Saturday, January 02, 2010

You Have A Split Second To Make A Decision
Watch the video first, then read the text

I'm sure this is just a training video... and with that said, what did you see? Did the police overreact? Did a surrendering suspect just get shot in the back?

Watch the video again.


Did you see anything that may have defended the cops actions? If you look carefully, when the bad guy was ordered to put down the M-16, he did. But at the same time, he reached to the small of his back and was pulling out a pistol.

Even as he was going down, you can see the pistol still in his shooting hand.

How many of you caught that the first time you saw this video?

Think about that the next time the news media runs 7 seconds of video, where everyone and their brother wants to crucify a cop for doing his damn job!

May God bless our law enforcement officials, and may St Michael protect them.


Blogger Foxfier, formerly Sailorette said...


When my mom was in college, she dated a cop for a while; one of their odder dates was going into a training thing where you would be tested on your responses about who to shoot.

She failed it because in the situation of finding someone who matched the suspects' description, the guy didn't respond to verbal instruction and was coming at her while reaching into his inner coat pocket, so she shot. (the set-up was that the guy was reaching for his "I am deaf and mute" card)

I kinda wish folks would go through that kind of situation before they'd declare themselves experts on this kinda thing....

(For what it's worth, the video is so small that I still can't see the guy's other hand, after being told.)

2:38 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I can't see him pull the firearm but I see it in his hands as he goes down. As if a cop's job isn't tough enough, he risks losing his job or worse if the libtard bureaucrats feel he was not kind and gentle enough with the perp. Maybe being a Navy SEAL would be a better career? Nah.

4:03 PM  
Blogger JLS said...

This is a highly disturbing video for me. It took me til the 3rd run to see the pistol coming from the back in his hand. But that is not what troubles me at all.

What troubles me and is somewhat distressing is the speed at which the cops acted.

If only I were one tenth that fast, I'd be dropping a lot more quail that my dog bumps into the air. Today, he sent a whole covey of big ones right overhead and it took me a long long time to get the damne* safety off.

It's maybe on the order of once while sitting back watching an NFL game and ... one lousy beer and certainly not more than two ... I tried to race the snap.

By the time I got on my feet, the pass play was over.

I'm in excellent shape, but I notice that there are no adds anywhere for improving one's speed at doing normal day in day out activities which require quickness, such as shooting bad guys and bagging quail.

My first year in college while working the heavy bag in the gym, some pale round guy goes to the speed bag, puts on fancy red/black/white bag gloves that look like they've never seen any use, and proceeds ... this guy was in reality a magician ... to make me believe that the bag was a blur and its sound of such high frequency that one would think a bee hive were nearby. And then he thought he could convince me that he had been on the Tokyo US Olympic boxing team at 125 #.

Maybe it's this Catholicism schtueck that I've been in now for thirty years but I find myself humble enough to begin inquiring about speed training.

Yeah, first however, I'm going to persuade some of my cop friends to sit under a bare lightbulb while I get the truth out of them, namely that all those fast paced videos are really film editing tricks.

Yeah, also it's too bad they had to shoot the bad guy, but, well, if they didn't, then who would? Maybe the CNN anchor he/she would volunteer next time.

You know what? I think the illusion is all in how they tell the story ... the art of fooling the listener. At a reserve meeting a while back we were listening to a couple guys arguing over which would be better to have in a one on one alley fight, a knife or a pistol. Arguing? Yes, believe it or not. Did the guy insisting on the knife ever change his mind? No, in fact he was puzzled why we all laughed when he said he would rather face a pistol because he could see the bullet coming and move out of the way. I wonder if he ever became a cop.

9:31 PM  
Blogger Al said...

This also shows how the angle affects things. We are seeing this from a different angle than the cop & thus it is harder to see what he is doing with his right hand. Like Sonia I didn't see the gun til after he was shot. Something the cop clearly was able to see before we did.

1:26 AM  
Blogger Creary said...

Foxier, Sonja, and JLS,

I agree it's a small grainy video on my computer too, and so I can't really see the gun until the guy is on the ground.

But I honestly don't think the LEO in the foreground of the video ever saw the gun before shots were fired either. His partner (the LEO in the background), who is smartly positioned at the man's 5 o'clock, is the one who yells "GUN!", because he was in position to see it. I've played and re-played the video to check, but I don't see any brass ejecting from the foreground LEO's weapon, nor do I see the slide retracting. Thus I think the foreground LEO did exactly what he should have done and held his fire, while his partner saved his life.

9:02 AM  
Blogger Wendy in VA said...

My husband has been a cop for 22 years. Thank you and God bless you for this post.

11:26 AM  
Blogger nypd green said...

Good post VSC.

One of the great perils of law enforcement, is the fear of the dreaded 'Monday Morning Quarterback'. I can think of several occaisions where I would have been totally justified in firing my weapon but did not. I am blessed that all of those incidents ended with a perp behind bars and me going home safely to my family, but those occaisions of hesitation can sometimes come with deadly results for a police officer.

God bless all those who wear the shield, may Saint Michael protect them.

4:54 PM  
Blogger JLS said...

The gun does not appear before the shot.

Only one cop shoots ... three shots.

Had there been only the one cop, he probably would have dropped the perp, but it would have been close. From what I've heard and it makes sense, but I have not checked it out, is that the human brain cycles, and if the one cop's had been at the down part of the cycle at the exact moment that beltband pistol came up, he might have take some lead himself.

Where, however, are the critics who would bemoan the fact the the cop who shot did not shoot the gun out of the perp's hand, thus saving the govt the medical bill, and involving more desk work at taxpayer expense? BTW, anyone ever wonder where the bullets go after they knock the guns out of the hands?

6:18 PM  
Blogger JLS said...

Caution: Long winded rant ...

Way back in history I had a job rounding up teenagers after school and making them work for a living.

When the apartment door of one opened up, there were several young teens standing around another who was lying on the floor with a white sheet with big bright blood red stains on it.

Then another one came into view holding what looked like a real live assault rifle to me. Those kids play acted that scene pretty damne* life like ... or rather death like.

I will not reveal how I managed to take cover, but immediately the older teen I had come for appeared and closed the door behind her. They were all Viet Namese refugees only a few years after arriving in the USA.

I grew up with toy guns and then real guns and have been around them on and off all my life ... that scene had no appearance that indicated a fake scene. No cell phones in those days; I was trying to figure out how to call the cops, or if I should call the possible bluff. It looked insane.

Now cops are trained to be prepared for really bizarre realities, and even then they are sometimes bushwhacked at front doors. In that case that ... probably ... play gun looked like a real one. Does one want to stand there and inspect it to be sure? How much time does the unexpecting guy have to decide whether to get the heck out of Dodge or start laughing at the joke?

I have since then come to understand people a lot better, but even today decades later I wonder what I would do in the same situation today had I never run into it before.

What I did realize is that those kids had some grizzly trauma in their past that they were trying to resolve. They likely had witnessed some really bad stuff before they escaped from the horrors of Viet Nam, and they would have been much younger when they did witness the death and destruction of war in their yards and homes.

But how long does it take for a cop to realize if the suspect is for real or not? How much time does the cop have?

I know from experience that school kids know all sorts of stuff they get from TV shows, and they are clever at setting up scenarios to "bushwhack" adults. Some teens grow older without the benefit of growing up, and act like little kids ... ie some of the bad guys do stupid stuff when facing cops. They would sometimes, it seems likely, try to set up the cops ... they do this in schools to the teachers and administrators sometimes. What about the bad guys who hold up store clerks with phony guns? Sometimes the cops get sued for killing or maiming such idiot bad guys. But look at the suicide bombers whose families sometimes get money for it. Sort of the same thing in a way.

So, where does society draw the line? What about those Navy Seals that are up on charges for giving a black eye or bruised chin to one of the insurgents they captured? What kind of lunacy is romping in the military justice system that would bring those Seals up on charges instead of stuffing their records with good words? Why is there such a vast array of standards, if such are standard at all, in our legal profession? Is it because of the disparity among law schools ... where they can't agree on much and so they don't? And does this schlockyness spill over into the war zone and the inner city war zone?

6:43 PM  
Blogger Dirtdartwife said...

I watched it three times. First time I caught the far-side partner's "GUN" warning. I had to watch it two more times before I finally saw it.

When it comes to police and officals that protect and serve the people of this country, I will always give them the benefit of the doubt first. Especially after the fiasco with the police officer in Cambridge and the ensuing "Beer Summit" crap. (still feel sorry for the police officer in that case).

I know we have some corrupt cops in our country, but considering we've got corruption from our President all the way down... I can't say anything against those that truly are out defending our freedoms and protecting us from harm.

9:07 PM  
Blogger Former Altar Boy said...

Creary is right about what some of the others missed trying to watch the video and maybe did not hear the first officer's partner yell, Gun!" Watch it again, but listen, too.

1:34 AM  
Blogger Foxfier, formerly Sailorette said...

I can't remember the last time I heard a lynch-mob inciting video that had sound that wasn't one of those really out of focus, zoomed out "beating" ones.
(Someone is trying to stab me, I'll beat the crud out of them, too....)

5:15 AM  
Blogger Arkanabar T'verrick Ilarsadin said...

I heard the "GUN!" warning. Watching it the second time, I asked myself, "Did he have a handgun in the back of his pants?" Watched it another time or two, never saw it, but never doubted that the shooter DID see a gun.

A cop SHOULD shoot to protect himself or his partner if he thinks it will save a life. He'll probably go on trial, but if he's smart, he'll tell his lawyer to hire Massad Ayoob as an expert witness.

7:42 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home