I want to know how the reporter found these two idiots. My shift watched this last night and I laughed so hard I thought I was going to pass out.
WOOOO WOOOO!!!
I also love how they almost wrecked out and ran that stop sign at the end. Classic youtube.
Since I am back on the streets in a patrol capacity, I am trying to put together a decent "bailout" bag. I bought one that is identical to the one in the picture and am trying to figure out what to put in it. I currently have the following:
Four 30 round AR mags
Two extra pistol mags
Extra shotgun rounds on a small sling
Several chem lights
Extra flashlight and batteries
Flex-cuffs
Tourniquet and a few field bandages
Can anyone think of something important I am missing?
I was surfing the internet last night and came across this story about a Swedish officer involved shooting.
Apparently a guy tried to rob a gas station with a machete. He fled the scene but the officer found him hiding nearby. This next part is where it gets strange:The officer tried to persuade him to come out and to disarm him, but was unsuccessful. Instead, the arm man came at the officer, threatening with the machete, as well as verbally.
The officer fired a warning shot, but was then forced to shoot the 58-year-old in the leg.
Um what?
I was trained in the academy that warning shots are only used in the movies. We were taught that what goes up must come down and your bullet could end up in someone else's head. And what is this business about shooting someone in the leg?
I mean, I am glad that a life was saved but the officer took a big risk. What if he had missed and the guy stuck that machete up his Swedish ass? I have talked to several Swedish police officers and they don't do very much marksmanship training even though they are all armed with Sigs (228s I think). However that is really not the issue. People who are hyped up on adrenaline or drugs sometimes don't feel it when they are shot. I have read several examples where a suspect was shot several times and just kept on fighting.
I guess this is just another example of the difference in attitudes of European police versus the USA. Any American cop would tell you that if they got attacked with a machete, the suspect would have several holes in their chest. Before the anti-cop types start up with accusing us of shooting to kill, there is another reason we shoot center mass.
First, it is hard as hell to hit a moving target with a pistol. This is especially true when you are scared for your life and are pumped up with adrenaline. Anyone who has narrowly avoided a car accident probably remembers how their hands and legs were shaking. This is the adrenaline in your system. Now imagine trying to shoot a pistol with those shakes. We aim for the biggest target (chest) because we want to hit something.
Another reason is that most major organs are in this area and several shots to the chest will overload the nervous system (hopefully) and cause the body to go into shock. This means the bad guy will stop trying to shoot, stab, or hit you in head with a hammer.
For more information on the problems with shooting to wound, check out this article on Policeone.com.
I remember talking to a Swedish cop once and she (the force there is about 50% female) told me about how they don't handcuff arrested suspects unless there is an articulable reason why it was necessary. Apparently handcuffing is considered a use of force there and they felt it took away the dignity of the arrested person.
Um what?
I asked how they transported their suspects and she said in the backseat of their cars. I looked at their car (a Volvo station wagon) and saw that it didn't have a cage in the backseat.
She said that there usually isn't any problem but they have had some issues with drunks and recent immigrants so the policy may get changed. Good grief, I hope it gets changed.
I think that their crime rate is so low that it lets them neglect some common sense officer safety tactics in a real bad way. My old academy instructors and FTOs would have had a stroke if they had heard that conversation.
I received an email from a reader directing me to the video below:
Apparently this video is becoming a big deal in the UK. While I can understand people being concerned with the video of the 72 yr old bitchy grandma being zapped, I see nothing wrong with the UK video.
It is obvious that the suspect won't listen to the officers. You can see one cop trying to get him in cuffs and the other officer deploying his taser to try to gain compliance. Back-up arrives and they use a "swarm" technique to secure his legs and arms until the drunk can be put in cuffs.
I didn't see anyone beating on the suspect except for some blows to the arms to get them behind his back. Pretty good tactics overall except for their poor crowd control. I would not have let that crowd get so close to me. That's just asking for a bottle in the back of the head.
Good job Nottingham police. I thought only armed police in the UK had tasers. Am I wrong about that?
Okay go watch it here. I'm sure you've seen it already.
I know, I know, it looks bad. I've watched it a few times and have some thoughts about it.
First, the woman was an idiot. It's obvious that she was used to getting her way. I've also read in several other news sources that the woman had a history of getting pulled over and then driving away without signing the ticket. I doubt she will do that again after this incident.
Second, the officer warned her several times about what was going to happen but she continued to hoot and holler. I guess she thought she was untouchable. I've dealt with drama queens like that before.
Third, the woman is obviously trying to use the "72 year old grandma" route for sympathy. I loved that once the dashcam video came out, she shut her mouth about the incident.
I love the fact that the officer's boss is supporting him. It is rare to find a department head who would weather such a media frenzy. I know my department would be quick to throw me to the wolves.
I think the officer was justified in what he did. She was trying to get back to her car and both were near a busy roadway. However I do think he was too quick to use that taser. There's no doubt that he could have forced her into cuffs. I tend to think of the taser as something to use instead of getting into a good fight. Newer officers seem to think of the taser as something to use whenever they have to put hands on people.
Of course going hands-on would have looked bad too. If the "grandma" had resisted that, there is a good chance she would end up with road rash or a broken arm. Then folks would be crying about that police brutality instead. It is really a lose lose situation for the police in these incidents.
Everyone should look at the fact that the officer quickly got her under arrest and there were no serious injuries.
Isn't that our ultimate goal?
Boston Mayor Tom Menino said Friday he will not approve a police
department plan to put semiautomatic M-16 rifles in the hands of regular patrol
officers. But Menino says he's open to giving them to "specialized
units."
[...]some community leaders criticized the lack of public notice and questioned the reasoning behind arming district officers with M-16s when the city's SWAT team already has such weapons.
Pardon me while I lose my mind. Have these people not learned anything? The police are outgunned out there and need the extra firepower. Of course officers are not going to charging to every call with an assault rifle in their hands. However when they run into this, this, or Heaven forbid, something like this, they will have a better chance of surviving.
I think the mayor just made it clear that he values politically correct appearances over the lives of the police officers in his city. Maybe they should just switch to slingshots.
If you think that I am exaggerating things, read this story by Time about how the police are sorely outgunned on the street.
