Cop fights for his life against a Pro Boxer

[franci1911]

This police officers approach was wrong from the get-go. Out weighed and out classed. Approach to vehicle could have been better. His body search technque didn't leave him to much advantage either. In the struggle the gun jams, (panic sets in and no tap, rack, and roll). The only good thing is that the professional boxer didn't know what to do in that case either. Police don't spend enough time working on tactics (not required by most if any departments). Just a scoring of 65% or better on the B-27 sillouette targets once a year.

Of course the officer still hung in there until backup came in just the right time (lucky for him). Pepper spray doesn't work if you have enough addrenaline working for you. Samething on many abdomin shots. Shot placement during panic/stress is essential. .025

I would be interested to get the point of view of some of you especially those with law enforcement backgrounds.

TbyFnrtUtJQ (http://www.youtube.%20com/watch?%20v=TbyFnrtUtJQ&%20mode=related&%20search=)

[arnisador]

Wow, that could have been awful! I give him credit for keeping trying against a larger and aggressive opponent, and for keeping moving and stalling while waiting for backup, but while I'm no law enforcement expert I certainly understand the criticisms.

[Carol]

Wow...that was disturbing in more ways than one. :eek:

The rules of engagement are different for LEOs than they are for civillians...do U.S. police officers generally have to attempt to use a less-lethal option (such as OC spray) before resorting to deadly force?

[franci1911]

Wow...that was disturbing in more ways than one. :eek:

The rules of engagement are different for LEOs than they are for civillians...do U.S. police officers generally have to attempt to use a less-lethal option (such as OC spray) before resorting to deadly force?

The use of less than lethal option before resorting to deadly force depends greatly on the perception of the officer in the elevation of threat. Whereby did the police officer have cause to believe that his life was threatened and there was no other recourse. He would afterwards in debriefing have to be able to articulate his actions for lethal force to his C.O. - Internal Affairs - or to what ever inquest that would deem it necessary to question his actions. In short it depends on the particular situation whereby lethal force would be necessary.

I do not believe there is a set method of rules of engagement to use lethal force that LEOs have to followin every case for every situation.

Case in point:

During my tactical firearms training today an LEO that I know spoke of an incident that took place some time back. The scenario that he told me of at first may have appeared as unnecessary use of lethal force until he was able to articulate its use to his superiors. The situation went like this; On a disturbance call the officer came up to the suspect, as he approached him he asked the suspect for his I.D. At this point the suspect flipped back his jacket to reach towards his back. The police officer shot the suspect, killing him, Dead at the Scene. Now the suspect did have a gun, but how did the officer realize this? This was the querry that the investigators had asked him. In articulating his reasoning, he claimed that in other situations where a suspect had flipped back his jacket and the way his hand was moving towards his back was indicative of someone reaching for a gun. Even though he could have been going for his wallet, the shoot was deemed just.

So the escalation of force to deadly or lethal force is different in every situation and boils down to the LEOs ability to articulate his reasoning.

[Carol]

Ahh...that's a much clearer picture than what I had in my mind.

Thanks for the thorough explanation, Guro Franciotti :bow:

[franci1911]

You're quite welcome

[adam t babb]

our local cops would of just shot him

adam

[JoeBrandt]

Respect... :lookaroun