained to me, even a close range miss will very likely get a reaction from the BG, enough to give you up to a two seconds advantage.
Personally I prefer the elbow up/elbow down draw stroke, which is very fast indeed and gives a very good chance of your first shots hitting the BG in the belly area.
Naturally this would be followed with movement while bringing the gun up higher up in the cone of vision--a/k/a the zipper.
So--I'll leave it to others to decide for themselves if this is still a valid concept.
As it was explained to me, even a close range miss will very likely get a reaction from the BG, enough to give you up to a two seconds advantage.
Personally I prefer the elbow up/elbow down draw stroke, which is very fast indeed and gives a very good chance of your first shots hitting the BG in the belly area.
Naturally this would be followed with movement while bringing the gun up higher up in the cone of vision--a/k/a the zipper.
So--I'll leave it to others to decide for themselves if this is still a valid concept.
I'm not sure what the "SPINE SEVERED FROM SHOT FIRED BY TEEN" article brings to this particular thread.
The article gives little detail about the mechanics of the shooting. Was the shooter reported to have used the technique you are asking about? It does not appear so.
Regardless:
I'm of the opinion that Officer Andolina desreved his commendation, regardless of whether tacticians might approve or disapprove of the course of action he decided on. Brave is brave, and brave he was when it mattered.
GVF,
You seem to take perceived disagreement and/or things that you perceive as challenges rather personally. There are two examples in this thread alone: First, over responses to a critique you asked for, and now in response to comments to a seemingly unrelated-to-the-thread article that you posted. You are coming across as a bit more worked-up than called for. Which in turn detracts from points you seem passionate about conveying.
Erik
The article gives little detail about the mechanics of the shooting. Was the shooter reported to have used the technique you are asking about? It does not appear so.
Regardless:
I'm of the opinion that Officer Andolina desreved his commendation, regardless of whether tacticians might approve or disapprove of the course of action he decided on. Brave is brave, and brave he was when it mattered.
GVF,
You seem to take perceived disagreement and/or things that you perceive as challenges rather personally. There are two examples in this thread alone: First, over responses to a critique you asked for, and now in response to comments to a seemingly unrelated-to-the-thread article that you posted. You are coming across as a bit more worked-up than called for. Which in turn detracts from points you seem passionate about conveying.
Erik
Last edited:
stephen426
New member
Erik,
I think the point that gvf was trying to make was that sometimes the best weapon to use is your body rather than trying to draw and fire. I actually agree with this and believe that some unarmed combat skills should be part of everyone's arsenal.
Frankly, I never said that officer Andolina didn't deserve his commendations. His willingness to risk his life for his partner's is certainly selfless and heroic. My point is that charging a loaded weapon is rarely the best defensive maneuver.
I think gvf took it personally when I mentioned that certain things could have been done differently that could have resulted in a different outcome. For one, they should have had they hands on their weapons or even their guns drawn before approaching a suspect who had his hands in his pockets. One officer should have held the suspect at gun point while the other officer secured him. I believe this is all standard procedure. Having both officers walk right up to the suspect with out their weapons drawn is what they did wrong (in my humble opinion). I'm willing to bet that had Officer Andolina been able to do it all over again, he would have done something like that. I'm sure he would also risk his life for his partner's if he had to do it all over again.
While some Monday night quarterbacking, I call it analyzing a situation to see what could have been done to prevent future incidents. Failure to learn from tragic events simply leads to them happening again. Again, I have nothing personal to gain from this. Heck if it saves an officer's life because they stop a suspect in a safer way, then it is well worth the critique.
I think the point that gvf was trying to make was that sometimes the best weapon to use is your body rather than trying to draw and fire. I actually agree with this and believe that some unarmed combat skills should be part of everyone's arsenal.
Frankly, I never said that officer Andolina didn't deserve his commendations. His willingness to risk his life for his partner's is certainly selfless and heroic. My point is that charging a loaded weapon is rarely the best defensive maneuver.
I think gvf took it personally when I mentioned that certain things could have been done differently that could have resulted in a different outcome. For one, they should have had they hands on their weapons or even their guns drawn before approaching a suspect who had his hands in his pockets. One officer should have held the suspect at gun point while the other officer secured him. I believe this is all standard procedure. Having both officers walk right up to the suspect with out their weapons drawn is what they did wrong (in my humble opinion). I'm willing to bet that had Officer Andolina been able to do it all over again, he would have done something like that. I'm sure he would also risk his life for his partner's if he had to do it all over again.
While some Monday night quarterbacking, I call it analyzing a situation to see what could have been done to prevent future incidents. Failure to learn from tragic events simply leads to them happening again. Again, I have nothing personal to gain from this. Heck if it saves an officer's life because they stop a suspect in a safer way, then it is well worth the critique.
The first is an opinion. Which of course is fine. But it is an opinion or interpretation, not a statement of fact.
As to your mention of the cop-story, if you read where this was placed, it followed several posts that pointed to flexibility in response to what is actually happening in a critical emergency, and reality determining what SD actions to take: so, the story of the officer was mentioned as an example of this - so extreme that the one action available to the officer to save a life (his partner's) was to use his body as the weapon, a shield, not his gun. (Which is what the facts were and the finding of the subsequent investigation; a poster here began the ensuing discussion).
You mean, for example, could I misinterpret this personal note to me on a Gun Forum critically evaluating my psychic workings - as personal.
Or your off-hand judgment of my article being unrelated to the thread, which you made in a note unrelated-to-the-thread...... would I mis-perceive it as personal.
----------------------------
Your remarks on my posts are opinions, not facts. Which is fine. But opinions, interpretations, are not statements of fact.
Re the story of the officer: if you read where it was placed, it followed several posts that stressed flexibility and letting the needs of the reality of an SD emergency determine appropriate SD actions, as opposed to theory doing so. As an example supporting this view, I posted the story of the officer -- so extreme a situation that it's reality called for the one weapon available to save his partners life: his body, not his gun - (which were the facts of this case and finding of the subsequent investigation) - another poster then joined on that story and the discussion ensued.
Last edited:
Interesting thread. I've heard of that technique before but the 30 degree shot just seems too dangerous to me.
I guess I could maybe learn the "halfway" point (i.e., 60 degree shot).
I just don't know if I'd have the calm mindset to really know when I was at the 60 degree point though!?
I guess I could maybe learn the "halfway" point (i.e., 60 degree shot).
I just don't know if I'd have the calm mindset to really know when I was at the 60 degree point though!?