Weapons Usefulness debate

**Bneterasedmynam** · Posted On: 4/10/2012 1:26pm

Originally Posted by Diesel_tke

Yeah we were actually just drilling this last night. It is pretty hard for you to move off the center line and draw your weapon at the same time, unless you have practiced it a bunch of times. We had a guy that I had just introduced the proper footwork to, and he didn't even pull his weapon the first 5 times he did it. The first time, he freaked out and just backed strait up. He got stabbed a bunch of times.

Post me some videos of cops using their guns successfully. Most cops barely ever use their guns other than pointing them at people while giving verbal orders.

No, I think that cop should have used distance, proper cover, and back up. But it is hard either way.

Don't bring up a stawman and then get pissed off when your strawman was not as well thought out as you believed it to be.

Ok so first I am not pissed off at all, in fact I'm enjoying this debate. Second if I can post more vids of cops using their weapons successfully than you can post of cops getting attacked by the incredible hulk, do I win??

**Diesel_tke** · Posted On: 4/10/2012 1:35pm

Originally Posted by Bneterasedmynam

Ok so first I am not pissed off at all, in fact I'm enjoying this debate. Second if I can post more vids of cops using their weapons successfully than you can post of cops getting attacked by the incredible hulk, do I win??

Yep, then you win the discussion of wether or not cops can use their weapons successfully. I bet you can find a whole lot more videos that show that even though they had those guns, they chose not to use them and used less lethal means.

Oh, and it is hard to tell sometimes if people are getting pissed off, through the written word. My bad.

**downtime** · Posted On: 4/10/2012 1:37pm

Originally Posted by Diesel_tke

Yeah we were actually just drilling this last night. It is pretty hard for you to move off the center line and draw your weapon at the same time, unless you have practiced it a bunch of times. We had a guy that I had just introduced the proper footwork to, and he didn't even pull his weapon the first 5 times he did it. The first time, he freaked out and just backed strait up. He got stabbed a bunch of times.

Post me some videos of cops using their guns successfully. Most cops barely ever use their guns other than pointing them at people while giving verbal orders.

No, I think that cop should have used distance, proper cover, and back up. But it is hard either way.

Don't bring up a stawman and then get pissed off when your strawman was not as well thought out as you believed it to be.

I actually had this conversation with someone the other night. As an officer do you believe that the prevailing mindset of most officers is that drawing a pistol is last resort because the last thing they want to do is fire on someone? I have a State Police friend and he made a great point. Every call a police officer responds to has a firearm present...because the officer brings one.

Admittedly Im sort of a gun nut and a big 2nd amendment advocate. However I currently don't own a firearm or carry. I was questioned why? due to the enjoyment I get from shooting. My reply is typically "Well after 16 years of Infantry training and combat tour, Ive answered the question as to whether or not Im willing to pull the trigger when pointing a firearm at someone and deal with the consequences, I was taught never point a firearm at someone unless your willing to shoot. I avoid this currently by not carrying, IE if we're to a point where I feel threatened enough to draw on you...well theres a probability that your getting shot. Id just assume to avoid all that and not have the temptation present. (I dont exactly live in a high crime state, and I certainly admit as of late I have been rethinking my stance and will probably at some point carry again.)

So I guess back to the original question do you feel that most police officers are either unwilling or just dont have that mindset to discharge their weapon? Due to moral implications/ beliefs, or the rigamaroll that follows a discharge?

**Bneterasedmynam** · Posted On: 4/10/2012 2:02pm

Originally Posted by Diesel_tke

Yep, then you win the discussion of wether or not cops can use their weapons successfully. I bet you can find a whole lot more videos that show that even though they had those guns, they chose not to use them and used less lethal means.

Oh, and it is hard to tell sometimes if people are getting pissed off, through the written word. My bad.

I do agree that most cops don't have to and probably don't want to fire their weapons. However the point I was making was about the effectiveness of weapons not the desire of wether or not to use them.

Perhaps a better way to put this would be in a question form: If you were in an incident that required you to defend yourself or your family, would you feel better protected with or without a weapon??

**Permalost** · Posted On: 4/10/2012 2:07pm

Originally Posted by Bneterasedmynam

Perhaps a better way to put this would be in a question form: If you were in an incident that required you to defend yourself or your family, would you feel better protected with or without a weapon??

That's a wholly different question than the law enforcement one.

**downtime** · Posted On: 4/10/2012 2:17pm

Originally Posted by Bneterasedmynam

However the point I was making was about the effectiveness of weapons not the desire of wether or not to use them.

One and the same in my opinion. A weapon cannot reach its maximum effectiveness if an individual is unwilling to employ it in the manner it was meant to be used.

**Bneterasedmynam** · Posted On: 4/10/2012 2:25pm

Originally Posted by downtime

One and the same in my opinion. A weapon cannot reach its maximum effectiveness if an individual is unwilling to employ it in the manner it was meant to be used.

Yes but the same is true for fighting without a weapon, so it's a moot point.

**Robstafarian** · Posted On: 4/10/2012 2:26pm

Originally Posted by Bneterasedmynam

I think I have seen that video, but here's the thing there are many more videos of cops successfully using their guns. Do you really think that cop would have done any better slugging it out with that guy?? He would have needed a grenade launcher to stop him. [emphasis added]

So now you're attacking the weapon?!

The cop didn't need a more effective weapon; he needed more effective technique. The need for distance, cover, and calling for backup are all quite reasonable criticisms before bringing in explosive ordinance, and that doesn't even begin to get into tactics like the Mozambique Drill.

**Bneterasedmynam** · Posted On: 4/10/2012 2:28pm

Originally Posted by Permalost

That's a wholly different question than the law enforcement one.

The law enforcement question devolved into who could post how many vids, so I'm approaching the same original point on the effectiveness from a different angle.

**Bneterasedmynam** · Posted On: 4/10/2012 2:34pm

Originally Posted by Robstafarian

So now you're attacking the weapon?!

The cop didn't need a more effective weapon; he needed more effective technique. The need for distance, cover, and calling for backup are all quite reasonable criticisms before bringing in explosive ordinance, and that doesn't even begin to get into tactics like the Mozambique Drill.

He had the distance to fire five times, and what cover did you see that would have helped?? It's not like that hulk was standing still or hiding to shoot back. He charged and was hit several times, yet he kept going. So yes a stronger gun would have helped. That or a head shot, which is difficult on a moving target.