Spokeperson said the number of shots fired by PD could be over 200.
Spokeperson said the number of shots fired by PD could be over 200.
Seems like a lot of LEO open fire immediately when gunfire is perceived... e.g. either reacting to a suspect firing, or automatically presuming someone else (another officer) is legally justified to shoot, so they are too.
I wish they trained each officer to restrain themselves regardless of the circumstance and only open fire when a) all the conditions are personally satisfied and b) they are aware of their target and what is behind their target. Even if they hear gunshots. (Simulator training would be nice).
This sort of situation seems to result as some derivative of the Battle of Los Angeles, which they called "Jittery Nerves" back then, but I'd call it mass participation myself... e.g. 1) having heightened senses/overly alert, 2) wanting to be a "part of the action", and 3) presuming that other people are justified in their action, so you can blindly participate or you'll miss out. It's the latter part that can be trained away imho.
I tend to give them a little more credit when it comes purely to round count. As in 'oh shit, someone's shooting at me and my friends, I'd better unload'. A situation most LEO have little to no prior experience with. Adrenaline kicks in, focus narrows, keep shooting until the threat stops. As I said earlier, 200 rounds averages about 10 rounds per shooter, into a vehicle from which incoming fire is being taken, from multiple assailants. You can argue how many officers should of shot in the first place, but they see their brethren in danger, and human nature is what it is. I bet those 10 or so shots seemed to go very quickly from the officer's perspective.
Choosing to engage while using moving civilian-occupied vehicles for cover, thus drawing fire towards them, is the part that really gives me pause for concern over the round count.
Well yes, different perspective, but same issue. It results in a problem where if one officer either accidentally or prematurely fires, then the group as a whole is somewhat likely to summarily execute whatever the target is and anything near the target, even more so if any other officer also fires. It's not just "to act on their behalf", but it is coupled with a presumption that the other guys are acting correctly; so you are too - without personally having any cause to engage.
I don't think any officer in that specific situation saw "their brethren in danger" when they all started firing. While there is arguable justification for application of potentially lethal force in the run up to the shootout, evidence hasn't been presented yet as to why the officers started firing. Was it merely because someone on the port side had a gun? Did they point a gun at an officer? Or did one officer open fire prematurely triggering the cascade? At any rate, one can't justify that as acting on behalf of other officers, as ones on the starboard were even blasting left and right when hands were demonstrated as the driver tried to exit. The officers there, at best, were simply presuming other officers had proper justification and so they were going to "help out". Starboard reflected no immediate threat to an officers life in the helicopter video, which is pretty comprehensive - and I am presuming that, to my understanding, suspects had fired (some) rounds while driving. That still by itself doesn't authorize lethal force (from a moral perspective) once the vehicle has come to a stop and the officers have an overwhelming force majority + body armor + a hostage is present.
Now, from a legal perspective, since it is subjective "fear" standard on behalf of the individual, the officers will be cleared of any wrongdoing and placed back on duty. However, we all know what is "legal" is not synonymous with what is "moral", as it has often times been legally acceptable to enact severe moral wrongs.
The only solution I can see to these situations is to train using virtual reality systems. You can program an unlimited amount of scenarios for your area.
The link below will not show the actual system in operation for obvious reasons. Just use your imagination.
https://breakingdefense.com/2018/09/...at-task-force/
I think VR has a lot of potential for LEO training. It would take quite a bit of instinctual conditioning to break the "hear bang->open fire" reaction, and that's a possible way to help.Quote:
Originally Posted by BushMasterBoy
Looked like a bad situation to me but I don't know what the armchair police captains think the police should have done once the kidnappers started shooting. The sooner they end the incident, the fewer by-standers are endangered. They'd be getting criticism for doing nothing if they just stood back and while the kidnappers fired. The flashes at the truck itself looked to me like muzzle flashes, not sparks from incoming rounds.
As far as using the vehicles for cover, yes, they are occupied but are you saying the police should just walk up between the vehicles and offer themselves as targets? It looked to me like they were using the engines as cover (better protection anyway), not the passenger cabins.
Cops are expected to protect people from danger, not to knowingly put them at risk. They used the people they are charged to keep safe and instead used them as human shields.
The police had helicopters following, they should have held back and waited for a less populated area than a busy highway at rush hour. Used some fucking tactics. Not surround the hijacked vehicle and then mag dump into it from 4 different directions.
The only positive outcome of what happened was all the fresh memes the jaded internet community has made out of this.
https://media.discordapp.net/attachm...03bea6d377.jpg
https://media.discordapp.net/attachm...636&height=636
https://media.discordapp.net/attachm...565&height=636
https://media.discordapp.net/attachm...image0-100.jpg
https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net...bf&oe=5E8CC27D
https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net...0b&oe=5E8562E3
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...5747355281.png
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...5741119810.jpg
https://youtu.be/iOmjzjEs5DM (reposting video)
Reviewed it and noticed more details.
1:43 looks like someone reached out the starboard and blindly shot a single pistol round.
1:45 instead of watching the stairs/driver, look at the side of the UPS truck. You can see a crazy # of shots there on the paint as they occur. Reflective of either the overall accuracy or blindly firing through the truck from an obtuse angle, not sure which.
Shots STILL impacting around the driver as the video ends even after the driver is visibly dead. (1:56+)
That is an excessive stretch of any legal justification to still be firing at that point.
I wouldn't be surprised if it ends up being 200. There's easily 20 on one area of the truck there that is nowhere near being a "target". And while a suspect did fire at police, that doesn't mean the innocent lives lost wouldn't have been preventable - as others pointed out. It's unlikely the suspects would have been blindly firing anything if they weren't being hotly pursued.
If police backed off, followed via air, and GASP, the suspects fell through the cracks, does it actually matter? How many times do they successfully "get away" anyway even if police are never there. Thieves are generally DMF'ers, and they could've solved the case in short order when they went to pawn the jewelry and properly served high-risk warrants in a safer situation, probably all in under a week.
ETA:
(I'll add the officer on foot about 40' away from the rear right corner immediately was returning fire at the suspect as the suspect shot a single round)
Hard to say if flashes in the UPS truck are from the suspects, but can't be sure. The 1:49 one looks probable. But otherwise, the metal there is also reflecting some police sirens, it's hard to say if it is sparks or it could even be reflecting LEO muzzle flashes.