Great outcome.
I noticed some issues tactically speaking.
Officer Davis smoked that ass clown. Talk about shot placement.
Any reasonable person would have no issues with the shooting depicted in the video.
Good work.
let the Monday morning qbing begin?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY0WxgSXdEE
Sent via Tapatalk
Reality. Shit can go bad really fast on a traffic stop.
Glad none of the good guys were killed. This is why I get a little adrenaline rush every time I stop a vehicle…you never know who is sitting in that car, or what their intentions are…
The officer was very lucky that he was not killed do to tactical errors on his part but Adrenalin will sometimes inhibit a person from thinking ahead to deal with the “what ifs” and allows the mind to center only on a single goal. (Basically Fight or Flight)
Being a L/E and a tactic’s trainer it is not criticism to critique a critical incident and learn from its short comings. Its a vital training tool used in police academies all over the country as others can learn from the mistakes we make.
Now on the quick look it appears the main and obvious goal of the officer was to prevent the escape of the subject and this single objective over all others is the reason he closed the distance to point blank as to attempt to pin the drivers door shut so the driver could not fee on foot.
Now earlier the officer was heard stating that there was multiple weapons inside the vehicle but did not state what type or were they were located. Once the chase was on the officer only focused on a single task which was to capture the subject. All other concerns (Weapons/Safety) and tactical training were suppressed most likely from a dump of adrenalin into his system. This is why many times a officer can not recall the facts of a shooting until they had a chance to claim down and allow the body chemistry to return to normal.
With more experience and training the officer may have been better able to handle the influences of his adrenalin dump and made different choices. So in closing I must also offer that the above sounds all fine and dandy but is only based on a bunch of assumptions on my part and the simple explication could be is that the officer had a simple lack of experience or maybe even common sense which lead to what we saw on the video but the only person who really knows the truth is not here.
Finial score,
Good Guys +1
Bad Guy 0
And give God a assist on this one.
I am so very relieved the officer went home safely.
I hope the lessons are studied and absorbed, to reduce the risk to his fellow officers.
He told his partner that there were numerous “weapons cites” refering to his criminal history compared to his young age. No mention of actual weapons in the vehicle.
My error, the video/audio was stuttering on my machine.
No worries. I was just clarifying.
+1
Watching it was really painful and several times I started screaming at my monitor.
We desk rookies for some of the stuff he did around here.
Don’t know if he had his seatbelt on, giving how fast events unfolded and how short the chase was, but he cleared leather amazingly well, from a SEATED position in a cruiser full of console and gear beside him! :eek:
If officers are not training to do this then they are behind the curve. Shooting from inside a vehicle in a seated position through glass is eye opening to say the least. It’s also pretty wild how a bullet may or may not be affected by auto glass.
Wondering what that means ^
If I’m tracking, there were certain audible and visual cues that would have escalated the contact instantly.
I don’t agree with posting critical incident analysis and aar on an open forum. General impression, sure. But that’s about it. All I see coming out of your post is a bunch of non le Monday morning quarterbacks who have never been in a gunfight but “know” what should have been done.
I agree with several of your points and have a couple thoughts of my own but this doesn’t seem like the place to have that discussion.
The officer was hit twice, stayed in the fight and won. Sure he fought from an unnecessary position of disadvantage but at least the man had the mindset to win the fight.
Absolutely!
Agreed! The effect of shooting from inside a vehicle can be more significant than that of shooting into a vehicle (windshield) since there is a greater distance the bullet must travel after it’s trajectory has been shifted. Duty ammo should be used for this kind of training and most pd’s can get access to windshields and vehicles (junk yards are a source). While the windshield’s geometry and shape are variable, your duty ammo should not be. Hopefully officers have the chance to shoot into and out of multiple vehicles.
Fwiw, a FBI buddy of mine told me that vehicle testing is a big part of FBI bullet selection. He demoed with his pistol both into and out of a vehicle and the results were pretty damn good. Shooting out, the impacts were only slightly off (less than 3 inches at 7 yards compared to my 9 inches off) and in the opposite direction of what you would expect.
But yeah, crucial training. Of course using your vehicle as a weapon is also important to ingrain in the mindset. Nothing gets you inside a bad guys ooda loop quite like running his ass over (assumed deadly force incident)!
The pics looked like the Cop shot a pretty nice bug hole throught he window to where the rounds were about flying free to the asswipe at the end there.