Here I again inject some facts into this discussion. Newhall incident:
Perpetrators: Twinning and Davis.
Officers: Patrol 1 = Frago and Gore; Patrol 2 = Alleyn and Pence.
1. Perps are intercepted by Patrol 1.
2. Perps feign cooperation. Officer Frago has shotgun. Officer Gore does a pat-down on Davis.
3. Due to poor awareness, Twinning shoots Frago with a .375mag.
4. Officer Gore tries to shoot Twinning with his service revolver. Davis turns around and shoots him at point-blank with a .38 Spc.
5. Patrol 2 (Officers Alleyn and Pence) arrives for assistance.
6. Perps empty their revolvers at Patrol 2, then obtain new weapons from their car: Davis gets a shotgun and Twinning gets a 1911.
7. Officer Alleyn blasts away with a Remington 870. Error one: he pumps the gun so fast that he racks unfired shells out of it. Needless to say, he's quickly out of ammo and transitions to his revolver.
8. Officer Alleyn killed by Davis and his shotgun.
9. Officer Pence fires at Twinning with his revolver, but misses. Twinning shoots back, and Officer Pence is hit.
10. Officer Pence tries to reload his revolver. Error two: he does a range reload, dropping the spent brass into his right hand, and pocketing it. Too slow. Twinning sneaks up on him and shoots him point-blank.
A third patrol then arrived, and the perps fled the scene.
There was a bystander, Gary Knees, who attempted to help Officer Alleyn. But his story has been omitted for brevity.
Source: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Newhall+shootout and the ones in my previous post.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Various strawmen
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by foxguitar View Post:toothy10::5geezer::new_blueg:glasses6::toothy10:: tinfoil:
Originally posted by foxguitar View PostIQ 10 point lower than Hamsters
Originally posted by foxguitar View Postget a post count.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by ChenPengFi View PostI just wanted to point out that this is the wrong formula.
That describes force.
Kinetic energy is usually expressed as 1/2 Mass x Velocity squared.
Sorry, carry on.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by foxguitar View PostOk point by point , I wasnt there so but this much I know , the first 2 were executed prretty quickly so chances there wasnt chance to engage in a lengthy combat situation. The 3rd officer If Im correct had a shot gun and the 4th officer we can agree had the brass.
Originally posted by foxguitar View PostOk the point is it doesnt matter if one or all 4 retained the brass at least 1 did . And the procedures at the range in that agency and other police agencies were forever changed as a direct of that incident . Yes other tactical mistakes were made .
Originally posted by foxguitar View PostEvery cop alive has made tactical mistakes and its by the grace of god that more of us arent killed or injured.
Originally posted by foxguitar View PostSo why you so bent on how many officers did that . Does it matter . The point I think illustrates the premise that you will fall back on your training. So why cant you admit that and move one.
Originally posted by foxguitar View PostWhy do you think all the Bullshidos in here are so onboard with the Matt Thorton credo of Alive training.
Originally posted by foxguitar View PostThats why we have so many debates and so on about the usefullness of Kata and what not
Originally posted by foxguitar View PostSo I think you are thinking too small minded. I think the account of this tragedy underscores my points.
Question, how many shells did the officer have in his hand?
Originally posted by foxguitar View PostAnd the difference of Paul Bunyan is 4 LEOs didnt die in 4 and half minutes .
Originally posted by foxguitar View PostI think I made my point and my case.
Originally posted by foxguitar View PostAnd 1 other point .
A cop will see things differently than a civilian and a veteran officer will see things differently than a rookie .
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Foolish View PostYes, I am Foolish for attempting to argue with a fucktard like you. LET'S TRY CAPS AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS THOUGH. YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUCK YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.
NOW LET'S MAKE IT BOLD. YOU STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUCK YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.
You are obviously too fucking stupid to understand that your word doesn't mean shit without backing it up. If you were to tell me what color panties you were getting all in a bunch I would have to ask for pictures. If you were to tell me which beach you got the sand in your vagina from I would have to ask for sworn statements from several witnesses.
You fail at logic and the sad part is you are too fucking stupid to realize it.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by foxguitar View PostI THINK YOUR NAME SAYS IT ALL , FOOLISH , FITS YOU
WHEN YOU GROW A BRAIN WE CAN DISCUSS THIS OK , CASEY JONES :new_blueg
NOW LET'S MAKE IT BOLD. YOU STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUCK YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.
You are obviously too fucking stupid to understand that your word doesn't mean shit without backing it up. If you were to tell me what color panties you were getting all in a bunch I would have to ask for pictures. If you were to tell me which beach you got the sand in your vagina from I would have to ask for sworn statements from several witnesses.
You fail at logic and the sad part is you are too fucking stupid to realize it.
Leave a comment:
-
You know, I really hate to derail threads I haven't contributed to much with petty grammar complaints, but these problems are becoming quite bothersome. So please, forgive me while I point out a few reoccurring problems.
When using a contraction, such as "wasn't" or "don't" an apostrophe ( ' ) should be placed between the letters removed.\
Right: ...the point is it doesn't matter if....
Wrong: ...the point is it doesnt matter if....
Second, punctuation marks such as commas and periods are placed directly after the word that precedes them; there should be no space in between.
Right: End of story.
Wrong: End of story .
Finally, interrogative sentences should end with question marks, not periods.
Right: So why you so bent on how many officers did that?
Wrong: So why you so bent on how many officers did that .
Anyways, like I said, I hate to derail. Hopefully we can resume this discussion with a writing style that's easier on the eyes.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Foolish View PostSo if being a lumberjack doesn't mean that he has the final word on Paul Bunyan what is the difference? Is it just the fact that there were LEO deaths means we should just accept your word without any evidence?
If that is the case, I work for the railroad and there was once this guy named John Henry. He was born with a hammer in his hand. He spent his life putting down rail. Of course we all know he dug a tunnel faster than a steam hammer. You can't question my story because he collapsed and died after he finished the tunnel.
I think you are unquestionably proving that you have no training in general logic to fall back on.
I THINK YOUR NAME SAYS IT ALL , FOOLISH , FITS YOU
WHEN YOU GROW A BRAIN WE CAN DISCUSS THIS OK , CASEY JONES :new_blueg
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by foxguitar View PostAnd the difference of Paul Bunyan is 4 LEOs didnt die in 4 and half minutes .
If that is the case, I work for the railroad and there was once this guy named John Henry. He was born with a hammer in his hand. He spent his life putting down rail. Of course we all know he dug a tunnel faster than a steam hammer. You can't question my story because he collapsed and died after he finished the tunnel.
I think you are unquestionably proving that you have no training in general logic to fall back on.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by BoonDog View PostWhy did it get testy?
Your premise is faulty. That is what I am trying to point out to you. You keep saying it does not matter how many of the officers were found with brass in their hands. It is VERY relevant, especially for your premise. In the case you mentioned, without any citation still after being asked for it many times, one report mentions only one officer having brass in his hand.
Now to help you understand this, I will try and point out why it matters. If only one did this, then the other three officers did not do this. They did not fall back on the training in the crisis. This story, as presented, blows a huge hole in your premise.
Can you rebut any of my argument with a valid rebuttal or new evidence.
AND stop doing the appeal of "I'm a Cop, you must believe me."
PS
As to your lumberjack analogy, if I were a lumberjack and told you the legend of Paul Bunyan and you questioned it, I better be able to say more than "I'm a lumberjack, you must believe me even though you provide contrary evidence."
Ok point by point , I wasnt there so but this much I know , the first 2 were executed prretty quickly so chances there wasnt chance to engage in a lengthy combat situation. The 3rd officer If Im correct had a shot gun and the 4th officer we can agree had the brass.
Ok the point is it doesnt matter if one or all 4 retained the brass at least 1 did . And the procedures at the range in that agency and other police agencies were forever changed as a direct of that incident . Yes other tactical mistakes were made .
Every cop alive has made tactical mistakes and its by the grace of god that more of us arent killed or injured.
So why you so bent on how many officers did that . Does it matter . The point I think illustrates the premise that you will fall back on your training. So why cant you admit that and move one.
Why do you think all the Bullshidos in here are so onboard with the Matt Thorton credo of Alive training. Thats why we have so many debates and so on about the usefullness of Kata and what not
So I think you are thinking too small minded. I think the account of this tragedy underscores my points.
And the difference of Paul Bunyan is 4 LEOs didnt die in 4 and half minutes .
I think I rest made my point and my case. And 1 other point .
A cop will see things differently than a civilian and a veteran officer will see things differently than a rookie .
So When I ask you if you are a LEO its not to say im cool and you are not . Its to gauge your life experience when it comes to a tactical police situation, Just like surviving a military battle there is no way to describe it to another person and do it justice , but some one was in battle will instantly know exactly what the person is talking about.
End of story .
Fuck being a cop Id rather be retired .Last edited by foxguitar; 8/02/2009 6:02pm, .
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by foxguitar View Post]Ok Im done Ive said my piece , Im sorry it got testy , but I stick to my premise you do what you are trained to do in a crisis.
Your premise is faulty. That is what I am trying to point out to you. You keep saying it does not matter how many of the officers were found with brass in their hands. It is VERY relevant, especially for your premise. In the case you mentioned, without any citation still after being asked for it many times, one report mentions only one officer having brass in his hand.
Now to help you understand this, I will try and point out why it matters. If only one did this, then the other three officers did not do this. They did not fall back on the training in the crisis. This story, as presented, blows a huge hole in your premise.
Can you rebut any of my argument with a valid rebuttal or new evidence.
AND stop doing the appeal of "I'm a Cop, you must believe me."
PS
As to your lumberjack analogy, if I were a lumberjack and told you the legend of Paul Bunyan and you questioned it, I better be able to say more than "I'm a lumberjack, you must believe me even though you provide contrary evidence."
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by BoonDog View PostWell, that is your opinion and you can think what you want. I do not have to provide proof to you. Don't you know who I am?
See what I did there? I argued just like you.
no you need practice , theres only one FOXGUITAR LOL
And your point? I don't care. You can attend all the seminars and read all the books you want. That does not make your post any more right. In fact it has nothing to do with your post. Also, you are not the only one on here with experiences in life.
Yeah but you are arguing about something you have no knowledge about , If you were an experience lumberjack and I came on here telling you about lumberjacking it would be silly on my part would it not .
And if you dont think 28 years as a LEO and countless seminars counts for anything then I guess you dont think your martial arts instructors experience and time spent account for anything.
But if only one did it and it was so ingrained, does that mean the other three had poor training? The other three died and did not hold onto their spent rounds. Why are they dead if holding spent rounds is what caused them to not be able to have good tactics?
It was ingrained , it was taught at their academy , these were young inexperienced officers . And after that the training in the range procedures as well other tactics were changed as a result
And you were asked to provide proof that the four cops, as you claimed, died because of training methodology on the range. You have provided no evidence to your claim. All you have said is that you read books, attended seminars, and are a cop, so we should believe you. You have not argued against any of the evidence provided against your statements, nor have you grasped what the issue is being addressed.
What difference if it was one or all 4 , The point being there "officer" if it cost one of them valuable seconds to re-load and contributed to his or their death then it was a fatal mistake.
Im not to criticize these 4 poor officers who made the ultimate sacrifice but there were as in most Police deaths tactical mistakes made.
the whole point and Ill repeat it was to show how you react as you are trained when it comes down to brass tacks. what point with that do you or any rational person have a problem with.
The point was one or more officers had spent cartridges on them when they were found as they were taught at their range . END OF STORY
So, if I disagree with you, I must not be a LEO. That is a piss poor way to argue. Also, the evidence is contrary to your notion. Argue against the evidence provided or provide rebuttal evidence. That is all I have ever asked of you. Is that so hard for you?
And if you or not a LEO isnt relevant , again the point is to agree with the OP and illustrate the point with a tragic circumstances.
Their deaths as the FBI shoot out in Miami changed Police tactics , As did the Scott Gadell shooting in NYC . NYPD went to speed loaders after he was killed while attempting to reload
Ok Im done Ive said my piece , Im sorry it got testy , but I stick to my premise you do what you are trained to do in a crisis.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by foxguitar View PostWell are you or not , if so wheres your proof , and if you are how long ,
See what I did there? I argued just like you.
Originally posted by foxguitarEver read the books on surviving street encounters , well not only did I read it I attended their seminars , These are professionals who disect incidents where LEOs are killed.
Originally posted by foxguitarwhether it was one or all 4 , At least one did that and perhaps that cost him valuable seconds which cost him his life.
Originally posted by foxguitarAnd the whole point of all this was to agree with the OP that you refer to your training in a crisis situation.
Originally posted by foxguitarbut you as a "LEO "would know that wouldn't you ?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by BoonDog View PostBy your story, the cops died because they were trained to hold their brass when reloading. However, there is only evidence of one cop holding brass. That is 1 of the four. The other three officers did not do this. If training caused it, does that mean the others did not follow proper training? I doubt that Police training on picking up brass had much to do with why the lost the gun battle. Other tactics mattered even more.
You now look like a worse idiot for saying the following
And the whole point was to agree to what the OP said about you refer to your training in a crisis situation and if you are a LEO I want proof or stfu
and when question after someone tried to look it up as directed BY YOU
You also point out that the surviving gunman stated that the officers got careless. Now cite where the cause of the death was from the police being trained to pick up their brass.
You assume I have never been an officer or that I am not even one now. Just because I do not have a tag does not mean that I am not an officer.
Well are you or not , if so wheres your proof , and if you are how long ,
Do you carry automatics , Because if you carried revolvers and trained on them prior to speed loaders which btw were faster than the pouch were still cumbersome in a combat situation.
Ever read the books on surviving street encounters , well not only did I read it I attended their seminars , These are professionals who disect incidents where LEOs are killed.
And one case study they conducted was the Newhall incident. They are the ones who hammered the point that the officers were trained to catch their brass , whether it was one or all 4 , At least one did that and perhaps that cost him valuable seconds which cost him his life.
Ok and I doubt you are a LEO without proof. and security guard at walmarts dont count.
And the whole point of all this was to agree with the OP that you refer to your training in a crisis situation but you as a "LEO "would know that wouldn't you ?Last edited by foxguitar; 8/02/2009 2:42pm, .
Leave a comment:
Collapse
Edit this module to specify a template to display.
Leave a comment: