Some good information on warning shots and a scenario

First, someone opined we should carry a non lethal round for this sort of situation. Where the heck would you have us carry this piece of equipment?

I am not a small guy and with all the gear I have to carry my belt and vest is pretty well laden down right now, and you want to add another piece of equipment.

You are in a MOB situation vastly outnumbered with wounded Coppers on the field that is a deadly force scenario.

"R/O due to the fact that above offenders had already injured officers, would not comply with verbal commands and physical tactics and continued to commit the offense of Aggravated Battery to a Police Officer utilized deadly force to stop the most brazen offender being in fear for his life and the lives of his fellow Officers"
 
and will usually hit an innocent bystander, probably someone's child or a mom.
Click to expand...
Nice example of Murphy’s Law, but simply not true in reality.

A prime example of an exaggeration that leads to passing BS into law, imo … some of which, NJ is infamous for.
 
BTW, Wagonman - some of the officers around here have a little holder on their belts for two less than lethal 12 gauge shells for their shotguns in the car. Not that I'm recommeding anything - just mentioning something I've seen.
 
Every bullet that leaves your firearm absolutley 100% responsible for, glad to see everyone agrees about that. As to firing warning shots, I don't know, and If I did there would be a serious backstop I was aiming at, taking into account caliber and ballistics. However, if there is an immenient threat and I feel as though my life is in danger no warning shots except for the ones that hit the chest. If your worrying about trying to warn off a threat by a shot, it could take important focus of the threat. Just my little opinions on the subject.
 
Glenn E. Meyer said:
...some of the officers around here have a little holder on their belts for two less than lethal 12 gauge shells for their shotguns in the car. Not that I'm recommeding anything - just mentioning something I've seen.
Click to expand...
Interesting.

In our little community, the police have gone over to dedicated "less lethal" shotguns in all the cars -- no live shotgun ammunition at all. The idea, of course, is to avoid nasty surprises. And if the situation warrants something more serious, each car also has an AR-15.

But I suspect that in the situation under discussion, all the officers involved had were sidearms. According to the blog, they were undercover.
 
Thats creepy though. What if they do a traffic stop and there are two serious criminals armed with lets say an AR and an AK and they each have a pistol to boot. Say they have ton of ammo and are criminals who will resort to violence at the drop of a dime. I would not want to be up against them with only pistols if they started to open fire. The less than lethal shotgun would do nothing if anyone had it, unless somone got a lucky shot on the drivers head through an open window, knocking him out. Doubtful it would do anything though. Then they have to rush for AR's in a trunk while under fire :eek:. Id say stick to the 00B 12 pellet 2 3/4" law enforcement load.
 
Oh good whew. I was nervous for the officer for a while when I heard that. Nothing worst than some scumbag shooting at an officer who was trying to help, and then the officer is undergunned. Im glad to hear they have their AR's ready, that makes sense then with less than lethal. I can understand the morality behind it but think it could be dangerous. Do they alternate less lethal with say 00B. Like the 1st two are rubber 00B but then real?
 
We're getting a little off topic, but here, if it's a shotgun, it's loaded only with beanbags. They don't want to shoot someone with 00B if they thought they were shooting a beanbag, and they don't want to be firing beanbags if something more authoritative is in order.

Also, SOP is that if an officer has the shotgun (which is loaded with less lethal), he's backed up by another officer with the AR or a drawn sidearm.
 
Good Point. The backup makes a lot of sense. Ok i got a clear picture in my head now. So really you could have it all covered, A less lethal shotgun for less demanding circumstance, the pistol for medium confrontation, and the AR for serious contact. All these people acting at once sounds like a pretty effective team. Thanks for that its intersting.
 
I am not against more options. I love my tazer, much to my surprise. "tazer tazer tazer" means my chances of having to get into a boxing match has lessened considerably. The criminal element knows that we have avery low bar to reach to utilize this wonderful tool. Obey or be tazed.

It is the MMQBing I dislike.
 
LOL wagonman. "Oh in the face, in the face:eek:"-The Hangover. In all seriousness tasers are useful but Ive seen a guy fight one when both probes were in and go after the cop. Also thick clothes prevent both probes from distributing electricity.
 
I know, thats why I said lessened my chances. The psychological effect is usually enough. especially after someone in the group has tken the ride in the past
 
True Wagon it is a good deterent. I still think it is a decent SD weapon to get someone to stop if thats what you got. Better than a butter knife lol. Do you carry with the tazer just curious?
 
Every bullet that leaves your firearm absolutley 100% responsible for, glad to see everyone agrees about that.
Click to expand...
Responsible in the broadest sense : yes … BUT … this takes into account personal moral obligations that should not be a matter of law to decide.

Culpable for the harm caused to others, beyond reasonable expectations for the bullet to do harm, when the weapon was fired justifiably : most definitely not.

The percentage of responsibility in both a criminal and civil sense, should not go beyond what is reasonable to assess.
 
I don't carry the Tazer off duty, I don't think I am authorized----not sure though.

I don't know if I would even if I can. It would seem you would need two people to deploy it correctly. one to taze one to cuff. After the tazing the offender is ready to fight again immediately.
 
Yea and probably not to happy :eek:. That makes sense how would you be cuffing a guy squeezing it with one hand while hes shaking all around. You cant even move his arms because his muscles are so tense. I don't think I would carry it either, you really do need 2 people like you said. Im not a LEO but am very intersted in their tactics, it is interesting to see all the SOP's for these strange scenarios. Animal- I meant in kind of the broader sense like you said, say a richochet hit a calf and half the bullet/jacket went through and through. No serious damadge done but I fired the round. I would offer for the medical bills and try to help the person out. However, if they tried to sue it would be rediculous in a righteous SD shooting. This is where the reasonable assessing comes in and I agree.
 
IMO I would not fire any warning shots. I am not a police officer but i am speaking on behalf of us civilian CCers. If i draw my gun on a person i intend to shoot them with it.
 
I draw my gun, I also intend to use it. However, not every situation where you draw, calls to shoot. That being said, If I have a gun out I am also ready to fire it immediatley if necessary. I think maybe a warning would help in some situations. Most of the time though, I think my warning shot is going to be the 1st one that hits the threat in the chest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top