Watching your six

L

LASur5r

Moderator
My wife's nephew is a Sheriff's Deputy. The other day he was telling me about not taking things for granted so I thought I'd just pass this on.

Seems there was a bank robbery going on, deputy arrived on scene, parked his unit behind building right across the street. On exiting the vehicle, deputy notices a well dressed lady wearing dark glasses peering at bank around corner of same building. When she sees deputy she acts startled, but recovers quickly and says, "Oh officer, I'm glad you're here..I think something is going on at the bank...
Officer being there to protect and serve, walks past lady to peer at bank at which point she shoots him in the back....turns out she was the lookout.
Lucky the officer had his vest and survived.
 
Seems more of an anecdotale (SP?) story to me. Surely any lookout so calm and composed as to to pull that ruse on a cop, and who would commit such a serious offense as shooting a cop, would have had the presence of mind to shoot him in the head.

------------------
 
nbk2000, welcome to TFL ...

I find it distasteful to discuss such an act, but ... if I felt I had to shoot an armed person who was already on alert, I'd still go for COM. Easy to talk about CNS / head shots, but at least for many of us, not so easy to make that shot in such a situation.

The lesson is well advised ... Ayoob teaches that (and, I forget the jargon) it is not uncommon for BG's to have such a person somewhere else in a convenience store while the primary BG holds up the clerk.

Regards from AZ
 
I would think that for most people it would actually be quite easy for them to shoot someone in the head from a pace or two away since they're not looking the person in the face, the target is probably stationary (peering around corner), and most people (having seen "head-shots" in countless movies where only a little bloody red spot appears on the victims head) don't realize till after the first time just how messy it really is so there'd be no real reason for them not to.

And anybody with 2 brains cells to spark together knows that police wear vests so that's NOT where you want to be aiming.

As for the backup guy, I'm sure that the majority of them would, if the police showed up and didn't know they were a BG too, probably walk away or pretend to be a bystander. The woman who shot the cop is an abberation, otherwise there'd be a lot more dead cops than there are.

Only if the backup thought it was a bystander or do-gooder, and the risks were worth exposing themselves as BGs to witnesses and cameras would they possibly interfer.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Thomas:

The lesson is well advised ... Ayoob teaches that (and, I forget the jargon) it is not uncommon for BG's to have such a person somewhere else in a convenience store while the primary BG holds up the clerk.
[/quote]

That's what he (and probably others) call a "tailgunner." According to Ayoob, bad guys have been known to send such a person into an establishment before going into to rob the place. The tailgunner pretends to be just another patron. So, if an undercover officer or a CCW carrier tries to interrupt the robbery, the tailgunner comes up from behind and shoots them in the head.

M1911
 
Man, you guys were scaring me. I was wondering where I went wrong in writing this story?.

The point of the story was that you really have to watch your six and be aware that there could be a "tailgunner" there to take out a police officer or a good Samaritan with a CCW permit. Just because the "lady" did not appear to be a BG, doesn't mean a thing...often that's why they're out there.

Stay safe guys and watch your six.
 
Keep this thread clean guys - I am very near closing it.
I have lost 3 friends who were good and dedicated law men.
Discussion of how to kill them raise my ire.
 
I believe there's a saying that goes like "Assumption is the mother of all foul ups". The officer who got shot assumed that the women was a bystander and so he let his guard down and got shot for his trouble.

NEVER assume a stranger is OK. Always keep them in front of you where you can watch them. And it would be perfectly justifiable to pat down someone who might be a possible "tailgunner" or who you couldn't keep on eye on during a situation. No need for a warrant or probable cause, officer safety is enough.
 
Lemme go to a fundamental basic: Ala Chairman Jeff, in talking about the four colors, Condition Yellow helps you control your environment. Part of your environment is behind you.

The concept of "tailgunners" is a specific add-on into an area which is already a potential hazard.

You don't have to be a LEO to consider your Six. Mugger #1 approaches from the front in an obvious manner; #2 eases up quietly, from behind--and you're in deep doodoo.

Regards, Art
 
Um- before I welcome you to the board, nbk, let me be sure I'm understanding you correctly. It sounds like you are saying that LEO in any situation they are not comfortable in, have the right to search an unoffending citizen? Surely I misunderstand? (I certainly have before.) I know you could not be suggesting wholesale abrogation of our Constitionally guaranteed 4th amendment right, could you? No. Sorry I even thought that was what you meant. I mean, if you had meant that, any Law officer, anywhere, could stop and search whoever was near him, "for his safety".

If I have somehow misunderstood what you meant by No need for a warrant or probable cause, let me welcome you to the board. If I have not misunderstood, you are not my friend, though I respect even enemies who are forthright.
 
I said that because, from what I've read, a LEO doesn't have to have a warrant or probable cause to pat you down for weapons (officer safety). That's not to say that they can empty out your pockets and purse, just feel for a gun.

And aren't law-abiding citizens who don't have anything to hide willing to voluntarily submit to a search? :rolleyes:

I'm not a cop (obviously) but if I think something's going down I'm not letting anyone get behind me. Either stay in front of me, or get the hell out of here!

And on the subject of searches, it's already been ruled that devices that passively image things not normally visible are permisible without warrant. For instance a helicopter can fly over your house and scope it out with a thermal imager which amplifies the infrared energy emitted by everything.

But anything that emits energy and images the returned signal is deemed an intrusive search and thus needs a warrent. For instance, a radar imager that sends a radar beam into your house to locate where you are and your movements would require a search warrant.

Passive (no warrant):
Thermal imagers (FLIR)
Night Vision Devices
"Bionic Ears"
Millimeter wave cameras

Active (warrant):
Radar
Laser Mics
Bugs
Ultrasound scanners

There's a whole industry developing both types of devices for street use. One of them uses passive millimetric imaging of body energy to visualize concealed weapons and contraband. Soon to be the size of a camcorder. And being passive, no warrant needed.

What does the development of these devices mean? Possibly police parking their cars watching sidewalks to see who walks by with a concealed gun or "suspecious" spot. That's probable cause right there. And if they're wrong, so what. They did it in "good faith" so the judge would reject any lawsuit against them for unreasonable search.

Just as surveillance cameras and metal detectors used to be only affordable to governments, this technology will get cheap enough to be purchased by business. What would you think about Wal-Mart or the local video store scanning you? For theft prevention of course. :rolleyes:

here's what it looks like when your scanned by one of these devices.
bodysearch.gif


There's the future.
 
Okay, my bad. I see you meant that it was being done, not that you agree with it.

I am all for local LEO officers, but I jealously attempt to retain what rights my loving government grants me.
thefinger.gif
 
An eye-opening post!

I carry (not LEO) and feel better informed now. I will now be more "heads-up" in this sort of situation in the remote chance I stumble upon a robbery. I will certainly check for a helper. I will not be making arrests!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top