Firearms Talk banner

Idiots filming robbery scene fail to notify police

3K views 51 replies 13 participants last post by  Rentacop 
#1 ·
This is slightly old news and if someone else has posted it, I apologize. I didn't know FT had a specific forum for Firearms in the Media. Here is a c/p from a post I made on another forum. In the end no charges were filed (but there should have been some against the movie people.)

These idiots were filming 2 blocks from the police station and didn't bother to inform anyone they were making a movie.

State Police are now investigating why one local officer discharged his weapon even though the suspect immediately complied by dropping his gun.

quote:A Crawfordsville police officer discharged his service weapon Tuesday (9/26) evening at a suspected robber standing in front of Backstep Brewery on North Green Street. The suspect, who was actually filming a scene for the latest Montgomery County Movies production, was not injured as a bullet flew past him and possibly ricocheted off the brewery or its next door neighbor, the Journal Review.

Before the 7 p.m. incident, a woman driving north on Green Street noticed two men in black hoods, both with pistols. She immediately called 9-1-1 and reported a robbery.

Witnesses say they heard a single gunshot and came out of a business across from the Journal Review. They saw an officer with his gun drawn and saw the suspect drop to the ground while yelling, “It’s a movie.”

The suspect was actor Jim Duff. He ran out of the brewery as part of the movie scene, only to find an audience of police officers with weapons drawn. Duff immediately threw off his cloth mask and dropped the air gun he was holding.

“As I came out of the brewery and saw the officers, I quickly complied and threw off the mask and dropped the gun,” Duff said. “The next thing I know I heard a gun shot and something buzz by my head.”

Fragments of the bullet were found lying in the street in front of the north end of the Journal Review building.

MCM owner Philip Demoret was the second man dressed as a bandit in the scene. He was not outside at the time of the incident but was standing next to the glass door. He heard officers yelling as he started to exit and backed off immediately.

As he peaked out the door he saw several officers with guns drawn and still yelling at Duff to get on the ground before he heard the shot.

“I saw Jim do exactly what the police were telling him to do,” Demoret said.

Demoret and MCM had permission from the property owner to be filming.

Kodi Swan, co-owner of MCM, was inside the brewery at the time. She understood why police responded to the 9-1-1 call. However, she was concerned that a shot was fired at one of her actors when Duff was complying with the officer’s orders.

“I am glad the police were doing their job,” Swan said. “My bigger concern is how close it came to being an issue with one of our actors. I get it, from my prior military service, they have to go with what they know and what they are seeing. Police officers have a very difficult job, especially when guns are involved. They don’t know if a gun is real or not and they have to react to what they know. I am concerned that our actor was complying and a gun was still fired.”

Director Steve Hesler said the actors were doing exactly as he had instructed for the robbery scene.

Movie company officials admit they did not notify local police about the filming.

link to bodycam footage (may not still be active) http://www.journalreview.com/news/article_39648194-a7a7-11e7-84ac-87298b4f2d7c.html
 
See less See more
#3 ·
Do you mean if someone was planning a riot, called the police and told them it was a movie the police would not show up?:eek::rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dallas53
#5 ·
I would be more offended about a cop firing on an unarmed, cooperating perp. What the hell is wrong with these trigger-happy bozos?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SRK97 and Dallas53
#6 ·
i have to agree in this instance. if the guy threw the gun down, and got on the ground, then he was no longer a credible threat, and firing any shots was not necessary and was very dangerous.

personally he should be reprimanded and sent back for more training, and if that doesn't work, then he should think about a career change.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dango
#9 ·
The people who were filming the scene made a bonehead error.

The defense of the cop is all well and good until you are the one with the pistol pointing at you. The fear that caused the shot was, according to the story, unjustified. Paranoia is not a valid defense. Otherwise, I might be shooting anyone I liked because I was claimed that they might be trying to harm me, and it wouldn't matter if they were armed or aggressive or unarmed and passive.

I respect and appreciate police, but I will be damned if I would defend a cop who shoots first and lets God sort out the victims. Wearing a badge should not grant a license to kill. If they are so afraid of their life that they are willing to shoot unarmed people, then they are in the wrong job. Those kind of cops need to be serving hamburgers for a living. "Do you want fries with that?"
 
#10 ·
In the late seventies we started training officers that everyone they approached was a danger. At the same time the recruitment standards were loosened to allow shorter, lighter, police officers.

The result was there were a lot of small guys and gals, less physically capable, recruited and trained to be afraid, and to resort to weapons sooner.

With a twenty year retirement plan, we are now on the third generation of such officers. And, for some reason we act surprised when they shoot too soon.
 
#11 ·
As I stated, I am not defending the cop. It was a negligent discharge no matter how you look at it and luckily no one was hurt this time. I also stated some obvious reasons why some officers are getting nervous. I have questions about the situation police are faced with. Why is the media stirring up so much hate? What is the agenda?
 
  • Like
Reactions: dango and Dallas53
#12 ·
As I stated, I am not defending the cop. It was a negligent discharge no matter how you look at it and luckily no one was hurt this time. I also stated some obvious reasons why some officers are getting nervous. I have questions about the situation police are faced with. Why is the media stirring up so much hate? What is the agenda?
It’s a cop, a gun, an un-armed innocent man! How much better can it get for the media! The only thing missing is a pick-up with the Confederate flag and a black person running away!

ellis
 
#16 ·
JTJ

I don't think that the medial is anti-police. Police and fire fighters just got a lot of good publicity over handling the fires and hurricanes. The press reports the news where police have done questionable things. That is part of the value of a free press. We don't need bad shootings suppressed or covered up unless we want more of them.

We grant police extraordinary powers. With that comes extraordinary responsibilities. Some of them just can't handle it the second part. Those folks need to be purged from the system, not wrapped in a blue protective blanket. Good cops should be the first to call out bad cops, just as good doctors should call out bad doctors. Professional "courtesy" seems to get in the way of right and wrong.
 
#17 ·
We grant police extraordinary powers. With that comes extraordinary responsibilities. Some of them just can't handle it the second part. Those folks need to be purged from the system, not wrapped in a blue protective blanket. Good cops should be the first to call out bad cops, just as good doctors should call out bad doctors. Professional "courtesy" seems to get in the way of right and wrong.
I can agree with that but lets hold the media to that standard. I still look at the Media lynching of police in Ferguson and the almost total blackout on negative liberal news.
 
#20 ·
Manta; It is a big problem. Recently a woman was killed by a totally unqualified officer that was made a policeman by the mayor of a large city looking to make points with the immigrant community. You wont see much in our liberal news slanted reporting. There are police on the job that are in the wrong career field but I believe there are more good ones than bad. A lot of good officers have been ambushed and killed because of the media bias making them targets and this makes them nervous. When an officer knows he is a target and any situation could be an ambush, decisions are going to become slanted towards self preservation. The media has become a lynch mob and should be held accountable for the damage they are doing.
 
#21 ·
Manta, i have to agree with JTJ on this as well. there has been a lot of media bias against officers of law enforcement over the past several years. pretty much placing targets on their backs. i too fault the media for having a hand in doing that.

there are several cases of officers shooting unarmed people that are definitely questionable and should be investigated, and possible criminal charges directed at those officers. but if you think about it, usually the negative stories about police officers are the ones getting the media attention, not the thousands and thousands of positive stories of all the good officers doing good things for people in their communities. that is IMO, very unfair and biased media at work.

and much of those on YouTube? take those with a grain of salt would be my suggestion. look at the motives and the reasoning behind the people videoing and posting them. what are their ulterior motives? some of them just have a beef with people in law enforcement and are going to try and use anything they can to make police officers look bad or portray them in unfavorable fashion.
 
#22 ·
They did take action regarding the shooting at the petrol station.

Groubert, 34, was fired from the state Highway Patrol and pleaded guilty last year to assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature.

On Tuesday, Circuit Court Judge Casey Manning sentenced Groubert to 12 years in prison but suspended the time to five years and then gave him credit for the 17 months that he had already served in jail after pleading guilty, meaning that Groubert will serve only about three years in total. He will only have to serve his full sentence if he violates probation after his eventual release.
 
#25 ·
This is slightly old news and if someone else has posted it, I apologize. I didn't know FT had a specific forum for Firearms in the Media. Here is a c/p from a post I made on another forum. In the end no charges were filed (but there should have been some against the movie people.)

These idiots were filming 2 blocks from the police station and didn't bother to inform anyone they were making a movie.

State Police are now investigating why one local officer discharged his weapon even though the suspect immediately complied by dropping his gun.

quote:A Crawfordsville police officer discharged his service weapon Tuesday (9/26) evening at a suspected robber standing in front of Backstep Brewery on North Green Street. The suspect, who was actually filming a scene for the latest Montgomery County Movies production, was not injured as a bullet flew past him and possibly ricocheted off the brewery or its next door neighbor, the Journal Review.

Before the 7 p.m. incident, a woman driving north on Green Street noticed two men in black hoods, both with pistols. She immediately called 9-1-1 and reported a robbery.

Witnesses say they heard a single gunshot and came out of a business across from the Journal Review. They saw an officer with his gun drawn and saw the suspect drop to the ground while yelling, “It’s a movie.”

The suspect was actor Jim Duff. He ran out of the brewery as part of the movie scene, only to find an audience of police officers with weapons drawn. Duff immediately threw off his cloth mask and dropped the air gun he was holding.

“As I came out of the brewery and saw the officers, I quickly complied and threw off the mask and dropped the gun,” Duff said. “The next thing I know I heard a gun shot and something buzz by my head.”

Fragments of the bullet were found lying in the street in front of the north end of the Journal Review building.

MCM owner Philip Demoret was the second man dressed as a bandit in the scene. He was not outside at the time of the incident but was standing next to the glass door. He heard officers yelling as he started to exit and backed off immediately.

As he peaked out the door he saw several officers with guns drawn and still yelling at Duff to get on the ground before he heard the shot.

“I saw Jim do exactly what the police were telling him to do,” Demoret said.

Demoret and MCM had permission from the property owner to be filming.

Kodi Swan, co-owner of MCM, was inside the brewery at the time. She understood why police responded to the 9-1-1 call. However, she was concerned that a shot was fired at one of her actors when Duff was complying with the officer’s orders.

“I am glad the police were doing their job,” Swan said. “My bigger concern is how close it came to being an issue with one of our actors. I get it, from my prior military service, they have to go with what they know and what they are seeing. Police officers have a very difficult job, especially when guns are involved. They don’t know if a gun is real or not and they have to react to what they know. I am concerned that our actor was complying and a gun was still fired.”

Director Steve Hesler said the actors were doing exactly as he had instructed for the robbery scene.

Movie company officials admit they did not notify local police about the filming.

link to bodycam footage (may not still be active) http://www.journalreview.com/news/article_39648194-a7a7-11e7-84ac-87298b4f2d7c.html

This actually happened about 5 blocks down the road from my plant. That was the talk of the neighborhood around here for several weeks. Sgt. Schroeter has been to the plant several times for late night alarms, safety walk throughs for active shooter scenarios, and really is a stand up guy. My youngest son is wanting to be a cop and he's taken him on two ride alongs. Freaken super nice guy. I wont type out my last chat with him, but the guy is unbelievable lucky that Matt didn't unload on him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dango
#26 ·
In the late seventies we started training officers that everyone they approached was a danger. At the same time the recruitment standards were loosened to allow shorter, lighter, police officers.

The result was there were a lot of small guys and gals, less physically capable, recruited and trained to be afraid, and to resort to weapons sooner.

With a twenty year retirement plan, we are now on the third generation of such officers. And, for some reason we act surprised when they shoot too soon.
The human brain doesn't work well under stress and in a hurry . Maybe the officer's brain didn't process the change in the situation or...who knows ?
I don't expect perfection and zero mistakes from the police . Today's cops have a difficult ( make that " impossible " ) job to do .
Police are expected to be lawyers, psychologists, race-car drivers, professional wrestlers, expert gunslingers and track stars all at the same time .
Sorry guys, but when you start the " This cop should be fired " stuff, you lose me .
Blame the criminals and particularly BLM for the police being on hair-trigger alert .
 
#27 ·
Manta, i have to agree with JTJ on this as well. there has been a lot of media bias against officers of law enforcement over the past several years. pretty much placing targets on their backs. i too fault the media for having a hand in doing that.

there are several cases of officers shooting unarmed people that are definitely questionable and should be investigated, and possible criminal charges directed at those officers. but if you think about it, usually the negative stories about police officers are the ones getting the media attention, not the thousands and thousands of positive stories of all the good officers doing good things for people in their communities. that is IMO, very unfair and biased media at work.

and much of those on YouTube? take those with a grain of salt would be my suggestion. look at the motives and the reasoning behind the people videoing and posting them. what are their ulterior motives? some of them just have a beef with people in law enforcement and are going to try and use anything they can to make police officers look bad or portray them in unfavorable fashion.
Whether a suspect is unarmed or not tells us nothing !!!!!! The numbskulls in the media think " unarmed man " means " open-and-shut case " but unarmed people can be shot justifiably under a host of circumstances involving such things as toy guns or airsoft guns, disparity of force, appearing to draw a gun, fleeing felon who is an imminent danger to the community at large etc.
We forum members are often " armed men " . Does the fact that we are armed make it justifiable for the police to shoot us ?
And I might add : One after another of these " cop bites dog " cases falls apart when the facts come out ( in American Handgunner etc. --never on CNN ) . Even in the few " questionable " cases, the police were always provoked in some way .
I know I'm pulling the stuffing out of your Teddy Bears...
 
#29 ·
I went back and watched the beginning of your video . "Nothing lies like a video " . We don't know why the cop was pointing a gun at the suspect in the first place or what he was arresting him for . That has a bearing on how much consideration the suspect should get . This was a case of " the quick or the dead " . I would have fired at any serious crime suspect who dove into his car when ordered to comply . There was indeed provocation ( how much we don't know ) . And " unarmed " doesn't tell us anything .
I have the good sense to be careful interacting with police in this day and age ----and I'm white !!!!
 
#30 · (Edited)
BTW Manta :
I've lived in the " Wild West United States " my whole life . I've collected maybe 9 speeding tickets, been stopped on suspicion of DWI, been stopped and questioned as a possible robbery suspect, interrogated about a shooting death and handcuffed, ordered out of a campground while motorcycle camping, questioned on suspicion of riding a motorcycle on the Appalachian Trail, stopped for expired tags, ticketed for not having license and registration in possession , stopped in 3 DWI checkpoints, stopped in a drug checkpoint with expired tags and more .
Guess what ? None or our country's supposedly trigger-happy cops ever shot me . No brutality. Nothing .
Don't be afraid to visit our country ---well--at least don't be afraid of the police .
 
#31 · (Edited)
http://www.thestate.com/news/local/crime/article167297872.html
Here's the cop's account . He says he actually saw a wallet he took to be a gun . If his account is true, a bone-head move by a suspect triggered an awful mistake and an innocent cop is going to jail .
One time a black officer asked for my license and registration while I was parked in a parking lot . " It is in my back pocket ", I said ". He replied, " Go ahead " , so I slowly removed my wallet from my back pocket . And I lived to tell you about it .
Next case !
 
#34 ·
http://www.thestate.com/news/local/crime/article167297872.html
Here's the cop's account . He says he actually saw a wallet he took to be a gun . If his account is true, a bone-head move by a suspect triggered an awful mistake and an innocent cop is going to jail .
One time a black officer asked for my license and registration while I was parked in a parking lot . " It is in my back pocket ", I said ". He replied, " Go ahead " , so I slowly removed my wallet from my back pocket . And I lived to tell you about it .
Next case !
I can only go by my experience, if stopped by the police here and asked for ID i could make any move i wanted, apart from actually lifting a firearm without fear of being shot. that's what i don't understand why the difference in America.
 
#32 ·
Manta; It is a big problem. Recently a woman was killed by a totally unqualified officer that was made a policeman by the mayor of a large city looking to make points with the immigrant community. You wont see much in our liberal news slanted reporting. There are police on the job that are in the wrong career field but I believe there are more good ones than bad. A lot of good officers have been ambushed and killed because of the media bias making them targets and this makes them nervous. When an officer knows he is a target and any situation could be an ambush, decisions are going to become slanted towards self preservation. The media has become a lynch mob and should be held accountable for the damage they are doing.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/07/1...-shot-jessica-damond-lauded-by-community.html
I'm not sure why you characterize the officer as " totally unqualified " . Furthermore, we don't know if he shot her on purpose or by accident . My understanding is that she appeared suddenly at the patrol car window as the police were suspecting an ambush was about to occur .
 
#33 · (Edited)
My understanding is that she appeared suddenly at the patrol car window as the police were suspecting an ambush was about to occur.
Still not a good enough reason to shoot someone, if they were being ambushed yes think they might be no.

Here's the cop's account . He says he actually saw a wallet he took to be a gun . If his account is true, a bone-head move by a suspect triggered an awful mistake and an innocent cop is going to jail
He was not innocent he overacted and shot an innocent civilian, someone that on edge should not be in the police. As for the bone head he just did what the officer instructed him to do show ID. The only person he has to blame for going to jail is himself, not his victim.
 
#37 ·
All we see on the media in the UK regarding the police in America is this type of incident police shooting and asking questions later. I am sure there are lots of examples of police showing restraint in these type of incidents. But it would make me concerned if i was in America and having interaction with the police in a traffic stop etc. People will say comply and there will not be an issue, for me not complying is not a good reason for the police to shoot you. I watched a video where the guy did comply and was still shot, being frightened nervous is not reason to shoot someone if they are that on edge they should be considering a different carer. Examples.
Police Officer Shows Restraint with Threatening Suspect - YouTube
â–¶ 3:02


SC Trooper Opens Fire On Unarmed Man - YouTube
View attachment 179508 â–¶ 3:15
These are two very interesting videos. The first shows what police have to deal with in a moment of time. That officer made a spectacularly good decision not to shoot. One that many of us (and in fact several of his colleagues) might have made differently.

The second one is much harder to defend. It's not as black and white (no racial reference intended) as it may appear. The officer asked for the subjects license. Without thinking about it, the subject turned quickly and leaned back into the car. He may have been simply complying with the officers request for the license. He may have been going for a gun. The officer has no way to know which. The sudden move triggered a defense reaction from the officer who drew and moved.

First learning moment: When dealing with an officer, don't move suddenly for any reason.

Second learning moment: If you have to draw on a subject, focus absolutely on his hands. (To confirm this, see the first video.)

In that short period of time that the subject was leaning into the car, the officer yelled something at the subject who came back out of the car just as quickly as he went in. Again, a quick movement by a subject triggers a reaction. (Refer to the first learning moment again.) This time the reaction was to start pulling the trigger.

With the luxury of viewing the video once or several times, with the luxury of knowing from the title that the subject was unarmed, with the luxury of NOT being an officer wearing a target placed there by our distorted media reporting, it's easy to conclude that the officer was totally wrong. The subject did not have a gun. Unclear from the video what he did have in his hands coming out of the car.

The officer may not have taken enough time to identify what was in his hands and may have been making a bad shooting decision. One of the problems with instant media access and instant analysis of the situation (i.e. media reporting) is that isolated examples become the "proof" that such actions are commonplace and represent a systematic, racially-motivated attack. They are neither.

Here is a thought experiment that may help get people to think as officers are forced to think continuously. Imagine that you are given this challenge: You sign a promissory note for a years salary to be given to someone you don't like. You go to a shooting range where targets can be placed on edge to you, so you can't see what they look like. 10 targets are set up. One at a time, you stand in the lane with your gun at the ready position. Someone else will, without warning, turn the target and start a timer. There are 4 possible outcomes:
1. Target is armed and you shoot within 0.5 seconds. And you keep your promissory note.
2. Target is not armed and you decide not to shoot. And you keep your promissory note.
3. Target is armed and you fail to shoot within 0.5 seconds. And you give up your promissory note. (You are getting off lightly here since actual consequences could be loss of life.)
4. Target is not armed and you decide to shoot. And you give up your promissory note. (You are getting off lightly again since actual consequences could be loss of a lot more than 1 years salary.)

Would you take that challenge?

That's what the officer has to do every day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dango and manta
#38 · (Edited)
These are two very interesting videos. The first shows what police have to deal with in a moment of time. That officer made a spectacularly good decision not to shoot. One that many of us (and in fact several of his colleagues) might have made differently.

The second one is much harder to defend. It's not as black and white (no racial reference intended) as it may appear. The officer asked for the subjects license. Without thinking about it, the subject turned quickly and leaned back into the car. He may have been simply complying with the officers request for the license. He may have been going for a gun. The officer has no way to know which. The sudden move triggered a defense reaction from the officer who drew and moved.

First learning moment: When dealing with an officer, don't move suddenly for any reason.

Second learning moment: If you have to draw on a subject, focus absolutely on his hands. (To confirm this, see the first video.)

In that short period of time that the subject was leaning into the car, the officer yelled something at the subject who came back out of the car just as quickly as he went in. Again, a quick movement by a subject triggers a reaction. (Refer to the first learning moment again.) This time the reaction was to start pulling the trigger.

With the luxury of viewing the video once or several times, with the luxury of knowing from the title that the subject was unarmed, with the luxury of NOT being an officer wearing a target placed there by our distorted media reporting, it's easy to conclude that the officer was totally wrong. The subject did not have a gun. Unclear from the video what he did have in his hands coming out of the car.

The officer may not have taken enough time to identify what was in his hands and may have been making a bad shooting decision. One of the problems with instant media access and instant analysis of the situation (i.e. media reporting) is that isolated examples become the "proof" that such actions are commonplace and represent a systematic, racially-motivated attack. They are neither.

Here is a thought experiment that may help get people to think as officers are forced to think continuously. Imagine that you are given this challenge: You sign a promissory note for a years salary to be given to someone you don't like. You go to a shooting range where targets can be placed on edge to you, so you can't see what they look like. 10 targets are set up. One at a time, you stand in the lane with your gun at the ready position. Someone else will, without warning, turn the target and start a timer. There are 4 possible outcomes:
1. Target is armed and you shoot within 0.5 seconds. And you keep your promissory note.
2. Target is not armed and you decide not to shoot. And you keep your promissory note.
3. Target is armed and you fail to shoot within 0.5 seconds. And you give up your promissory note. (You are getting off lightly here since actual consequences could be loss of life.)
4. Target is not armed and you decide to shoot. And you give up your promissory note. (You are getting off lightly again since actual consequences could be loss of a lot more than 1 years salary.)

Would you take that challenge?

That's what the officer has to do every day.
I can only go by what i see of the police actions here and in America, anyone joining the police here had a lot more challenges regarding the decisions you describe above than officers in America. That's why i don't understand why the type of police involved shootings in America do not happen here, as a said not complying or sudden movements getting your ID etc would not get you shot. I would be happy if someone could explain why the difference to me now one has yet. PS I do admire anyone that joins the police to serve, but that does not exempt then from punishment when they get it wrong IMO. I thought he was going for a gun might be good enough for some but not me, he was going for a gun would be good enough for me.
 
#40 ·
Manta, take a good look at what went on in Ireland and you might get some idea of what is happening here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dango
#43 ·
A bad shoot is just that and the consequences should reflect that but lets get all the evidence before convicting them in the media. What happened in Ferguson is a prime example. The Media and our illustrious Nobama wrongly convicted the cop in the eyes of the world and incited a riot. The cop was severely injured by the man he shot and the shooting was self defense. The media ruse was deliberate and calculated to cause the most harm. Nobama set race relations back 50 years and that too was deliberate.
 
#49 ·
Older officers most retired now weren't nearly as fast to go to guns.
They didn't have to be college boys to get the job and were usually pretty rough men before being cops. They didn't fear going hands on physically.

Officers today usually have college degrees, never had a physical confrontation in their life and fear to do so unless they have a huge numbers advantage.

So they approach any even slightly questionable situation guns drawn and scared silly with training that is sadly lacking on except when in doubt shoot.

Couple that with the fact it's 's rarity for charges for wrongful death etc to be brought against an officer, and convictions as rare as unicorn eggs, and you get shoots by cops that should never have occurred.
 
#50 · (Edited)
Older officers most retired now weren't nearly as fast to go to guns.
They didn't have to be college boys to get the job and were usually pretty rough men before being cops. They didn't fear going hands on physically.

Officers today usually have college degrees, never had a physical confrontation in their life and fear to do so unless they have a huge numbers advantage.

So they approach any even slightly questionable situation guns drawn and scared silly with training that is sadly lacking on except when in doubt shoot.

Couple that with the fact it's 's rarity for charges for wrongful death etc to be brought against an officer, and convictions as rare as unicorn eggs, and you get shoots by cops that should never have occurred.
I go through some training similar to police training and we are not ever taught " when in doubt shoot " .
I'd like to see some evidence that older police officers were " slower to go to guns " . From what I've read, in the old days, the police didn't tackle and wrestle with suspects ; They pointed a .38 Special at them and ordered " Freeze ! " . Police used to have authority to shoot fleeing burglars in some states . In the good old days, police were trained by Ed McGivern and others to shoot from and at moving cars but today that is almost always prohibited .
The police today face the best trained , best equipped criminals in history and they do so under greater scrutiny and ridiculous rules of engagement ( Example : even facing an active shooter, they are not to fire if it might endanger innocents ) . Those " older officers " often faced knife-wielding punks and drunks but not maniacs setting ambushes .
I'm not sure why a college education should disqualify a person from police work . I've seen some college football players I wouldn't want to tussle with .
I don't approach every situation " scared silly " but, even at my job, we all know not to take anyone or anything for granted. Mr. Nice Guy could turn out to be a disgruntled / disturbed ex-whatever who stays up all night playing Medal Of Doom IV .
As for being afraid of a one-on-one fight ? That's just being realistic and cautious . Things go from bad to horrible if the suspect pulls a knife or gets you in a wrestling lock and takes your gun off you . Using numbers is common sense . Avoiding fights also avoids lawsuits .
Police today have Tasers , pepper spray and handy expandable batons and are taught to use those less dangerous weapons when gunfire can be avoided .
In short, your description of police training is purely false . Your other statements about police practices are at least doubtful .
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top