Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Debunking the "8% forgot to take off the safety" in Bear Attacks Myth
Gun Watch ^ | 16 October, 2016 | Dean Weingarten

Posted on 10/21/2016 9:29:51 PM PDT by marktwain



If you have been reading about defensive uses of firearms against bears, you have likely read that bear spray is more effective than firearms, and that a large percentage of people faced with bear attacks failed to disengage the safety.  Both are based on a highly flawed study.

In a discussion at The Truth About Guns, a commenter, writing about the subject thought that a high percentage, maybe 20%, of defenders, failed to take off the safety.  The commenter did some research, found the study by Tom Smith and Stephen Herroro and others, and corrected the number to "8 percent of people who faced a bear failed to disengage the safety".

I read the paper.  It is easy to misunderstand the numbers.  The number of people who failed to disengage the safety are much, much smaller, less than 2 percent.  The total number of firearm users in the study were 215.  That means four people out of 215 failed to disengage the safety on the firearm that they had.  About the same number (5) missed the bear.

The reason for the misunderstanding is clear, if you read the study carefully.  The eight percent is the percentage of the people with guns who failed to stop the bear or bears, not the percentage of people who tried to stop the bear or bears.

The overall percentage of people who successfully stopped the bear with a gun was a bit over 76 percent.  When only handguns were considered, the percentage was just short of 84%!  That is correct.  The study found handguns to be more effective than long guns.

If you are starting to wonder what is going on in this study, you are not alone.

The study has numerous flaws, the most glaring being that incidents where injuries to humans occurred were highly oversampled.  There was a strong selection bias toward incidents where firearms failed.  From the study:

Finally, additional records would have likely improved firearm success rates from those reported here, but to what extent is unknown.
This study is widely reported in the media to claim that firearms are not as effective as bear spray for protection against bear attack. 

The study is mildly interesting.  It is not persuasive science.  I am not going to go into all the flaws in this study.  It has been done.  One of the things that stands out is that a previous study, Human Injuries from Bears in Alaska, shows completely different results.

That study examined over a thousand Defense of Life and Property reports in Alaska from 1986 to 1996.  Only 2 percent of these incidents resulted in any injury to the people involved. That study was not mentioned in the bear attack study done by Tom Smith and Stephen Herrero.

Then next time you read "8% forgot to take off the safety", realize that it is a misunderstanding of the numbers. 

©2016 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch 


TOPICS: Outdoors; Pets/Animals; Politics; Society
KEYWORDS: ak; banglist; bearattack; guns
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-79 last
To: All

Never met anyone who carried a 1911 with the safety off. Don’t want to.

Revolvers have a DA trigger pull in the range of 12 lbs. Many of the striker fired handguns have trigger pulls around 5 lbs. I have a Shield like that. Thinking of trading it in at the next gun show for a 686+ with 4” barrel. Not light, but 7 rounds of controllable full power 357 is nothing to sneeze at.

FBI shootout: what they really were not prepared for was someone shot to pieces who kept on fighting. He was fatally injured with one of the early rounds, but he kept fighting and shooting. You can shoot someone in the heart with a 44 magnum. If they want to fight, they have 10-30 seconds of residual blood pressure to the brain to keep shooting. Shooting someone does not make them stop shooting, unless you hit the CNS.

Even more so with a grizzly, and the CNS of a grizzly would be a very tough shot - particularly if he is charging. A friend who worked in Alaska brown bear territory was required to carry a 375 H&H Magnum. The RIFLE was carried waist level at all times. They figured you wouldn’t have time to get it off your back. He sometimes came across half-eaten salmon with the blood still squirting, and he had no idea where the bear had gone...


61 posted on 10/22/2016 11:39:23 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (We're a nation of infants, ruled by their emotion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: riverrunner

You said,”Having spent a career in law enforcement and was active at the time of the shooting...” Now this was a much better post and you tried to include facts this time instead of just your disgusting insults.

I agree that there was never anything to be gained by blaming the silvertip round. There was at the time (perhaps still so) a predilection for equipment solutions to every problem. Remember all that talk about “one-shot” stops? Maybe it’s because that is an easy solution and seems to be under your control, when the reality however is deadly chaos. You are making the same mistake when you blame them for not having body armor and not having rifles.

Blaming “poor shooting and poor tactics” is just cheap second guessing on your part. Perhaps when your time comes you may not wet your pants and spray rounds everywhere, but there is no way for us to know that.

Saying their tactics “sucked” does nothing but show your ignorance and naiveté. After every department doing training and training and training, officers still suffer the adrenaline response and shoot poorly. If you have discovered the magic ingredient that can finally be added to the training protocol, by all means you should speak up now, my good sir.

What happens when you wait out side the nightclub or the high school making sure that everybody is properly equipped and that everyone has reviewed their tactics and rules of engagement. Is that a good tactic? What happens if an officer treats every traffic stop as a potential lethal encounter? Why, if a man turns around and reaches into his truck, then he is going to come out with a carbine and kill you right?

Maybe you are really smart enough that you won’t ever do something that could get you or somebody else killed. Perhaps they could test you and set your level of intelligence as a minimum for hiring in law enforcement.


62 posted on 10/22/2016 11:45:57 AM PDT by BDParrish (O God, please bless America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: All
Handguns for Protection in the Field

By Chuck Hawks


This article is about using a handgun for defense against large predators, principally bears and large cats. In the New World, these would include the cougar, jaguar, black bear, grizzly bear, brown bear and polar bear. A wolf pack constitutes a somewhat different type of deadly threat. The individual animals are smaller, but attack as a group, a very dangerous situation, indeed.

All of these predators hunt deer and other (sometimes much larger) game that is the same approximate size as an adult human being. Being the same approximate size as the predators' usual prey is highly undesirable; the implication is that we are at risk when in proximity to these large predators, particularly in areas where they are protected or not hunted regularly and thus do not fear homo sapiens as an apex predator.

So that we have a realistic appreciation of the size of these predators, I am going to use the figures developed by Edward A. Matunas and published in the 47th Edition of the Lyman Reloading Handbook. These are the approximate live weight ranges of full grown males of the species: gray wolf, 75-170 pounds; cougar, 150-250 pounds; jaguar, 200-310 pounds; black bear, 300-650+ pounds; grizzly and brown bear, 700-1600+ pounds; polar bear, 900-1550 pounds.

A powerful rifle is superior to any handgun in killing power, of course, and is the best choice for protection against large predators. (See Rifles for Protection in the Field.) However, a rifle may not be very handy inside of a tent, beside a trout stream, or for a nature lover or mountain climber on a strenuous hike. For outdoorsmen not engaged in hunting, but nevertheless exposed to the threat of attack by large predators, a handgun is probably the only firearm that offers the requisite portability and also leaves the hands free for other activities.

Deadly encounters with large predators involving people armed with magnum handguns are relatively rare and I doubt enough of them have been carefully documented since the development of the magnum revolver in 1935 to create a statistically valid "one shot stop" database. This is a pity, for without such data we can only estimate, based on our own research and experience, which calibers and loads offer a realistic level of protection.

Although infrequent, attacks on humans by large predators do happen. They are increasing in number in North America, due to continued human encroachment into wilderness areas and unwise policies protecting potentially dangerous predators from sport hunting. After a generation or two of not being hunted, these large predators lose their fear of man and revert to viewing our species as potential prey.

Because large predators have thick fur, a tough hide and much heavier muscles and bone structure than human beings, it is generally accepted that a bullet/load capable of deep penetration is highly desirable. This favors bullets of robust construction and high sectional density (SD).

In addition to powerful ammunition with plenty of penetration, we need a very reliable repeating handgun. The choices basically come down to an autoloading pistol chambered for some sort of magnum cartridge, of which there are few, or a revolver chambered for a powerful magnum cartridge, of which there are many.

The most commonly available, reasonably portable, autoloader that might serve our purpose is the Glock Model G20, chambered for the 10mm Auto (.40 caliber) cartridge. The G-20 is as reliable as a powerful auto gets and relatively compact. This pistol comes with a 4.6" barrel, is 7.59" in overall length and weighs only 26.28 ounces. In recent years Glock has promoted the G20 as a hunting pistol.

The EAA Witness DA autoloader is also offered in 10mm Auto and the Colt Delta Elite version of the 1911 Government Model used to be. There are probably others of which I am unaware.

The problem is the limited availability of suitable ammunition for the 10mm Auto cartridge. Remington does not offer any 10mm hunting ammo and Federal has only a single 10mm Light (FBI type) load. The Winchester 10mm factory load with a 175 grain Silvertip JHP bullet has an advertised muzzle velocity (MV) of 1290 fps and muzzle energy (ME) of 649 ft. lbs. This is a potent anti-personnel load, but the Silvertip JHP handgun bullet is known more for rapid expansion than deep penetration. Hornady offers a 10mm factory load using their 200 grain jacketed hollow point XTP bullet (MV 1050 fps, ME 490 ft. lbs.). Hornady recommends this bullet for "medium game" (Class 2), which would presumably include wolf, cougar and possibly black bear, but not grizzly, brown and polar bear.

The stand out 10mm loads are from Cor-Bon and they are probably superior to anything you can handload. Cor-Bon offers a 10mm load in their Hunter line that drives a 200 grain (SD .179) Penetrator round-nose (RNPN) bullet at 1125 fps and 562 ft. lbs. The Cor-Bon Hunter line also includes a 180 grain (SD .161) bonded core soft point (BCSP) bullet at a MV of 1300 fps and ME of 676 ft. lbs. Although inferior in sectional density, the best 10mm Auto loads are otherwise about equivalent to the best .357 Magnum revolver loads.

There are a many makes and models of magnum revolvers in the marketplace. The reliability of any good revolver is unquestioned. Thus, my choice for protection in the field would be a magnum revolver with a 4.0" (absolute minimum) to 6.5" barrel, with a 5.5" to 6.5" barrel preferred. Ballistic performance is good and the sight radius is long enough to allow precise shot placement, which is critical.

This barrel length is necessary to achieve the requisite ballistic performance from magnum cartridges and remains reasonably handy to carry in a good shoulder or belt holster. A revolver with a shorter barrel may be slightly lighter and a bit handier to carry, but a short barrel simply does not allow a magnum cartridge to reach its full potential.

Never even consider a magnum revolver with a barrel shorter than 4.0". A magnum with a 2.5"-3" barrel is ballistically castrated and hardly any lighter or more convenient to carry than a 4" model. In addition, the decrease in practical accuracy between a 4" barrel and a 3" barrel is pronounced, due to the latter's decreased sight radius. The recoil and muzzle blast from a snub-nosed magnum are severe, which is also detrimental to accuracy.

Insist on fully adjustable sights. Fixed sights can be zeroed for only an "average" person shooting one load. For protection in the field you will probably be using heavy for caliber bullets at maximum velocity, not the nominal standard load and who knows how firmly the "average" person for whom fixed sights are presumably regulated holds the gun. (The slightest difference in grip will change the point of impact of any handgun.) Very precise shot placement will be necessary to save your life from a charging predator, so you need adjustable (target type) sights.

The three widely distributed magnum handgun cartridges are the .357 Magnum, .41 Magnum and .44 Magnum. Another possibility is the even more powerful .454 Casull, which has become more available in recent years.

Bullet selection for any of these should tend toward the heavy bullets for the caliber, to maximize sectional density and thus penetration. Jacketed soft point (JSP), bonded core, partitioned core, or hard cast bullets are the usual choices. Federal, for example, advertises their CastCore (hard cast lead) bullets as, "excellent for back-country self-protection."

At short range a full power .357 Magnum loaded with 158 grain (SD .177) to 180 grain (SD .202) bullets should suffice, since the target is the animal's central nervous system. Even one of the great bears can be stopped at close range if the shooter can deliver a .357 bullet to the brain.

The biggest advantage of the .357 is that most shooters can shoot it more accurately than the bigger magnums. The brain or spinal cord of even a large bear (the biggest of the big predators) is a small target, requiring precise bullet placement. "Spray and pray" won't get the job done, regardless of bullet diameter and energy.

Standard 158 grain .357 Magnum JSP factory loads, such as the Remington Express, call for a MV of 1235 fps and ME of 535 ft. lbs. Such loads are available from most ammunition manufacturers. Deep penetration .357 Mag. factory loads with 180 grain bullets are offered by Winchester (Partition Gold at 1180 fps and 557 ft. lbs), Federal (CastCore at 1250 fps and 625 ft. lbs.) and Cor-Bon (BCSP at 1265 fps and 640 ft. lbs.) Cor-Bon also offers a .357 load using a 200 grain (SD .223) hard cast bullet at 1150 fps and 587 ft. lbs. The .357/180 grain loads are my preference for protection in the field.

A .41 Remington Magnum revolver using 210 grain (SD .178) to 250 grain (SD .212) bullets in full power loads should be effective against large predators. The .41 is considerably more powerful than the .357, actually treading on the heels of the .44 Magnum. Of course, it also kicks almost as hard as a .44 and is almost as hard to control.

However, for those who can master it, the .41 Magnum is a good choice, particularly with heavy for caliber bullets. The Remington 210 grain JSP Express factory load has a catalog MV of 1300 fps and ME of 788 ft. lbs. The Cor-Bon Hunter line includes what is probably the ultimate .41 Mag. load. This uses a 250 grain hard cast bullet at 1325 fps MV and 975 ft. lbs. ME.

The best choice, for the relatively few shooters who can actually shoot it with the required level of precision, is probably a full power .44 Magnum shooting 240 grain (SD .185) to 320 grain (SD .248) bullets. The big .44 has proven that it can make an impression on even the largest predators.

The Remington 240 grain JSP Express factory load drives its bullet at a MV of 1180 fps and ME of 721 ft. lbs. Even fiercer (at both ends) is the Federal 300 grain CastCore load, with a MV of 1250 fps and ME of 1040 ft. lbs. The Cor-Bon Hunter line includes suitable .44 Mag. loads using 260, 280, 300, 305 and 320 grain bullets of various types. The impressive Cor-Bon 300 grain offerings include flat point penetrator and JSP bullets at 1250 fps and 1041 ft. lbs. from an 8.375" barrel.

The even more powerful .454 Casull has become popular with handgun hunters, but .454 revolvers are very large, even compared to .44 Magnum revolvers like the Ruger Super Blackhawk and S&W Model 629. The Freedom Arms Model 83 .454 is 14" long and weighs 50 ounces with a 7.5" barrel.

The Winchester 300 grain JFP .454 Casull factory load claims a MV of 1625 fps and ME of 1759 ft. lbs. The SD of that bullet is .210. Cor-Bon offers bullet weights of 265, 285, 300, 320, 335 and 360 grains in their .454 Hunter loads. The 350 grain bullet has a .250 SD and is driven at a MV of 1300 fps and 1351 ft. lbs. ME.

The problem is that very few outdoorsmen who are not dedicated handgun hunters are willing to carry an outsize .454 handgun. Similarly, very few shooters can control the recoil and muzzle blast of a .454. For the tiny minority who don't mind the size, weight, muzzle blast and recoil, the .454 is probably the optimum handgun caliber for protection against large predators, due to its combination of bullet diameter, sectional density and energy.

In the same general class are the .465 S&W, .480 Ruger and .500 S&W. Revolvers for these cartridges are often so large that in many cases one might as well carry (and would certainly be better served by) a lightweight rifle. The same could be said for the huge (and seldom seen) autoloading pistols such as the Desert Eagle and Wildey, which can be had in calibers up to .50 AE. With 6" barrels, the Widley weighs approximately 65 ounces and the Desert Eagle weighs 70.5 ounces!

I will now venture where wise men fear to tread and mention a few specific handguns. If I were buying a new single action (SA) revolver for protection against large predators, I would get either a stainless steel Ruger Blackhawk revolver (4.62" or 6.5" barrel) in .357 Magnum, or a Ruger stainless Super Blackhawk revolver (5.5" barrel) in .44 Magnum, depending on my recoil tolerance and which I could shoot better.

The .357 Blackhawk is 10.5" long and weighs 46 ounces with a 4.62" barrel (two ounces more with a 6.5" barrel). The Super Blackhawk is 11.38" long and weighs 45 ounces with a 5.5" barrel. Both the Blackhawk and Super Blackhawk can be had in either stainless steel or blued finishes, but I prefer stainless for protection in the field.

There are both objective and subjective reasons for choosing a SA revolver. Objectively, a SA is generally lighter and less bulky than a DA. They are stronger, pound for pound, more durable and every bit as accurate. Subjectively, at least for me, they fit my hand better, handle a little quicker, point more naturally and moderate heavy recoil better.

Since pin point accuracy is required, you should thumb cock either type of revolver and you sure as heck are not going to be able to reload (the DA's primary advantage in a fire fight). You will likely have time for only one good shot at a charging predator, so there is no particular reason to tote around a DA mechanism you will not use.

For the person who wants a double action (DA) revolver, the best .357 ever produced in the USA was the Colt Python, now discontinued. Stainless, nickel and blued Pythons with 4" or 6" barrels are available on the used market, but they are expensive. A 4" Python is 9.5" long and weighs 38 ounces. I often tote a 4" Ultimate Python in the field.

Among new DA .357s, the Ruger GP100 is available in your choice of blue or stainless finishes with 4.2" or 6" barrels. Overall length is 9.5" and the GP100 weighs 40 ounces with a 4.2" barrel. It is a strong, cleverly designed and well made revolver. Like the Python, the GP100 is built on a frame size ideal for a .357 Magnum, neither too big and heavy nor too small for long term durability.

In a DA .44 Magnum, the obvious choice is the stainless steel Ruger Redhawk. This is a big revolver, but not as huge as some, and it was designed specifically for the .44 Magnum cartridge. The standard Redhawk is available with a 4.2", 5.5", or 7.5" barrel. If carrying for protection in the field, I'd prefer the 5.5" option. A Redhawk with a 5.5" barrel is 11" overall and weighs 49 ounces.

These are all large revolvers, but very durable. They come with excellent adjustable sights, are highly accurate and are made in the U.S.A. Rugers are also reasonably priced, an important consideration for folks who are not handgun hunters.

Carried high in a cross-draw holster on a proper gun belt, these guns are not uncomfortable to tote in the field. Goodness knows, I have carried them a lot of miles in just that fashion. A cross-draw holster allows a good range of motion and does not interfere with sitting or driving a vehicle. It also keeps anything you might carry in your strong hand away from your handgun, preventing accidental bumps and dings.

Remember that first shot bullet placement is absolutely crucial, so whatever handgun you choose for protection in the field, make sure you can shoot it with great precision. You can't score peripheral hits fast enough to come out on top in a deadly encounter with a large predator. It is faster, stronger and much tougher than you are.

63 posted on 10/22/2016 11:57:47 AM PDT by NRx (A man of integrity passes his father's civilization to his son, without selling it off to strangers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

357 Revolvers,,

Look at the Ruger Match Champion,,,

Exceptional piece,great price.


64 posted on 10/22/2016 11:58:11 AM PDT by Big Red Badger (UNSCANABLE in an IDIOCRACY!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: MileHi
It is NOT safe to carry a 1911 with the hammer down a loaded chamber.

That is the reason John Browing designed the half cocked mode in the 1911. That is how I carry.

65 posted on 10/22/2016 12:37:54 PM PDT by cpdiii (DECKHAND, ROUGHNECK, GEOLOGIST, PILOT, PHARMACIST, LIBERTARIAN The Constitution is worth dying for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: cpdiii
That is how I carry.

That's nice. It's still a poor practice. Besides, thumbing the safety on a cocked-and-locked 1911 is smoother than cocking the hammer anyway. So why carry it unsafely?

66 posted on 10/22/2016 12:44:11 PM PDT by MileHi (Liberalism is an ideology of parasites, hypocrites, grievance mongers, victims, and control freaks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: cpdiii

http://forum.m1911.org/showthread.php?22864-hammer-down-carry


67 posted on 10/22/2016 1:38:34 PM PDT by MileHi (Liberalism is an ideology of parasites, hypocrites, grievance mongers, victims, and control freaks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: BDParrish

You have your opinion I have mine, I base mine on having arrested many violent felons and a lot of high risk stops.

Their tactics suck no matter how you want to spin it,.


68 posted on 10/22/2016 2:53:49 PM PDT by riverrunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: All

Anyone reading post 12, please don’t take the part about carrying a 1911 with the safety off seriously.

When God and John Moses Browning invented the 1911 as a military sidearm, the idea was that soldiers would actually train with it properly and the thumb safety would be used as intended.

Misinformation like this could get someone killed, or at least get someone’s leg blown off.

Also a true 1911 holds 8 rounds, not 14.


69 posted on 10/22/2016 3:17:05 PM PDT by OKSooner (She was practiced at the art of deception, I could tell by her bloodstained hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
"Don’t you see any people? They are the most dangerous predators on the planet!"

I don't know why, but all you have to do is hit a few with them with the pepper spray, and soon they all stay away.

70 posted on 10/23/2016 6:11:06 AM PDT by norwaypinesavage (always)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Iowa Granny; Ladysmith; Diana in Wisconsin; JLO; sergeantdave; damncat; phantomworker; joesnuffy; ..
Outdoors/Rural/wildlife/hunting/hiking/backpacking/National Parks/animals list please FR mail me to be on or off . And ping me is you see articles of interest.
71 posted on 10/24/2016 7:44:45 PM PDT by SJackson (The Pilgrims—Doing the jobs Native Americans wouldn’t do !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cen-Tejas

Yup, I carried a 44 mag revolver when fishing on the Chena.


72 posted on 10/25/2016 5:41:07 AM PDT by BerryDingle (I know how to deal with communists, I still wear their scars on my back from Hollywood-Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino

A rifle slung over your shoulder takes significantly longer to bring onto target for the first shot, on a target that may be approaching at 30+ mph at close quarters.

An additional factor is that one in the fur ball with the bear, a handgun is far easier to bring on target.


73 posted on 10/25/2016 5:59:08 AM PDT by GladesGuru (Islam Delenda Est. Because of what Islam is - and because of what Muslims do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino

A rifle slung over your shoulder takes significantly longer to bring onto target for the first shot, on a target that may be approaching at 30+ mph at close quarters.

An additional factor is that one in the fur ball with the bear, a handgun is far easier to bring on target.


74 posted on 10/25/2016 5:59:23 AM PDT by GladesGuru (Islam Delenda Est. Because of what Islam is - and because of what Muslims do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: BerryDingle

.......I test my boat each year in the Chena in downtown Fairbanks before heading off to Circle or The Bridge to access the Yukon.


75 posted on 10/25/2016 8:31:30 PM PDT by Cen-Tejas (it's the debt bomb stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Cen-Tejas

Interesting. I haven’t been to Fairbanks in 39 years now. A friend of mine stayed up there and said it’s a whole lot different now. I had a friend a few years before recalled the flood of 67 and 2nd Ave. was still a gravel street.


76 posted on 10/25/2016 9:54:15 PM PDT by BerryDingle (I know how to deal with communists, I still wear their scars on my back from Hollywood-Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: riverrunner

The fact that you are a LEO is irrelevant. Every department has someone like you. We should let the rest of your department know that you are on this forum insulting the memory of these heroes, so they could tell us the actual value of your “opinion.” Your tactic of insults on this forum which could be read by the families and colleagues of the fallen is what sucks.

The mistakes which get officers killed must be discussed, but these discussions are held behind closed doors, out of the public eye, and not with any arrogant know-it-all present.


77 posted on 10/26/2016 6:51:55 AM PDT by BDParrish (O God, please bless America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: BDParrish

It is very relevant.

Not to point the mistakes out is waiting for the tragic situation to happen again.

As far as being brought out in the open the days are long past that any thing law enforcement does is kept secret.

It is called the internet and YouTube.

We wouldn’t be having this discussion if the FBI had not tried to cover up their screw ups by trying to blame a single bullet.

The cover up as normal caused them more problems then the action itself.


78 posted on 10/26/2016 7:36:31 AM PDT by riverrunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: riverrunner

Once again there are no facts in your response, although I can appreciate that you seem to be taking a different tone now. You were just insulting every agent in the Bureau in general, and those heroes in particular, when you said that they were suffering from a case of “We are the FBI!”

Now you provide no evidence to back your accusations of a cover up. The fact that the analysis of the shootout was part of the decision to go to the 10mm will not prove your insults.

I understand about the internet and certainly would put you in that category. Your attitude would not be permitted among decent and honorable men. You may hide behind the anonymity of the internet, but I am confident that the others on the forum will see what your insults are worth.

You should apologize.


79 posted on 10/27/2016 8:31:53 PM PDT by BDParrish (O God, please bless America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-79 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson