Man pulls gun on cops outside of Applebee's

[BehindBlueI's]

Exactly...he definitely was well trained and knew his weapon well.

I took a low light class with ACT a few years ago and a shooter was experimenting with a laser sight. He did spend a lot of time trying to get the laser to settle (which is pretty tough to do) vs. finding the front sight and pressing the trigger like you would in daylight. That helped me make my mind up that night sights + a weapon light were the best combination for me personally.

If someone is holding a gun on you, do you think your mind wants to focus on anything other than the threat? Lasers take some training to use properly, but they have some advantages.

 

[SMiller]

If someone is holding a gun on you, do you think your mind wants to focus on anything other than the threat? Lasers take some training to use properly, but they have some advantages.

I believe there was a study that showed that 90% of police shooting that the officer point shooted under stress and didnt even realize till later that they didn't use the sights.

Just goes to show under stress that it doesn't always play out how you think it would.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Perhaps after the clip both take turns reloading and covering.

Could be, I don't know.

I do know that less emphasis is being put upon the Timmy Tactical s**t like "tactical reloads".

I know I wouldn't reload until he was being wheeled away. If you think there is a threat, no reason to screw with your gun.

 

[jblomenberg16]

If someone is holding a gun on you, do you think your mind wants to focus on anything other than the threat? Lasers take some training to use properly, but they have some advantages.

I agree...which is why I made the choice I made. From the shooting that I've done I know that I can get close range hits point shooting, but need a front sight to get good hits at longer ranges. Watching that person struggle with the laser made me realize that for me personally (mild OCD and a perfectionist at heart), I would spend so much time trying to get the laser where I wanted it for the exact perfect shot, that I'd probably be dead before the first shot. I am not at all bashing the lasers as they can definitely be an effective tool, especially in low light.

What I was hoping to point out was not the fact that he used a laser to aim, but that the laser helps us see just how much the muzzle of the gun is moving during the encounter. Independent of the method of aiming (point shooting, front sight, using the laser, etc.) the muzzle did not sit perfectly still on one spot on the target like it does in the movies.


The officers certainly knew how to use their weapons and that sighting system every effectively.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Could be, I don't know.

I do know that less emphasis is being put upon the Timmy Tactical s**t like "tactical reloads".

I know I wouldn't reload until he was being wheeled away. If you think there is a threat, no reason to screw with your gun.

I'd strongly disagree with that. Especially with a partner. Communicate, reload, be prepared for another gun battle if need be.

 

[jblomenberg16]

Could be, I don't know.

I do know that less emphasis is being put upon the Timmy Tactical s**t like "tactical reloads".

I know I wouldn't reload until he was being wheeled away. If you think there is a threat, no reason to screw with your gun.

Exactly. Murphy's law states that you will get shot at while you are trying to reload. In fact, I think there was a pretty well publicized case of a soldier in Iraq or Afghanistan that was shot while doing a "tactical" reload.

Several of the classes I've attended do talk about various ways to reload, and things to think about in terms of when to do it, how to minimize the risk, etc.


Seems like in this case with 1 threat, that the officers could minimize their risk by doing a reload after communicating that the other was covering the target.

 

[foszoe]

Do any police service pistols have the so called magazine disconnect safety? I take comfort in the warning on the slide that ...will fire without magazine. If the choice is made to change out the mag, at least there is one round chambered and ready to fire. Is that feature something designed to satisfy a state legislature or considered a legitimate safety feature by some in the firearms community?

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Do any police service pistols have the so called magazine disconnect safety? I take comfort in the warning on the slide that ...will fire without magazine. If the choice is made to change out the mag, at least there is one round chambered and ready to fire. Is that feature something designed to satisfy a state legislature or considered a legitimate safety feature by some in the firearms community?

Depends on the department, but I'd say few do these days. If you're reloading right, the time the gun is out of service is nearly negligible. Much less than would be required if you realize your gun is dry and don't have the luxury of picking when you're going to reload.

Magazine disconnects go ay back. I don't think they were in response to any particular legislation, but I could be wrong.

 

[Fargo]

Do any police service pistols have the so called magazine disconnect safety? I take comfort in the warning on the slide that ...will fire without magazine. If the choice is made to change out the mag, at least there is one round chambered and ready to fire. Is that feature something designed to satisfy a state legislature or considered a legitimate safety feature by some in the firearms community?

A very few might but I am unaware of any department in Indiana using a gun with a magazine safety.

Back in the 90's when such things were vogue, I seem to remember some police depts who issued some of the S&W's with mag safeties taught officers to drop the mag if there was a struggle for their gun and they feared losing it. There was a picture circulated from a struggle on the side of the road where an officer appeared to successfully do so.

I always thought mag safeties were kind of an answer in search of a question. They only really came into the gun debate when S&W and some others were using them as appeasement to the Brady Bunch.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

A very few might but I am unaware of any department in Indiana using a gun with a magazine safety.

Back in the 90's when such things were vogue, I seem to remember some police depts who issued some of the S&W's with mag safeties taught officers to drop the mag if there was a struggle for their gun and they feared losing it. There was a picture circulated from a struggle on the side of the road where an officer appeared to successfully do so.

I always thought mag safeties were kind of an answer in search of a question.

An officer in Indianapolis successfully did so, sorta. No magazine disconnect. He dropped the mag, pulled the trigger to clear the one in the chamber, then let the bigger and younger suspect have it while he went for his BUG. Bad guy ran and eventually got shot by police. Well before my time, but my sergeant was there (as a patrolman at the time) and tells the story fairly often.

 

[Double T]

Could be, I don't know.

I do know that less emphasis is being put upon the Timmy Tactical s**t like "tactical reloads".

I know I wouldn't reload until he was being wheeled away. If you think there is a threat, no reason to screw with your gun.

I would disagree. You have two people. One of which fired x/15 rounds of ammo. Call a reload and request cover. Not a huge deal, nor tactical timmy bull****.

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

Could be, I don't know.

I do know that less emphasis is being put upon the Timmy Tactical s**t like "tactical reloads".

I know I wouldn't reload until he was being wheeled away. If you think there is a threat, no reason to screw with your gun.

Well phylodog is a range instructor that I trust with my life, and the lives of my cohorts. So when phylodog teaches me when and how to do a tactical reload, I listen.

 

[Twangbanger]

I'd strongly disagree with that. Especially with a partner. Communicate, reload, be prepared for another gun battle if need be.

I agree. You never know when the guy has a d-bag buddy still in the restaurant.

I will be the skunk at the picnic here, though. I have great respect for officers in general and these folks did well & all, but there is always room for learning and improvement. The guy's judo-spin slung the b-guy muzzle across his partner for a moment, and left the b-guy with a potential shot on both of them at one point or another. I'm a low-information armchair QB, but although I can't see what was in the other direction, it would have seemed preferable to shove the guy forward as he drew, rather than spinning him across the partner and shoving him the other way. (Especially if it wasn't a loser with a BB gun who decided he was finished living...if he was a bit more focused on taking somebody with him, this could have been bad).

I wonder how close the lens on the camera makes things appear? When they were walking through the restaurant, it seemed like she was following b-guy awful close, although that could have been just how the camera made it appear. Is this normal when covering someone with a taser?

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I agree. You never know when the guy has a d-bag buddy still in the restaurant.

I will be the skunk at the picnic here, though. I have great respect for officers in general and these folks did well & all, but there is always room for learning and improvement. The guy's judo-spin slung the b-guy muzzle across his partner for a moment, and left the b-guy with a potential shot on both of them at one point or another. I'm a low-information armchair QB, but although I can't see what was in the other direction, it would have seemed preferable to shove the guy forward as he drew, rather than spinning him across the partner and shoving him the other way. (Especially if it wasn't a loser with a BB gun who decided he was finished living...if he was a bit more focused on taking somebody with him, this could have been bad).

I wonder how close the lens on the camera makes things appear? When they were walking through the restaurant, it seemed like she was following b-guy awful close, although that could have been just how the camera made it appear. Is this normal when covering someone with a taser?

Shoving him forward would have left him between them. Shoving him sideways lets them both get shots on him without being in each other's background. I don't think I could have done better than he did in a split second if I had had 30 minutes to plan ahead.

 

[Twangbanger]

Shoving him forward would have left him between them. Shoving him sideways lets them both get shots on him without being in each other's background. I don't think I could have done better than he did in a split second if I had had 30 minutes to plan ahead.

Yeah, I probably couldn't have either. Maybe I didn't explain well enough. It seemed that shoving him forward at 0:47 (ie, towards the left of the video frame) could have prevented what is depicted at 0:49, where the female officer is looking straight down the pipe, and led to them both shooting at him towards the left. But, there could have been a bunch of people to the right, I don't know (I assume the officer had some reason for not wanting it to go that direction).

 

[Jagdhund]

There has been a lot of people wanting these body cameras to prove excessive force and other things, but this shows they also help protect the officers that are doing everything right.

Without these videos to show the stupidity of the suspect. There would probably be controversy as to if the officers were justified to shoot.

 

[KellyinAvon]

There has been a lot of people wanting these body cameras to prove excessive force and other things, but this shows they also help protect the officers that are doing everything right.

Without these videos to show the stupidity of the suspect. There would probably be controversy as to if the officers were justified to shoot.

That's a good point. I think the overwhelming number of videos will show officers conducting themselves in an appropriate manner. Without the video the headline on this story could've been, "Upstanding Citizen Dragged from Rest Room and Shot by Rogue Cops."

 

[beachhead40]

You see the tazer go down, then the Glock come up.

Kind of reminds me of playing Doom.

or Counter Strike

 

[beachhead40]

I agree. You never know when the guy has a d-bag buddy still in the restaurant.

I will be the skunk at the picnic here, though. I have great respect for officers in general and these folks did well & all, but there is always room for learning and improvement. The guy's judo-spin slung the b-guy muzzle across his partner for a moment, and left the b-guy with a potential shot on both of them at one point or another. I'm a low-information armchair QB, but although I can't see what was in the other direction, it would have seemed preferable to shove the guy forward as he drew, rather than spinning him across the partner and shoving him the other way. (Especially if it wasn't a loser with a BB gun who decided he was finished living...if he was a bit more focused on taking somebody with him, this could have been bad).

I wonder how close the lens on the camera makes things appear? When they were walking through the restaurant, it seemed like she was following b-guy awful close, although that could have been just how the camera made it appear. Is this normal when covering someone with a taser?

" He should have" Throat Chopped/Hacksaw Jim Duggin his ass, I mean we all have a plan until we get hit in the face (HATE) quoting Mike Tyson but Officers came out on top and got to go home ON the SAME page.

 

[Birds Away]

I commend the Officers for a job well done in a very high stress situation. I am very glad they both survived unharmed. Watching the video it appeared that Officer #1 did all the damage and Officer #2 only got her three shots in at the last second.