Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44350499

So far, the only actual injuries reported are a police officer shot himself in the foot.

 BaronIveagh wrote:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44350499

So far, the only actual injuries reported are a police officer shot himself in the foot.

Poor trigger discipline?

I mean at least no one else has been hurt, that's somewhat good news.

 ScarletRose wrote:
Poor trigger discipline?

Shouldn't a police officer—who supposedly handles guns professionally—know about this stuff?

Could of tripped, things do happen

 BaronIveagh wrote:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44350499

So far, the only actual injuries reported are a police officer shot himself in the foot.

Honestly that sounds like the best kind of active shooter. I mean not that shooting yourself in the foot is a good thing but when that's the only injury it seems like things went okay XD

And in vaguely related news ...

Dancing FBI agent drops gun during backflip and shoots man in leg

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-44349521

 War Drone wrote:
And in vaguely related news ...

Dancing FBI agent drops gun during backflip and shoots man in leg

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-44349521

That is....


Doing backflips in a bar....


with a weapon....

with one in the chamber....

I hope that man is unemployed, hard.

 LordofHats wrote:

Honestly that sounds like the best kind of active shooter. I mean not that shooting yourself in the foot is a good thing but when that's the only injury it seems like things went okay XD

Seems the shooter had some sort of air pistol, so how this is even a shooter is sort of questionable.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

Honestly that sounds like the best kind of active shooter. I mean not that shooting yourself in the foot is a good thing but when that's the only injury it seems like things went okay XD

Seems the shooter had some sort of air pistol, so how this is even a shooter is sort of questionable.

Because it sounds good for 24 hour news networks that feed on bad stories.

Shouldn't a police officer—who supposedly handles guns professionally—know about this stuff?

The average cop isn't a "gun guy."

 SOFDC wrote:

Shouldn't a police officer—who supposedly handles guns professionally—know about this stuff?

The average cop isn't a "gun guy."

Yeah. I've logged more range time in the last month than most cops do in a year. And I'm pretty much a "Filthy casual" in terms of how much time I get there. There's guys who practically live there.

 Grey Templar wrote:
There's guys who practically live there.

Around here those guys just have one at home.

 SOFDC wrote:

Shouldn't a police officer—who supposedly handles guns professionally—know about this stuff?

The average cop isn't a "gun guy."

The average taxi driver isn't a "car guy" yet they should still know how to handle their tools and be competent and responsible. Would you trust a taxi driver without a driving license?

Mario wrote:

 SOFDC wrote:

Shouldn't a police officer—who supposedly handles guns professionally—know about this stuff?

The average cop isn't a "gun guy."

The average taxi driver isn't a "car guy" yet they should still know how to handle their tools and be competent and responsible. Would you trust a taxi driver without a driving license?

Thats kinda the point.

Police should be better trained with their weapons, but they generally aren't.

And yet, there are a lot of people who think only the police should have firearms...

 Grey Templar wrote:

 SOFDC wrote:

Shouldn't a police officer—who supposedly handles guns professionally—know about this stuff?

The average cop isn't a "gun guy."

Yeah. I've logged more range time in the last month than most cops do in a year. And I'm pretty much a "Filthy casual" in terms of how much time I get there. There's guys who practically live there.

Because they have the money and time to do so.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, cops are generally underpaid and clocking as many hours as teachers.

I bet the cop doesn't even get charged for assaulting a cop. This country is going down the drain!

Glad everyone is safe!

That cop was coming right at that cop!

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 SOFDC wrote:

Shouldn't a police officer—who supposedly handles guns professionally—know about this stuff?

The average cop isn't a "gun guy."

Yeah. I've logged more range time in the last month than most cops do in a year. And I'm pretty much a "Filthy casual" in terms of how much time I get there. There's guys who practically live there.

Because they have the money and time to do so.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, cops are generally underpaid and clocking as many hours as teachers.

I’ll grant you hours, but when people who make a lot less than cops can scrape up enough to train on their own dime more than cops...sorry, this is a drive to succeed issue, not a money issue.

 SOFDC wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 SOFDC wrote:

Shouldn't a police officer—who supposedly handles guns professionally—know about this stuff?

The average cop isn't a "gun guy."

Yeah. I've logged more range time in the last month than most cops do in a year. And I'm pretty much a "Filthy casual" in terms of how much time I get there. There's guys who practically live there.

Because they have the money and time to do so.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, cops are generally underpaid and clocking as many hours as teachers.

I’ll grant you hours, but when people who make a lot less than cops can scrape up enough to train on their own dime more than cops...sorry, this is a drive to succeed issue, not a money issue.

I'd have to be shown actual evidence of someone who makes a lot less than cops but somehow can afford to spend time to be at the range for significant periods of time.

A thousand rounds of ammunition bought in bulk for service pistol cartridges is generally in the 2-3 hundred dollar range. Obviously cut that in about half if you buy 500 rounds at a time instead. Range fees approx 15-20 per visit twice a month. I myself can manage to afford to shoot a case a month or every other month without causing myself hardship. If I save ammo money for a month or two I could send myself to a reputable pistol class. I make less than half what a policeman in my city earns.

EDIT: a case in this situation meaning 1000 rounds. This is a full career of officer friendly shooting his yearly 20-50 round qualification. Yes, these officers exist. Lots of them.

 SOFDC wrote:
A thousand rounds of ammunition bought in bulk for service pistol cartridges is generally in the 2-3 hundred dollar range. Obviously cut that in about half if you buy 500 rounds at a time instead. Range fees approx 15-20 per visit twice a month. I myself can manage to afford to shoot a case a month or every other month without causing myself hardship. If I save ammo money for a month or two I could send myself to a reputable pistol class. I make less than half what a policeman in my city earns.

EDIT: a case in this situation meaning 1000 rounds. This is a full career of officer friendly shooting his yearly 20-50 round qualification. Yes, these officers exist. Lots of them.

The police gets so much more leeway than regular civilians when it comes to using their guns so they should be better trained. It's simple as that, and the government should pay for that. Having badly educated/trained police officers shouldn't be acceptable. How many months training do US police officers usually get before they get pushed into the job? Wasn't it less than a year? It's like with the little discussion about driving licenses (in the automation thread) and how the US apparently has more crashes than other countries and a laughable license test. If you are willing to accept low training standards you get worse results and more injuries/deaths no matter how many guns are sloshing around in the USA.

And those numbers you counted up shouldn't even matter too much. They should have shooting range in house to practice and the ammo they need should get them a bulk discount and provided at no cost to the officers to train. Some districts also have quite expensive "wannabe military" equipment. Maybe some of the money wasted on pseudo tanks and gadgets could be instead used to train them (in general and not just shooting guns). Then instead of playing soldier they would actually be more competent police officers.

If I was a cop, I would spend more time learning how to de-escalate a person and on general psychology than I would at the range learning how to shoot someone.

That's just me though.

The police gets so much more leeway than regular civilians when it comes to using their guns so they should be better trained. It's simple as that, and the government should pay for that. Having badly educated/trained police officers shouldn't be acceptable. How many months training do US police officers usually get before they get pushed into the job? Wasn't it less than a year? It's like with the little discussion about driving licenses (in the automation thread) and how the US apparently has more crashes than other countries and a laughable license test. If you are willing to accept low training standards you get worse results and more injuries/deaths no matter how many guns are sloshing around in the USA.

And those numbers you counted up shouldn't even matter too much. They should have shooting range in house to practice and the ammo they need should get them a bulk discount and provided at no cost to the officers to train. Some districts also have quite expensive "wannabe military" equipment. Maybe some of the money wasted on pseudo tanks and gadgets could be instead used to train them (in general and not just shooting guns). Then instead of playing soldier they would actually be more competent police officers.

Yes they do, in my opinion too much leeway. Disregarding that issue, I don't see a problem with the average cop not shooting like an average human being rather than a gunpowder snorting autist or SWAT junkie. Why? This:

If I was a cop, I would spend more time learning how to de-escalate a person and on general psychology than I would at the range learning how to shoot someone.

A policeman`s job, 98% of the time, is not shooting people. I don't really want it to be otherwise. I would much rather all that training time go into "How to not trample the constitution as you do your job" and verbal judo. If he can operate the gun safely and has the presence of mind to TRY aiming rather than cranking rounds off into the apartment building behind the bad guy or whatever, I am relatively content.

...and let's face it, by the time officer friendly actually shows up whatever is going to happen has already happened. How good he shoots won't enter into it until long after I have won the fight or have become a chalk outline and in neither case do I give a damn. Let -ME- worry about shooting well, i'm the one who has to make sure he survives however long it takes the flashy flashies to show up.

 SOFDC wrote:

The police gets so much more leeway than regular civilians when it comes to using their guns so they should be better trained. It's simple as that, and the government should pay for that. Having badly educated/trained police officers shouldn't be acceptable. How many months training do US police officers usually get before they get pushed into the job? Wasn't it less than a year? It's like with the little discussion about driving licenses (in the automation thread) and how the US apparently has more crashes than other countries and a laughable license test. If you are willing to accept low training standards you get worse results and more injuries/deaths no matter how many guns are sloshing around in the USA.

And those numbers you counted up shouldn't even matter too much. They should have shooting range in house to practice and the ammo they need should get them a bulk discount and provided at no cost to the officers to train. Some districts also have quite expensive "wannabe military" equipment. Maybe some of the money wasted on pseudo tanks and gadgets could be instead used to train them (in general and not just shooting guns). Then instead of playing soldier they would actually be more competent police officers.

Yes they do, in my opinion too much leeway. Disregarding that issue, I don't see a problem with the average cop not shooting like an average human being rather than a gunpowder snorting autist or SWAT junkie. Why? This:

If I was a cop, I would spend more time learning how to de-escalate a person and on general psychology than I would at the range learning how to shoot someone.

A policeman`s job, 98% of the time, is not shooting people. I don't really want it to be otherwise. I would much rather all that training time go into "How to not trample the constitution as you do your job" and verbal judo. If he can operate the gun safely and has the presence of mind to TRY aiming rather than cranking rounds off into the apartment building behind the bad guy or whatever, I am relatively content.

...and let's face it, by the time officer friendly actually shows up whatever is going to happen has already happened. How good he shoots won't enter into it until long after I have won the fight or have become a chalk outline and in neither case do I give a damn. Let -ME- worry about shooting well, i'm the one who has to make sure he survives however long it takes the flashy flashies to show up.

98% of the time? How about 99.999% of the time. I have had many family members involved in law enforcement at many levels for many years and even in law enforcement needing a firearm is like needing a parachute on a cross country flight. My father had to bail out of more aircraft in 20 years of military service (just once) than he ever had to employ his side arm as a firearm. He did have some nut job bite his arm like a pit bull and they couldn't get the guy to stop chomping so after unloading his revolver it was used as a lever to pry the guys mouth open. True story. My uncle however shot 2 people in 5 years out in LA. So yeah, California cops....

 Grey Templar wrote:
Yeah. I've logged more range time in the last month than most cops do in a year. And I'm pretty much a "Filthy casual" in terms of how much time I get there. There's guys who practically live there.

Time at the range isn't worthless, but it's nowhere near as useful as you'd like to assume it is when you are suddenly thrown in to a life or death situation. When are thrown, without warning, in to a life and death situation where adrenaline spikes and almost everything about the event is unknown, then that time on the range doesn't hurt, but any assumption that you're more likely to handle it better than a policeman comes from you assuming the only skill being tested is gun handling, which is kind of silly.

Yes, look at the resource cop in Parkland who froze up.

 sebster wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Yeah. I've logged more range time in the last month than most cops do in a year. And I'm pretty much a "Filthy casual" in terms of how much time I get there. There's guys who practically live there.

Time at the range isn't worthless, but it's nowhere near as useful as you'd like to assume it is when you are suddenly thrown in to a life or death situation. When are thrown, without warning, in to a life and death situation where adrenaline spikes and almost everything about the event is unknown, then that time on the range doesn't hurt, but any assumption that you're more likely to handle it better than a policeman comes from you assuming the only skill being tested is gun handling, which is kind of silly.

Of course. Though cops get shockingly little of that training as well, unless you’re on the SWAT team.

 SOFDC wrote:
A policeman`s job, 98% of the time, is not shooting people. I don't really want it to be otherwise. I would much rather all that training time go into "How to not trample the constitution as you do your job" and verbal judo. If he can operate the gun safely and has the presence of mind to TRY aiming rather than cranking rounds off into the apartment building behind the bad guy or whatever, I am relatively content.

Also, when there is a bad shoot, it's pretty rare it is a bad shoot because the cop rightly identified that someone needed to be shot but then fired and hit an innocent bystander. It happens, but it is far more common that the cop hit exactly who he intended to hit, but it turned out the cop misjudged and fired on a person who wasn't posing any kind of threat.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Of course. Though cops get shockingly little of that training as well, unless you’re on the SWAT team.

Sure, if the point is 'cops should get more training in threat identification etc' then we don't disagree. But the point being made was that people who spend more time on the gun range are better prepared, and that's the point I was saying is wrong.

 sebster wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Of course. Though cops get shockingly little of that training as well, unless you’re on the SWAT team.

Sure, if the point is 'cops should get more training in threat identification etc' then we don't disagree. But the point being made was that people who spend more time on the gun range are better prepared, and that's the point I was saying is wrong.

They are better prepared in terms of weapon function, accuracy, discipline, etc... That is important in a stressful situation. You don't want to have to think about how to operate your weapon, it should be instinct so you can devote your mental energy towards the situation and not "how do I use this thing?"

Now its not going to make someone not cower in a corner clutching their weapon when things are going down, thats what other training is needed for. But you're wrong in saying that "Going to the range doesn't help in a firefight". It does help. Its not 100% of the equation, but it is part of the equation. And cops should go to the range far far more often than they do now, in addition to many other things of course.

 Grey Templar wrote:
They are better prepared in terms of weapon function, accuracy, discipline, etc... That is important in a stressful situation. You don't want to have to think about how to operate your weapon, it should be instinct so you can devote your mental energy towards the situation and not "how do I use this thing?"

Sure, muscle memory is important is stressful situations.

Now its not going to make someone not cower in a corner clutching their weapon when things are going down, thats what other training is needed for.

Here you are stuck on the same false assumption. You still think it is all about the act of shooting, the only additional element you've added is someone so panicked they aren't able to shoot. You're still ignoring situational awareness, suspect threat patterns, signs of erratic behaviour, conflict avoidance and non-violent conflict resolution, all the other stuff that is hugely important to avoiding the shooting, and to making sure that if you do pull the trigger you're as confident as can be that you had to do it.

And that's all stuff that you aren't going to get from spending your weekends at the range. That doesn't mean time at the range won't leave you better prepared than someone who spends their weekends playing golf, but it will still be a massive skills gap compared to even a poorly trained cop, who will still develop those skills just from his daily interactions with the public.

But you're wrong in saying that "Going to the range doesn't help in a firefight".

Good thing I said the exact opposite. Twice.
"Time at the range isn't worthless"
"that time on the range doesn't hurt"

Come on, dude. That's really bad.