Glock Pro Forums banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
21 - 40 of 65 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
530 Posts
Discussion Starter · #21 ·
.....How would you like to be judged on your job performance by someone not doing your job?
If it is that obvious to someone who couldn't do my job, that I couldn't do my job, it would be time for me to find another job that I could do better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
530 Posts
Discussion Starter · #23 ·
I think the point John is making is it's not as obvious as someone without experience might think.
Perhaps not. But it is just as obvious that it is completely foolish to even try to justify. The fact of the matter is they, (cops), do stupid things all the time. How many millions of taxpayer dollars have been paid out over the years to families, because of foolish police chases, that ended in the deaths of innocent citizens? Most all of which started over some stupid traffic violation. These people can be tracked from the air. Or if the cop has the plate number, it's all the information they need to make an eventual apprehension. Yet they put the public in direct danger with these idiotic car chases most every day of the week.

This was a stupid move on their part. Discharging that many rounds without connecting is dumb, period. They saw what they were up against. And if they didn't or else couldn't, they had no business shooting to begin with. Part of improvement on ANY job is admitting to your shortcomings, so improvement can be made. If these clowns think they did nothing wrong, and justify that type of action, it's only a matter of time before it happens again, and some innocent civilian gets killed in the crossfire. Then millions more will have to be paid out because of their direct STUPIDITY. The money isn't going to come from them. It's going to come from the TAXPAYER. People are getting tired of paying to clean up their messes. Most of these big cities that have these type of events occur, are financially strapped to begin with. This type of foolishness doesn't help anyone or anything. They need to start cleaning up their act. This isn't the first time this has happened. And it most likely won't be the last.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
89 Posts
After reading this I don't fell odd about carrying 2 17rnd spare mags but, then again I hit the range a couple times a month shoot maybe 50-100 rnds each time with my carry gun....so I guess It's up to the average gun owner too protect the police when a bad guy starts shooting at them?
I mean apparently we're more familiar with handling and shooting the gun we carry than they are with the gun their Issued....this kinda makes me a little sad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,142 Posts
I feel like this whole thread is nothing but click bait. It's almost like OP only read the headline, ignored the facts in the article, and went on an ignorant rant about police.

(1) The title of this thread is a joke. We don't use the same ammo as LEO because it's more accurate. We do it because it won't be held against you in a shooting that you had "extra deadly" ammo.
(2) The circumstances here were that it was dark, the suspect was hiding behind a car for nearly all of those shots and running for the rest. When you have a suspect out gunned by that margin, and he's hiding behind a barrier, filing that barrier full of holes is a GOOD idea. There is little chance of a stray bullet hitting an unintended target, you keep the suspect pinned down, and you just might get a hit on him through the barrier. If they had more rounds, they should have put even more than 84 through that car at him.
(3) To counter your other stupid claim, shooting people is NOT their job. They are trained in marksmanship just like you or me because they carry a gun. But it is not their job.

The fact that you just take the number of rounds and divide by the number of hits and formulate such a strong opinion of the shooting shows me all I need to know about you. Your judgment is poor and hasty and you have little knowledge of real world shootings. Both of which make me question your being a good candidate for carrying a gun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
530 Posts
Discussion Starter · #26 ·
The fact that you just take the number of rounds and divide by the number of hits and formulate such a strong opinion of the shooting shows me all I need to know about you. Your judgment is poor and hasty and you have little knowledge of real world shootings. Both of which make me question your being a good candidate for carrying a gun.
Oh please, spare me your rhetorical nonsense. Stop trying to make this into something it isn't. Firing 84 rounds, and in the process hitting what they were ALL aiming at ONCE tells me, and anyone with an ounce of common sense, these guys are horrible marksmen, or else terrible at judging when and where to take a shot, or all of the above. The only thing that prevented some innocent from getting killed in this bad joke of "police work", is pure luck, nothing more. If this happened in your neighborhood you would be crying the loudest.

If a hunter fired at his quarry in this manner wounding it in the process, you would be screaming and carrying on about how unethical he was, and how he had no business in the field with a firearm taking wild shots he knew he was incapable of connecting with. But a bunch of cops do it on city streets in a residential area, and you're fine with it. And you possess the audacity to question my ability to carry a weapon? Give me a break. Even more nonsense based on your hypocritical viewpoint. It's immaterial how many cops there were. The fact there were so many just compounds the danger of the entire incident. Shooting more rounds by more people, and in the process obtaining the same negative result, only served the purpose of making this an even bigger, more dangerous incident. And the title of the thread was MEANT to be a joke.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,142 Posts
Stop trying to make this into something it isn't.
LOL. I think you should take your own advice. You ignore any and all relevant factors, make sweeping conclusions that aren't based on facts, but generalizations, and now tell me not to make this into something it's not? That's laughable. This whole thread is making something into something it's not by doing nothing more than reading the headline of an article. What a joke.

You sound no different from the liberal gun grabbers who use knee jerk conclusions about situations in the news to drive their policy. I guarantee that if I were hiding behind a car and shooting at you that you would unload on that car and likely have a similar hit percentage to theirs. But hey, let's not let the facts and circumstances get in the way of our assumptions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
530 Posts
Discussion Starter · #28 ·
.........You ignore any and all relevant factors, make sweeping conclusions that aren't based on facts, but generalizations, and now tell me not to make this into something it's not?
Bull$h!t. I've ignored nothing. You're trying to over dramatize this for your blind, stupid support of a bad move. Why? Because they're cops. Which in itself means nothing, except they should be held to a higher standard they are not capable of. Their actions proved it. Everything I stated was fact. 84 round fired. ONE SINGLE HIT. Lousy marksmanship coupled with equal or worse decision making. Want more facts? They're God damn lucky the NYPD isn't on the receiving end of a multi million dollar law suit for killing or wounding innocents. A law suit they would lose, and the taxpayers would have to pay in order to cover their pathetic, stupid asses. "LOL".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,142 Posts
You are ignoring the fact that the officers each fired less than one magazine, that it was dark and the suspect was hiding behind a car. Can you hit a guy behind a car with less than a magazine? Can Jerry Miculek? YOU are over-dramatizing something that really is very meaningless. Not me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
530 Posts
Discussion Starter · #32 ·
So a guy is shooting at you and it doesn't occur to you to try to shoot him back?
Why would you shoot back if you know there is no chance you'll hit him? If you can't get a clear sight picture, how can you possibly connect? Magic perhaps? Or do you think the noise will scare him to death? I can understand why you support what these stupid buffoons did. You yourself would do the exact same thing, and achieve the same result in the process. That is the definition of insanity. The only good thing here is you're not a cop..... Thank God.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,142 Posts
It seems clear to me you have very little desire to actually educate yourself on the issues here, but they are complex and varied. You seem to want to just look at the single statistic (1 hit in 84 rounds) and automatically dismiss this as crappy cops. If you ever want to educate yourself about the complexities of the situation and come down from your high horse, check out this link to at least get some understanding of all that is involved here. http://www.theppsc.org/Staff_Views/Aveni/OIS.pdf The issue of police accuracy and hit ratios has been well-studied. It's no secret real life hit percentages are very low compared to training scores. And there are myriad reasons why. Yes, we need better real world training to make officers in the best position possible to safely end deadly encounters. But let's not crucify them for perceived incompetence just yet. ESPECIALLY given the fact that you not only refuse to consider important factors of the shooting in this case, but we simply don't even know all of the relevant information because your article doesn't give it to us.

So maybe educate yourself before jumping to conclusions and try for one second to withhold judgment until you actually have the right facts to consider.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,142 Posts
Why would you shoot back if you know there is no chance you'll hit him? If you can't get a clear sight picture, how can you possibly connect? Magic perhaps? Or do you think the noise will scare him to death? I can understand why you support what these stupid buffoons did. You yourself would do the exact same thing, and achieve the same result in the process. That is the definition of insanity. The only good thing here is you're not a cop..... Thank God.
The chance of shooting him through the car might be low (not "no chance" as you claim), but when someone is actively trying to end your life, you take that chance rather than just stand there and let him shoot at you. I hope you're never in a deadly encounter, because I'm not so sure how you'd do given comments here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
530 Posts
Discussion Starter · #35 ·
The chance of shooting him through the car might be low (not "no chance" as you claim), but when someone is actively trying to end your life, you take that chance rather than just stand there and let him shoot at you. I hope you're never in a deadly encounter, because I'm not so sure how you'd do given comments here.
They, AND YOU, would be just the ones to be stupid enough to try it 84 TIMES........... And miss 83 of them. And screw anyone who just happens to get in the way of this stupid, idiotic lunacy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
530 Posts
Discussion Starter · #36 ·
It seems clear to me you have very little desire to actually educate yourself on the issues here, but they are complex and varied. You seem to want to just look at the single statistic (1 hit in 84 rounds) and automatically dismiss this as crappy cops. If you ever want to educate yourself about the complexities of the situation and come down from your high horse, check out this link to at least get some understanding of all that is involved here. http://www.theppsc.org/Staff_Views/Aveni/OIS.pdf The issue of police accuracy and hit ratios has been well-studied. It's no secret real life hit percentages are very low compared to training scores. And there are myriad reasons why. Yes, we need better real world training to make officers in the best position possible to safely end deadly encounters. But let's not crucify them for perceived incompetence just yet. ESPECIALLY given the fact that you not only refuse to consider important factors of the shooting in this case, but we simply don't even know all of the relevant information because your article doesn't give it to us.

So maybe educate yourself before jumping to conclusions and try for one second to withhold judgment until you actually have the right facts to consider.
Stop trying to pollute this total stupidity with all of your bombastic bull$h!t.

FACT: These imbeciles fired 84 rounds, and in this whole convoluted process missed with 83 of them. Period.

You trying to make this into some type of "complex and varied" issue is pure, unadulterated, bull$h!t. Nothing more. They could have easily killed several innocent people. It's a miracle they didn't. Next time these nit wits try a repeat performance, and some poor, innocent kid gets caught in the crossfire, I'm sure they'll be comforted to know they'll have you cheering them on.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,256 Posts
billt, I have to agree (mostly) with Zenas. It's starting to look like maybe you just have an issue with cops. There's not enough information in the story to draw your conclusions, in fact, after speaking to other law enforcement it's not unreasonable at all. There could always be more to the story than meets the eye but what's here doesn't indicate anything wrong. I would say you got consumed with one fact only (84 rounds) without analyzing if there was an explanation for it. But some of your other posts makes me think you want there to be a cop issue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
530 Posts
Discussion Starter · #38 ·
billt, I have to agree (mostly) with Zenas. It's starting to look like maybe you just have an issue with cops.
Not true. Cops are a very necessary people in our society, who provide a very necessary service. Especially today. Without them we would have anarchy in the streets. If Baltimore proved anything, it proved that. But the fact is they are human. And as a result they are not infallible. Far from it. They "F*#K up" just like everybody else. Giving power to people has that effect. Just look at politicians if you need more examples. They all have the ability to get away with more because of the power they possess in todays society. And the way many of these departments are becoming far more militarized, it is compounding the "power trip" problem exponentially. Add that all up, and throw in a large dose of unaccountability, and that's when $h!t like this starts happening.

There's not enough information in the story to draw your conclusions, in fact, after speaking to other law enforcement it's not unreasonable at all.
Well of course other cops are going to defend it. That goes without saying. They're not going to condemn their bros in blue for anything. Try to get a doctor to testify against one of his collogues that F*#KS up in the O.R. and kills someone on the table. Good luck. Birds of a feather, and all of that sort of thing. As far as "not enough information", you've got to be kidding! What more information do you require in order to come to the conclusion that discharging a weapon, (or in this case weapons), 84 times in a populated residential area, and in the process hitting your intended target ONCE, is a stupid, dangerous practice? Every one of the idiots involved in this cowboy undertaking were God damn lucky they didn't kill an innocent. Let's at least get real here. What I'm seeing in all of the defense of this total nonsense, is a complete lack of ANY common sense. And as we all know, when firearms get discharged without that commodity present, bad things start happening real fast. You have this incident as proof positive of that fact.

I would say you got consumed with one fact only (84 rounds) without analyzing if there was an explanation for it.
The 84 rounds WAS THE "EXPLANATION"............. Only 84 rounds??? Jesus.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,142 Posts
Move along people, nothing to see here. Clearly this thread is nothing more than billt's attempt to flame cops. He formulated an opinion based on limited info in a news article and refuses to even consider any explanations. That's the mark of an internet troll who has an agenda. The "joke" in the title just solidifies it to me that he has no other purpose than to flame cops and troll this board.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
530 Posts
Discussion Starter · #40 ·
He formulated an opinion based on limited info in a news article and refuses to even consider any explanations.
Then how about you educate me with all of this privileged information you claim to have in your possession, so I can be swayed into making a more informed decision? Instead of sitting on the curb bitching about what you can't seem to explain in umpteen posts. How does that sound? (This I gotta' hear).
 
21 - 40 of 65 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top