Stopping power vs. Lethality - caught on camera

[simon99]

The ragheads would get all jacked up on meth and then go out. Sometimes if they were crashing doors, the first guy through may have had a Marine issue Berrata 9mm. Seems like they were not very effective on the tweaking raghead.

I have heard that some people may have sent alternatives over in different mailings, and that some 1911 .45's started showing up in holsters. Seems they were a bit more effective than the 9mm, or so I have heard.

In this case, likely a sucking chest wound, and you can go just a bit before you drown in your own blood. This video clearly shows how fast these things happen and how fast you have to decide. I am thinking that the cop had a very big "Oh sh*t" moment when that dude in BDU's got out and posed up.

You're right CoastRange57, right on the money. I never had to do entry duty, but knew a lot of guys that ditched their M9s and rolled in with Benelli shotguns instead. I think this has a great deal to do with the Corps decision to go back to the 1911 next year. Colt already has the contract with the Corps. Semper Fi

 

[DieselScout]

You're right CoastRange57, right on the money. I never had to do entry duty, but knew a lot of guys that ditched their M9s and rolled in with Benelli shotguns instead. I think this has a great deal to do with the Corps decision to go back to the 1911 next year. Colt already has the contract with the Corps. Semper Fi

The Marine Corp isn't going to the 1911 next year, it's just for special ops guys.

Marine Corps Special Operations Command (MARSOC) and Marine Expeditionary Unit Special Operation Command [MEU(SOC)], members of Force Recon, Special Reaction Teams (SRT), and the Marine Corps pistol team are the expected end-users for the first new Colt 1911s added to an armory's inventory since World War II.

Read more: Semper Fi: Colt M45A1 CQBP Marine Pistol Review - Shooting Times

So that means your normal everyday Marine who is issued a sidearm will still be packing the M9.

 

[mjbskwim]

I didn't go through all the posts. I just watched it now.
When the guy got out with his hands behind his back,that's when I get the shotgun out. Or I am aiming at the head/heart.
It was obvious the perp wasn't going to cooperate.

There are many professional you tube videos of what handgun rounds do to a human. A situation lie this,the cop should have had his gun out and willing to empty it on this guy

 

[Fast Eddie]

If this happened in China, how would it have played out?

Both guns would have failed, then a foot pursuit.

Also, there would have been only 1 kid in the car.

 

[Misterbill]

The ragheads would get all jacked up on meth and then go out. Sometimes if they were crashing doors, the first guy through may have had a Marine issue Berrata 9mm. Seems like they were not very effective on the tweaking raghead.

I have heard that some people may have sent alternatives over in different mailings, and that some 1911 .45's started showing up in holsters. Seems they were a bit more effective than the 9mm, or so I have heard.

In this case, likely a sucking chest wound, and you can go just a bit before you drown in your own blood. This video clearly shows how fast these things happen and how fast you have to decide. I am thinking that the cop had a very big "Oh sh*t" moment when that dude in BDU's got out and posed up.

With respect, there is a WORLD of difference between a NATO 9mm FMJ and +P or +P+ 9mm HP in terms if tissue damage alone. But when you have a choice, virtually ANY rifle bullet beats virtually any pistol round. There's a reason Seal Team Six iced bin laden with a 5.56 to the head instead of a 9mm to anywhere. -Then again, they're ST6. If I could shoot like they do I'd carry a .22 in complete confidence.

 

[Misterbill]

I didn't go through all the posts. I just watched it now.
When the guy got out with his hands behind his back,that's when I get the shotgun out. Or I am aiming at the head/heart.
It was obvious the perp wasn't going to cooperate.

There are many professional you tube videos of what handgun rounds do to a human. A situation lie this,the cop should have had his gun out and willing to empty it on this guy

I agree sort of. I have a feeling the LEO was already out of the car when the first warning was given, which means getting the shotgun isn't easy or quick. But ya, after the first warning was ignored, the gun is already out and pointed at the BG. It's shi*tty for the 99 out of 100 cases where you just have a belligerent idiot that now has a gun pointed at him over a traffic stop. -But in that 100th case it's what saves you from getting shot. And maybe the beligerent idiot from getting shot as well if he can refocus on the gun and realize what he was thinking of doing is now suicidal.

I've been very quick to criticize LE on over-use of force. But in this case it was pretty clear this was going to get ugly from the gate. The only question was HOW ugly (pepper-spray/taser/baton vs. shooting him).

Note to you guys standing up for your rights: You're doing a good thing. But don't EVER make a cop legitimately fear for his safety. No good will come of it and ya might well end up dead over a misunderstanding of intent.

Also a VERY good demonstration over action/vs. reaction times. I think I'm gonna add this video to my classes based on that alone actually.

 

[45 for me]

With respect, there is a WORLD of difference between a NATO 9mm FMJ and +P or +P+ 9mm HP in terms if tissue damage alone. But when you have a choice, virtually ANY rifle bullet beats virtually any pistol round. There's a reason Seal Team Six iced bin laden with a 5.56 to the head instead of a 9mm to anywhere. -Then again, they're ST6. If I could shoot like they do I'd carry a .22 in complete confidence.

Not that I disagree with what you are saying, but I would argue ST6 iced him with a 5.56 because that's what they were holding in their hands.

 

[Misterbill]

Both guns would have failed, then a foot pursuit.

Also, there would have been only 1 kid in the car.

The snark is STRONG in this one Obi-Wan.

 

[Misterbill]

Not that I disagree with what you are saying, but I would argue ST6 iced him with a 5.56 because that's what they were holding in their hands.

Oh now don't go injecting reality into it But ya, that too, though the old MP-5 "standard" seems to have gone out the window in favor of something that will penetrate body armor. Even though I'd much rather be taking 3-rd burst headshots with a MP-5 than with any AR variant you can name if it's about accuracy.

Then again, I'm not ST ANYTHING material.

 

[rick benjamin]

Why is ammunition still rare? Everybody misses.
Folks are swift to spray and pray. Notice how fast BA emptied his pistol?
Ducking and weaving, out of ammo, retrieving his mag instead of focus on target.
I wonder if BA tox screen was hot for meth.
State officer is still alive.
Wonder how many rounds he fired? At least one went home.

 

[Netspirit]

With respect, there is a WORLD of difference between a NATO 9mm FMJ and +P or +P+ 9mm HP in terms if tissue damage alone.

There is absolutely no need to go +P in 9mm (except for special applications). A modern round like Federal HST or Winchester RA9T drills a 13+ inch hole in ballistic gel (which exceeds FBI standards), very controllable with mild recoil, no wear on the gun and excellent suppression in 147gr.

If you have a reason to use +P (for example, if you shoot through windshields for a living) you might as well go .40 which was designed for police to begin with.

 

[wichaka]

Having attended many a gunshot autopsies, I can attest to three things;

1 - 10 people can be shot with the same bullet in the same place, yet the performance will be slightly different in each person. There are too many variables.

2 - Pistol bullets suck;

3 - Unless a round is put thru the snot locker, a person can survive a clean heart shot and fight for close to two minutes. And a lot of damage can happen in two minutes.

To reply to some of the comments;

There was no where near the time to employ a rifle or shotgun. Depending on dept. policy, they are either stored in a vehicle lock or trunk and are usually unloaded. Some allow for rounds in the magazine tube of the shotgun, some do not. This unfolded way too quick, which is how a lot of them go down. Sudden...unexpected.

Living close to the event, the bullet performed as it was designed. No bullet failure. Don't believe any other caliber would have changed the events. The suspect would have still lived to drive the few miles after being shot. See number three above.

Had the guy not displayed a gun and advanced on the Trooper the way he did, after the short standoff...would the Trooper be justified in shooting the suspect? Or does the Trooper have to wait to see a gun, or be fired upon?

 

[Netspirit]

Had the guy not displayed a gun and advanced on the Trooper the way he did, after the short standoff...would the Trooper be justified in shooting the suspect? Or does the Trooper have to wait to see a gun, or be fired upon?

I believe that whenever there is a danger that the trooper's pistol can be taken away from them, they are justified to shoot. If it was a small girl, then probably not. If it was a freak like the one on the video, then definitely yes.

 

[45 for me]

In China...

Both guns would have failed, then a foot pursuit.

Also, there would have been only 1 kid in the car.

I think you mean only 1 kid on the bicycle...

 

[DieselScout]

In China we would be having this discussion. We wouldn't have never known it had happened

 

[Misterbill]

Had the guy not displayed a gun and advanced on the Trooper the way he did, after the short standoff...would the Trooper be justified in shooting the suspect? Or does the Trooper have to wait to see a gun, or be fired upon?

If a cop orders you back into your car, after the second time you ignore the order, expect a gun to be pointed at you.

If you then advance on the cop with one hand behind your back, expect to get shot. BTW, if you fo that to ME, expect to get shot and I will get off scott-free regardless if you had a weapon.

In WA the standard is "imminent threat." In both the variants I described you gave off WAY more than that. No, you are not expected to see a gun.

Ability: probable gun.
Opportunity: range and probable gun based on hand position.
Jeopardy: Range, probable gun, irrational behavior when confronted with armed person YES.

That means You're dead, I'm not and I didn't even get questioned that much. Even with NO video. Ballistics never lie. Neither does investigation into the people involved. Outside some bizarre Trayvon Martin situation, you're golden with few questions asked.

YMMV in other states or localities, but seriously, that's the way it works. The cops really aren't out to get you in most places. And prosecutors REALLY hate bringing losers before a jury. TM was an aberration. FAR from the rule.

 

[Misterbill]

There is absolutely no need to go +P in 9mm (except for special applications). A modern round like Federal HST or Winchester RA9T drills a 13+ inch hole in ballistic gel (which exceeds FBI standards), very controllable with mild recoil, no wear on the gun and excellent suppression in 147gr.

If you have a reason to use +P (for example, if you shoot through windshields for a living) you might as well go .40 which was designed for police to begin with.

Because it's not about just penetration. It's about residual tissue damage. Speedxmass= damage. And your 147-grain 9mms actually do LESS tissue damage on the tests I've seen than somewhat lighter rounds at higher velocities. (No, I'm not gonna dig it up, it's late and I can't be arsed, but it's out there, I promise.)

For 9mm every "expert" I've ever talked to, including Mas Ayoob unless he's changed his stance went with +Ps or better for 9mm. I seem to remember a recommendation specifically for 127-grain Corbon +Ps. -Bear in mind it's been a while and it's late and also, a few beers. YMMV (Also I'm getting older and my memory ain't what it used to be) -Cheers.

 

[wichaka]

If a cop orders you back into your car, after the second time you ignore the order, expect a gun to be pointed at you.

If you then advance on the cop with one hand behind your back, expect to get shot. BTW, if you fo that to ME, expect to get shot and I will get off scott-free regardless if you had a weapon.

I knew the answer, it was a bait question.

As there seems to be many after-action opinions from those who haven't been there, and seem to want to lynch the LE person for shooting an unarmed person.

As one can see from the video, things happen in fraction of seconds. Which is why the courts look at the incident from the Officer view at the time of the incident, not armchair quarterbacking it after the fact. What was presented to the Officer at the time of the incident, AND what would a reasonable Officer do in such an incident.

 

[wichaka]

The reasonableness standard started with the court case Graham v Connor 490 U.S. 386 (1989), where 3 issues of 'reasonableness' surfaced about the police use of force;

1 - what was the severity of the crime that the officer believed the suspect to have committed or be committing?

2 - did the suspect present an immediate threat to the safety of officer(s) or the public?

3 - was the suspect actively resisting arrest or attempting to escape?

The above case also brought out the following;

"The calculus of reasonableness must embody allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving - about the amount of force that is necessary in a particular situation." -- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 396-397 (1989)

The U.S. Supreme Court has held that reasonableness under the fourth amendment does not require police officers to choose the least intrusive alternative, only a reasonable one. Following that principle, most courts have rejected arguments that the use of deadly force was not necessary because officers had less intrusive options available or it was made necessary by the actions of the officers themselves.

The police may confront and surround a subject, keep him for going anywhere, because of the threat/danger the subject may pose to the community, and have no legal obligation to retreat, or use less lethal force, etc.

I said MAY, I didn't say they are commanded to do it. As I have said in other posts, there is always discretion and it should be applied to every situation. But the bottom line is, the courts have held that LE can confront and control dangerous subjects, and officers may not be held liable for doing so, no matter how the subject responds.

 

[Misterbill]

I knew the answer, it was a bait question.

As there seems to be many after-action opinions from those who haven't been there, and seem to want to lynch the LE person for shooting an unarmed person.

As one can see from the video, things happen in fraction of seconds. Which is why the courts look at the incident from the Officer view at the time of the incident, not armchair quarterbacking it after the fact. What was presented to the Officer at the time of the incident, AND what would a reasonable Officer do in such an incident.

I'm extremely critical over what I see as routine LEO over-reaction. That's based on actual experience and training, not on what some jackass at the local paper wrote.

But as I said, ballistics don't lie. Yes, we'll KNOW if the "perp" was running away. Really, we will. Yes, we'll also know if the "perp" was facing full-front to you when shot. And yes, chances are, we'll even have a pretty good idea of where his arms were WHEN you shot. Modern forensics are THAT good.

If you shoot an unarmed man, forensics are going to be your very good friend (Zimmerman) or your very bad enemy. In very few cases are they going to be truly ambiguous.

And yes, everything about your past and the dead man's are going to be in play. (Hope you never made any intemperate posts on NWFA, because yes, they are all possibly admissible.)

It's always a dicey situation. Even in the most golden shoot imaginable there's a homicide investigation going on. But it's usually pretty clear-cut. Unbless you're doing something incredibly stupid (like defending property alone) Odds favor the good-guy. It just gets better from there.

Bottom line: If you think you're in serious danger, SHOOT FIRST. whatever happens beats Hell out of being dead.