Limnophile
New member
If you want to have some fun, try to verify any of that. For extra fun, write the author of the piece, and challenge him/her verify it.
I have no need to contact Mr. Tueller to query him. Thanks to the link provided in the NY Times article I can read a reprint of the original 1983 article: http://www.theppsc.org/Staff_Views/Tueller/How.Close.htm.
As far as contacting the author of the article at the Times, I would not waste my time. I do not regard the Times as a reliable source of fact or sound analysis, but I do regard it as a reliable weather vane of modern liberal-progressive intentions.
I do, however, assume that most cops are familiar with the three-decade old Tueller Drill. After all, most internet gunslingers are familiar with it. I also assume any law enforcement academy that fails to acquaint its attendees of how much distance can be covered in the time it takes to draw and fire two on-target shots would be negligent, and judge who would disallow this fact to be used as evidence in court would be corrupt or stupid, and anyone accused of unlawful use of lethal force who doesn't invoke the facts illustrated by the drill if they are relevant would be a fool.
That said, the 21-ft rule is merely a statement of fact, not a license to shoot anyone within that distance. I doubt that any credible department has ever portrayed or applied it that way. The Seattle PD's discipline of the cop who shot the homeless wood carving helps to demonstrate that, but I assume the author's beef is that the disciplined cop was not charged with at least manslaughter.