Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com

Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/)
-   Firearms in the Media (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f169/)
-   -   Firearms NOT in the media (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f169/firearms-not-media-71321/)

bkt 08-28-2012 10:04 PM

Firearms NOT in the media
 
Armed Citizen Stops Violent Attack on Cop
Perry Stevens was minding his own business when he witnessed an attacker on top of Officer Brian Harrison.

East Baton Rouge Sheriff’s spokesman Greg Phares says Officer Brian Harrison was escorting a funeral procession Friday when he pulled Temple over and wrote him a ticket for breaking into the procession.

Temple took exception and attacked Officer Harrison. Stevens ordered Temple to “stop and get off the officer.” Temple, who was already wounded once by Harrison, continued his attack, so Stevens shot him four times in the abdomen.

According to East Baton Rouge Sheriff’s spokesman Colonel Greg Phares:

He again orders Mr. Temple to stop what he was doing and get off the officer. Those commands are ignored and he fires a fifth shot and that hits his head. The incident is over with, and as you know, Mr. Temple is dead.

Police have already called the shooting justified. Mr. Stevens has a concealed carry permit.

Temple reportedly had a criminal record.

Two concerns here. First:

Both Phares and Baton Rouge Police Chief Jeff LeDuff stopped short of crediting Stevens with saving the officer’s life.

True. It’s impossible to know if Stevens saved Harrison’s life. That would require some sort of concurrent, alternate reality where Stevens didn’t intervene, then comparing the two outcomes. Life isn’t a tidy double-blind clinical trial.

The FBI reports that in 2010, 19 police officers were slain while alone on patrol. Seven officers were killed with their own weapons. Of 56 officers killed, 16 had fired their own weapons, as Harrison did.

Second: Only local station WAFB reported this incident. FBI Supplemental Homicide Reports show that private citizens killed police attackers only three times annually since 2000. Yet an unusual and compelling story of self-defense by a concealed carry licensee gets mentioned only by local media. Media blackouts allow anti-rights propagandists to continue claiming that self-defense incidents are rare, so banning concealed carry wouldn’t be an imposition.

Tackleberry1 08-28-2012 10:15 PM

I applaud ^^THIS^^ guy and his actions but do have one question?

Given the corrupt nature of LA Law enforcement we've all heard about our entire lives...would it not be a safer assumption that an honest citizen was defending themselves from a "dirty" cop who had already shot him once?

Just Saying...

Tack

USEBOTHHANDS 08-29-2012 01:12 AM

"Temple reportedly had a criminal record."

plus he had been shot once already, AND shot 4 more times in the abdomen, and STILL continued to assault the officer, until his life was ended with a head shot. what does that tell you about his demeanor? he was either superman and Mr. Stevens used a Kryptonite bullet to the head, or he was high on something.

Doc3402 08-30-2012 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by USEBOTHHANDS (Post 919549)
"Temple reportedly had a criminal record."

plus he had been shot once already, AND shot 4 more times in the abdomen, and STILL continued to assault the officer, until his life was ended with a head shot. what does that tell you about his demeanor? he was either superman and Mr. Stevens used a Kryptonite bullet to the head, or he was high on something.

Since the story didn't point out caliber of the weapon I would not make that assumption. For all we know the rescuer was using .22 shorts. I'm not ruling out your theory, but there is another possible scenario.

Take into consideration that the abdomen has no vital organs that would cause instantaneous incapacitation. In fact, there are no abdominal structures that would stop the attackers ability to use his arms if they were hit. True, there are some major blood vessels that if hit would have caused eventual loss of consciousness, but probably not in the time frame this incident occurred in.

The human body is an amazing machine built to survive. The first vessels off the aorta carrying oxygenated blood feed the heart, the upper extremities, and the brain. This gives us the ability to decide whether to fight or run, and maintains flow to the arms to fight if that is the decision made.

When the body starts to lose blood volume for whatever reason, the first thing to occur is a massive constriction of all peripheral blood vessels. This shunts blood to the core of the body so we can continue feeding the brain for as long as possible. In fact, if you are in the right place at the right time you can see that the very first sign of shock is high blood pressure caused by this shunting. Again, this supports either fight or flight.

For someone to attack a cop, I would think that your theory is the most likely. Just bear in mind that this is not Hollywood, and people that are suffering an adrenalin dump don't always act like you think they would. Under those conditions it's very possible the attacker didn't even know he was shot. This is why shot placement and caliber are critical. Why the rescuer went for belly shots first is beyond me, but if a head shot was presented that's the one to take.

Tackleberry1 08-30-2012 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doc3402 (Post 921182)
Since the story didn't point out caliber of the weapon I would not make that assumption. For all we know the rescuer was using .22 shorts. I'm not ruling out your theory, but there is another possible scenario.

Take into consideration that the abdomen has no vital organs that would cause instantaneous incapacitation. In fact, there are no abdominal structures that would stop the attackers ability to use his arms if they were hit. True, there are some major blood vessels that if hit would have caused eventual loss of consciousness, but probably not in the time frame this incident occurred in.

The human body is an amazing machine built to survive. The first vessels off the aorta carrying oxygenated blood feed the heart, the upper extremities, and the brain. This gives us the ability to decide whether to fight or run, and maintains flow to the arms to fight if that is the decision made. When the body starts to lose blood volume for whatever reason, the first thing to occur is a massive constriction of all peripheral blood vessels. This shunts blood to the core of the body so we can continue feeding the brain for as long as possible. In fact, if you are in the right place at the right time you can see that the very first sign of shock is high blood pressure caused by this shunting. Again, this supports either fight or flight.

For someone to attack a cop, I would think that your theory is the most likely. Just bear in mind that this is not Hollywood, and people that are suffering an adrenalin dump don't always act like you think they would. Under those conditions it's very possible the attacker didn't even know he was shot. This is why shot placement and caliber are critical. Why the rescuer went for belly shots first is beyond me, but if a head shot was presented that's the one to take.

I agree with Doc...this fellow may have been on drugs but without the toxicology report we just don't know.

Adrenaline is an amazing chemical and history is full of people from soldiers to civi's to cops who have fought and survived after being seriously wounded.

The aggressor may have been on narc's OR he just may have been pissed of and hell bent on hurting someone.

It does serve to remind us of just how innefective handgun rounds can be and stresses the importance of shot placement.

I suspect the armed citizens initial shots to the abdomen may have been due to the position of the combatants and an attempt to avoid hitting the officer.

Tack

BenLuby 09-02-2012 06:17 AM

The sidearm in question was a .45 by another source.

Balota 09-05-2012 04:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doc3402 (Post 921182)
Why the rescuer went for belly shots first is beyond me, but if a head shot was presented that's the one to take.

Maybe the rescuer had as much adrenaline rush as the BG, I know I probably will if I ever have to actually use my gun on someone. BGs belly may have been to one side of the officer making it safer to shoot there. When 4 rounds of 45 prove ineffective, the rescuer took the time to find a better angle for a head shot. All speculation, of course, but that sequence of events could explain his choices. (oops, sorry Tack, you already said that!)

Personally, I applaud his first choice, getting involved. He got the job done and that job is never pretty anyway.

Doc3402 09-05-2012 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Balota (Post 928705)
Personally, I applaud his first choice, getting involved.

Absolutely. I couldn't agree with you more.


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:26 AM.

Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.