Revisiting 1986 shootout - Interesting to see people with GSWs continue to fight
- Thread starter leadcounsel
- Start date
trooper3385
New member
If you need help in an investigation, there is no one better than the FBI. If you need help in a gunfight, your SOL if the FBI is your backup. I remember one of our self defense instructors was asked to teach some classes in defensive tactics to new FBI agents in the FBI A academy. He walked in and watched for about 10 minutes and then asked one of the instructors why they were not doing any kind of physical contact. He said they looked at him like he was crazy and said they don't do that there. He turned around and walked out and got on the next flight.
Wreck-n-Crew
New member
Just to add to my response about the ammo and Johnska's point that amount of ammunition, or lack thereof being a factor. The FBI attack was lacking from a tactical standpoint, even if by chance, it was lesson to be learned.
The firepower which they faced (that they had no knowledge of,)lead to the disaster being multiplied. The tactical advantage was lost when they converged on the suspects at different times. Making the attacks more like waves rather than the one big wave of all at the same time.
The .223 proved it's effectiveness in those waves. Averaging 2 agents per wave (if my recollections are correct)was hardly enough to gain the upper hand and provide firepower that overwhelmed the suspects.
Had the FBI had higher Capacity weapons and been able to converge and fire collectively with the proper ammunition, it could have been a different outcome.
However I believe that sometimes things have to happen to bring about necessary change. Call it fate or a learning experience the book was re-written and updated as time goes on. Sad we had to learn any lesson by the loss of life.
The firepower which they faced (that they had no knowledge of,)lead to the disaster being multiplied. The tactical advantage was lost when they converged on the suspects at different times. Making the attacks more like waves rather than the one big wave of all at the same time.
The .223 proved it's effectiveness in those waves. Averaging 2 agents per wave (if my recollections are correct)was hardly enough to gain the upper hand and provide firepower that overwhelmed the suspects.
Had the FBI had higher Capacity weapons and been able to converge and fire collectively with the proper ammunition, it could have been a different outcome.
However I believe that sometimes things have to happen to bring about necessary change. Call it fate or a learning experience the book was re-written and updated as time goes on. Sad we had to learn any lesson by the loss of life.
leadcounsel
Moderator
Much of this focuses on it from the angle of the FBI agents. However, it should also be noted that this could have gone much worse for the agents too but for some dumb luck. The criminals were fighting to their rear and sides and boxed in the immobile car for the first segment of the engagement. The criminals apparently were unable to score solid fight-ending hits on close targets with their long guns as a result of fighting from a poor fighting position and being wounded repeatedly and early. Most of their hits were non lethal (eg shots to limbs). Not trying to armchair QB, but imagine if they scored COM hits and sooner to the agents. ...
Had the bad guys experienced a little luck, they could have soundly won the fight and escaped (even just temporarily).
Sadly, our .gov agencies, be it police, FBI, CIA, and military, all seem to re-learn lessons the extremely hard way, always involving absurd and unnecessary loss of life.
The 'lessons' learned in 1986 were already known from at least a century of ballistic understanding and tactics. Willing to bet that any GI from WWII consulted in 1985 would have said that their tactics and weapons for 'urban combat' were woefully inept.
Yet, just looking through the history books of costly gov failed actions... we see many - and a shocking inability to learn from history. I'll avoid the long list because this is a gun and tactics forum. However, a lot of good 'tactics' involve not BEING there to begin with. And IF you must be there (whether war, serving search warrants, or traffic stops, or arrests) then you should be ready for nearly anything.
Had the bad guys experienced a little luck, they could have soundly won the fight and escaped (even just temporarily).
Sadly, our .gov agencies, be it police, FBI, CIA, and military, all seem to re-learn lessons the extremely hard way, always involving absurd and unnecessary loss of life.
The 'lessons' learned in 1986 were already known from at least a century of ballistic understanding and tactics. Willing to bet that any GI from WWII consulted in 1985 would have said that their tactics and weapons for 'urban combat' were woefully inept.
Yet, just looking through the history books of costly gov failed actions... we see many - and a shocking inability to learn from history. I'll avoid the long list because this is a gun and tactics forum. However, a lot of good 'tactics' involve not BEING there to begin with. And IF you must be there (whether war, serving search warrants, or traffic stops, or arrests) then you should be ready for nearly anything.
Derbel McDillet
Moderator
The 158gr LSWCHP bullets fired by SA Mireles hit and disrupted the spinal cords of both Platt and Matix, which instantly incapacitated them. None of the other previous hits achieved this effect and both would have been able to continue to perform willful activity until they eventually lost consciousness from blood loss - and that means they continued to be a deadly danger.
Matix's prior wounds were survivable.
Had the 9mm bullet fired by SA Dove gone thru Platt's, heart instead of stopping an inch short, Platt probably would not have gotten to his feet after crawling out of the Monte Carlo, and the outcome would indeed have been different.
Last edited by a moderator:
Changing a variable like ammunition or capacity may very well have lead to early effects on the decision making process for all involved. Some shots may never have been taken at all, had early shots had more or less effect, or had capacity changed the possibility of reloads or reload timing. That's not only true if those early hits were terminal. Even non fatal hits early on may have changed the behavior of participants in such a way where they may not have been in position for later shots to have been taken as they were.
Wreck-n-Crew
New member
I agree as in my first response...
The use of the .223 provided devastating firepower. The use of silvertip ammunition by the FBI as well as the uncoordinated engagement of the suspects, proved a deadly combination, increasing casualties received by the FBI agents. Change any of those three factors and the outcome would have been different.
After going over the report again it says that the shotgun was loaded with buckshot. No detail as to whether it was single 0 or double 00 was mentioned from the report I read. Still much better than birdshot.
Yep, that's what the official finding was. Personally, I think that was because the agents involved had already paid a very high price for screwing he pooch the way they did.
A lot was made of the "insufficient" penetration of the 9mm Silvertip. Nobody is so callous as to say a better shot would have ended things faster.
The agents did the best they could, with what they had, and what they knew. Unfortunately, some of the things they knew were the wrong things for the situation they were in.
The FBI had access to all the toys, rifles, submachine guns, shotguns, bullet proof vests, etc., but either didn't have them with them, didn't wear them, or couldn't get to them once the shooting started.
This shootout has been studied extensively in the 20 plus years since, and while not wishing to cast aspersion on the individual agents or the honor of the agency, about the only things they did right were show remarkable courage under fire, and finally stopping the killers.
One of the things that always irritates me is the huge volume of concern about "overpenetration" for defensive ammo. People seem to be intensely worried about it, and here is an example of where lack of penetration is blamed as the culprit.
The "faulty" 9mm went through Platt's arm, and wrecked a lung. If I recall correctly, had it kept going it still would not have hit the heart, it would have been just above it. One surgeon I heard stated that had the killer received that wound at the operating room door, it still would have mostly likely been fatal.
There are no magic bullets. not even .40/10mm
3 of the cops were armed with smith and wesson 459 semi automatics. That handgun has a magazine capacity of 14 rounds each. That's a total of 42 rounds on tap fired off by 3 different set of eyes. Yet! One crazy man armed with a mini 14 with 30 round magazine proceeded to kick butt for too long a time. Capacity? Ammo type? A difference? Maybe if you add in seal team six? I don't know but to say that even a professional can sometimes have a real bad day.
Well, SORTA. Based on Dr. French Anderson's analysis of the autopsy results, the round that everyone calls a failure actually penetrated quite well. It's just that it went through Platt's upper arm at an angle before hitting the side of his chest already expanded. After penetrating about 6" of upper arm (entered on the front of the arm an inch or two above the elbow and exited the inside of the arm an inch or two below the armpit), it still penetrated around 6-7" of chest (ending up about midline inside the chest cavity--superimposed on the right edge of the spine viewed from above). As nearly as I can tell, it penetrated 12-13" which is consistent with the FBI penetration specification. In fact, if one considers that it had to go through skin 3 times and probably through clothing twice in the process it actually performed very well.
It was primarily a combination of bad luck (arm in the way) and bad angle that kept it from getting all the way to the heart.
The Miami firefight lasted 4 minutes, involved more than half a dozen people and about 150 rounds fired. Anyone who tries to boil the success or failure of the fight down to a single factor is most likely more concerned with promoting an agenda than in determining the truth.
I'm always amused when performance of the 9mm rounds used that day is brought up as to why things went the way they did. I've read multiple after action reports of cops getting into fights with a bad guy, putting 15-20 rounds into them (most center mass) before getting them to stop. And that's with the magical calibers .40 and .45 with modern JHP ammunition.
Yet you never hear ammunition's "lack of performance" questioned with those rounds.
Yet you never hear ammunition's "lack of performance" questioned with those rounds.
Derbel McDillet
Moderator
It appears I'm wrong.
jmr40 wrote:
To which I replied:
According to this website - http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs7.htm - Matix's neck/chest wound "B" would have "ultimately been fatal".
I apologize to jmr40 and everyone else for my error.
Photograph of SA Dove's 9mm pistol showing where it was struck by a .223 bullet during the gunfight - http://www.examiner.com/slideshow/fbi-miami-shootout#slide=5
jmr40 wrote:
To which I replied:
According to this website - http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs7.htm - Matix's neck/chest wound "B" would have "ultimately been fatal".
I apologize to jmr40 and everyone else for my error.
Photograph of SA Dove's 9mm pistol showing where it was struck by a .223 bullet during the gunfight - http://www.examiner.com/slideshow/fbi-miami-shootout#slide=5
Last edited:
Derbel McDillet
Moderator
It penetrated about 8" total.
Skin is only a factor in bullet exit - and that's only when it's "unshored". In this instance the skin had no effect on penetration performance.
The truth is, had Dove's 9mm bullet passed through Platt's heart (about 12-13" penetration) he would have been rapidly incapacitated (the heart would have been unable to pump blood as efficiently, if at all) and the fight would have ended much sooner - long before Platt shot and killed SA Grogan and SA Dove.
A bullet must damage a vital structure to be effective. What it hits and how much damage it produces (wound severity) are the important factors. 15-20 rounds that don't damage anything vital, or don't produce much damage if a vital is hit, aren't going to compel a determined bad guy to stop.
Last edited:
I think in regards to weapons, capacity and tactics one could look at the north Hollywood shooting. Again, we have just two men who managed to hold off almost the entire police department for longer than anyone would expect. Albeit they had body armor and more rounds on tap than the Miami bad guys but still, two determined men. Now the findings are the police need ar15's. God forbid there will be something that will deem that inferior! I think one good shooter with a scoped bolt gun on the squad could have ended the Hollywood perps well and early. Anyways not trying to change the topic. It just seems the answer is always bigger firepower or perceived bigger fire power anyways. Pretty soon maybe seal team six will get the call. Not to long ago I had some friends get pulled over in Detroit for a traffic violation in the evening hours. The patrol cop exited with an ar15 in hand according to them. Not a felony stop or anything. Just a ticket.
I personally think a bigger round than the 9mm MAY have made a difference. Maybe not. A .38 takes way to long to reload. You are out of the fight when you are reloading. For sure being able to keep fire on the perps would have been desired. its hard to shoot back when you are getting hit. Had the bullet hit the heart I think in short order he would have been down for good. Not instantly but quickly. A bigger hole always lets out more blood and when the bad guy is shooting back every drop counts.
A .38 with speed loaders or strips even ( if practiced )doesn't take all that much longer in my opinion to re load. I shoot a snub .38 every time I go to the range. It does require more frequent reloading to keep in action however which is an issue in an extended gun fight. It also requires more motor skill.
Please note that I have recalculated the arm penetration figure based on the scale in Plate II-A. My earlier estimate of 6" is incorrect. The actual figure is 5".
The only way the bullet could have penetrated only 8" would be if Platt were an abnormally small person--he wasn't--he was 5'10" and 210.
There's clearly at least 5" of penetration in the upper arm alone.
The X-Ray demonstrates that the bullet penetrated to within an inch of midline after entering the right chest under the arm--at least 6" of penetration in the torso for a man Platt's size.
Cropped portion of Figure II-4 from p40 of Forensic Analysis of the April 11, 1986, FBI Firefight by W. French Anderson, M.D., Published by Paladin Press, 1996, 2006
The only thing that makes sense is that the oft-quoted 8" figure you're referring to relates exclusively to penetration after the bullet entered the torso and disregards penetration through the arm. Given the obvious penetration depth through the arm, the only way the 8" figure could be correct would be if the bullet only penetrated 3" into the chest and that is obviously nonsensical given the X-Ray evidence.
I've heard this before, but the pictures (Plates II-A and II-B) on page 46 of Dr. Anderson's book showing the penetration through Platt's arm, and the X-Ray plate (Figure II.4 on page 40) showing the final resting point of the bullet, are not not consistent with such a claim.
The only way the bullet could have penetrated only 8" would be if Platt were an abnormally small person--he wasn't--he was 5'10" and 210.
There's clearly at least 5" of penetration in the upper arm alone.
<<<I'm not going to embed the picture of Platt's arm since it's a little gory. Click here to see it.>>>
Cropped portion of Plate II-A from p46 of Forensic Analysis of the April 11, 1986, FBI Firefight by W. French Anderson, M.D., Published by Paladin Press, 1996, 2006
Cropped portion of Plate II-A from p46 of Forensic Analysis of the April 11, 1986, FBI Firefight by W. French Anderson, M.D., Published by Paladin Press, 1996, 2006
The X-Ray demonstrates that the bullet penetrated to within an inch of midline after entering the right chest under the arm--at least 6" of penetration in the torso for a man Platt's size.
Cropped portion of Figure II-4 from p40 of Forensic Analysis of the April 11, 1986, FBI Firefight by W. French Anderson, M.D., Published by Paladin Press, 1996, 2006
The only thing that makes sense is that the oft-quoted 8" figure you're referring to relates exclusively to penetration after the bullet entered the torso and disregards penetration through the arm. Given the obvious penetration depth through the arm, the only way the 8" figure could be correct would be if the bullet only penetrated 3" into the chest and that is obviously nonsensical given the X-Ray evidence.
Even if we accept that as fact, there would still be an unshored exit to account for. Figure II-2 on page 38 and II-3 on page 39 show Platt's position at the time the bullet struck him and there is clearly space between the exit wound on the upper arm and the entrance wound on the chest.
Attachments
Last edited:
Derbel McDillet
Moderator
I've seen the x-ray and the autopsy photos and have personally spoken with Dr. Anderson and Dr. Fackler. Doc Fackler is very familiar with this particular wound, having spoken with the autopsy doctor, Jay Barnhart. According to everybody I've spoken to the bullet penetrated about 8" total. (According to Dr. Fackler it was about the same as .38 Special 110gr +P JHP).
In regard to the illustrations, they're depictions of what may have happened. I have two different copies of "Forensic Analysis". The first is from the 3rd printing and is dated 1997. (I received it as a handout during a presentation I attended.). The second is the one from Paladin Press, copyright 1996, 2006. The illustration of the bullet's path through Platt's upper arm (Figure II-3) is different in the 3rd printing than the bullet path depicted in in the Paladin Press version. It appears to have been changed as a result of this information:
(Edited to add: The Gun Zone has published the original (uncorrected) illustration - http://www.thegunzone.com/platt-shot.html . The lower illustration is different than the one in the Paladin Press book.)
Figure II-2, which depicts Platt crawling out the passenger window of the Monte Carlo, shows the bullet striking his upper arm in the area of the triceps muscle, and is not accurate when one compares it to the autopsy photo (Plate II-A) and it apparently was not updated when Figure II-3 was changed.
Plate II-B (autopsy photo of Platt's armpit) clearly shows how high up in the arm pit area the bullet was when it exited the arm and entered the chest.
If you press your upper arm against your chest then you'll see that what appears to be 6" of penetration through the arm (as it seems in autopsy photo Plate II-A) becomes about 3" inches. In fact if you hold the 8 1/2" edge of a sheet of paper in the same orientation of the wound path, with your upper arm pressing against your chest, you'll see how the path will end just short of mid-center of your chest. With the upper arm pressing against the chest, the skin is shored.
In regard to the illustrations, they're depictions of what may have happened. I have two different copies of "Forensic Analysis". The first is from the 3rd printing and is dated 1997. (I received it as a handout during a presentation I attended.). The second is the one from Paladin Press, copyright 1996, 2006. The illustration of the bullet's path through Platt's upper arm (Figure II-3) is different in the 3rd printing than the bullet path depicted in in the Paladin Press version. It appears to have been changed as a result of this information:
(Edited to add: The Gun Zone has published the original (uncorrected) illustration - http://www.thegunzone.com/platt-shot.html . The lower illustration is different than the one in the Paladin Press book.)
Figure II-2, which depicts Platt crawling out the passenger window of the Monte Carlo, shows the bullet striking his upper arm in the area of the triceps muscle, and is not accurate when one compares it to the autopsy photo (Plate II-A) and it apparently was not updated when Figure II-3 was changed.
Plate II-B (autopsy photo of Platt's armpit) clearly shows how high up in the arm pit area the bullet was when it exited the arm and entered the chest.
If you press your upper arm against your chest then you'll see that what appears to be 6" of penetration through the arm (as it seems in autopsy photo Plate II-A) becomes about 3" inches. In fact if you hold the 8 1/2" edge of a sheet of paper in the same orientation of the wound path, with your upper arm pressing against your chest, you'll see how the path will end just short of mid-center of your chest. With the upper arm pressing against the chest, the skin is shored.
Last edited:
leadcounsel
Moderator
Well, we do know that several of the agents were out of the fight early reloading and were injured while doing so. The capacity of their guns? 6 shots for the revolvers, and presumably less than 6 for the shotgun.
Had they been shooting (offense) the bad guys may have been ducking and unable to fire. Instead they were reloading (defense) and shot and out of the fight.
Fights are often won on shots fired, just like hockey games are often won on shots on goal.
Last edited: