Title: Psycho Pig Heroes Shoot Man Armed with [Golf Club?] 10 Times Source:
[None] URL Source:[None] Published:Jan 24, 2012 Author:- Post Date:2012-01-24 22:37:47 by Eric Stratton Ping List:*Jack-Booted Thugs*Subscribe to *Jack-Booted Thugs* Keywords:None Views:319 Comments:23
Fucking moron brought a club to a gunfight. When a cop is pointing his gun at you it's time to give it up and fight through the judicial system and seek justice there. Pedro chose suicide by cop....
After watching the video a few more times, I noticed that the first cop IS holding a Taser and fires it at the dude at about 0:39 into the video. The guy simply pulls the dart out his face, then yeah, he goes to swing that thing at the cop who tazed him.
The only thing the 2nd cop did wrong, besides holding his weapon cocked to the side like a gangster prior to opening fire, was to empty his weapon into the guy. Three or four shots should have been sufficient, and he should not have kept firing while the guy was laying on the ground.
The cops probably assumed that the perp was on something like PCP (and he probably was) after all the other preliminary and very erratic dancing around the parking lot by the mestizo. In that case, they shoot until the perp quits moving. A person on PCP can keep going and take another person out of this world with them even with a shot out heart, and cops ain't martyrs.
After watching the video a few more times, I noticed that the first cop IS holding a Taser and fires it at the dude at about 0:39 into the video. The guy simply pulls the dart out his face, then yeah, he goes to swing that thing at the cop who tazed him.
The only thing the 2nd cop did wrong, besides holding his weapon cocked to the side like a gangster prior to opening fire, was to empty his weapon into the guy. Three or four shots should have been sufficient, and he should not have kept firing while the guy was laying on the ground.
We used to swing heavy objects back at the psychos, and inevitably they'd need a trip to the ER for stitches. I'm guessing what I did way back when would today land me in trouble today, while this shooting will probably go down as justified. Insanity is the end result of liberalism gone unchecked.
#13. To: FormerLurker, christine, Jethro Tull (#9)
The only thing the 2nd cop did wrong, besides holding his weapon cocked to the side like a gangster prior to opening fire, was to empty his weapon into the guy. Three or four shots should have been sufficient, and he should not have kept firing while the guy was laying on the ground.
I don't want to seem argumentative but the rule is, "Keep shooting until the subject goes down." Ammo is cheap and there's no polite way to shoot someone. And if the cop (or even you or I) fail to stop an armed perp then the cop's (or our) legacy could be to end up as part of a training course on "what not to do." For instance, suppose you're facing three perps armed with guns. How would you handle the problem? (Answer: Put a pill in each of them ASAP and then go back and address their individual needs based on which if any are still standing or jockeying for a chance to kill you) Surely in that scenario you can understand why economizing on ammo could get you killed, right?
25 years ago I read one of the best books on the subject. It was entitled, STREET SURVIVAL: TACTICS FOR ARMED ENCOUNTERS by PALADIN PRESS. It has lots of pix of dead cops, and they didn't end up in the book because of newer, more clever perps. Cops die from making the same mistakes again and again. This book is an advanced course that goes far beyond basic police academy training.
And, your conclusion that "Three or four shots should have been sufficient" is also a common misconception by people who've never had to stop a dangerous person in their tracks. If the rounds don't hit the CNS (spine or brain) then a mortally wounded perp can live long enough to kill everyone in the place. (In the courses I've taken this would be considered a failure of the training objective) And, don't assume that any weapon other than a firearm is a negligible threat. Even one inch of razor sharp steel can end or change many lives in a matter of seconds, and a blunt instrument can leave victims in playpens waiting for their next diaper changes for the rest of their lives. (file this under "THINGS WORSE THAN DYING-being a burden on your family")
The aforementioned book cites the case of an armed liquor store robbery suspect who soaked up 39 rounds of 9mm ammo in the head, neck and chest before his blood finally leaked out and he stopped hopping around inside the store. So, the rule (which is the result of cold statistical actuaries) is, "the longer it takes to neutralize an armed threat the greater the odds that a cop or armed citizen won't make it home to his/her family that night." The name of the game is to STOP the threat, and killing him or her is incidental to that. And giving the sucker an even break ("I fired only 3 shots-it seemed like the polite thing to do") is not part of the real world where survival is the objective.
The rule applies to civilians and cops alike: "Shoot for center of mass where your rounds will be most effective and keep shooting until the subject goes down." (This may seem counter intuitive but brain shots on moving targets are really easy on TV and film and really hard in real life) If deadly force is justified then any concern about offending the sensibilities of bystanders with camera phones could get you or other innocents killed.
LAPD learned much of the info the hard way when PCP made its debut in the city. After a few cops were unable to stop PCP flip outs with TASERs and revolvers the high capacity auto pistols and shotguns found favor with officers, particularly those who didn't care to be bludgeoned with their own arms after they were ripped out of the sockets.