Posted on 08/11/2007 10:27:09 AM PDT by kiriath_jearim
In the first part of this series we examined how those who dismiss criminals as being stupid are in fact themselves acting stupid. In another example of how dangerous it can be to underestimate the two-legged predators who walk among us, the FBI has recently finished a five year study of cop killers and the shootouts that took the officer’s life. While I have only seen a summary and not the whole report from the FBI,The Force Science Institute has published a very good synopsis of the report.
Some of the findings reinforce the deadly misconceptions the public has about criminals. In these attacks, the criminal was found to practice more often than the police officer, shoot more accurately than the police officer, has more experience in using lethal force than the officer and has the proper mindset needed to survive the encounter.
These findings need to be a wakeup call to the public: The thugs among us have been going through urban combat training since a very early age, and in the typical encounter, the street predator has the advantage.
To the readers of this website and those who take responsibility for their own safety, many of the study’s findings will not be surprising. For instance, offenders:
Do not pick a particular firearm with any criteria in mind, instead being stuck with what happened to be on hand.
Do not legally buy their firearms, with only one exception in the study.
Do not obtain any firearms from gun shows. -Almost exclusively chose handguns over the infamous “assault rifles.”
Do not use accessories or equipment, such as holsters or flashlights.
Beyond these findings, which are common sense confirmations of the reality that exists for all but the most rabid anti-gunners, some of the findings are pretty shocking, and we should adjust our training accordingly.
Criminals do not worry about marksmanship, stance, grip, sight alignment or any of the other fundamentals we rely upon. Instead, they rely most often on instinctive shooting, or “point and click.” The key is to get rounds on target, quickly. As one cold-blooded killer remarked, even if he shoots you in the leg, he can walk up later after you are incapacitated and put one in your head. Despite this, the criminals have a much greater accuracy rate than the police.
Criminals have been carrying and using firearms for far longer than those they target, as early as since age 9 and almost all since age 12. This has given them real-life experience in the carrying and use of guns from a very early age, and just like the young athlete out on the basketball court until sundown, they excel at what they practice.
Criminals have been through a PhD program in mindset. Most of these thugs have grown up without parents and have learned the lessons of the street. For years and years, their ability to survive has depended largely upon their willingness to do whatever it takes to persevere in an encounter. Think about that, while your kids are home eagerly awaiting the debut of High School Musical 2 in the coming weeks, those who will prey on them are out experiencing life and death encounters, and not necessarily for the first time. As an interesting corollary to this, the thugs who have been involved in repeated deadly encounters have probably USED force; the police who have been involved in repeated deadly encounters often have simply THREATENED the use of force. The police mindset is perhaps being diluted since they often defuse the encounter without using the gun, whereas the bad guy almost always uses the gun.
Criminals most often hide their guns in the waistband of their pants, often near their groin. The male criminals were of a uniform opinion that female police officers were more willing to conduct a thorough search of their person than male officers. Beyond this, the study found police often missed “telltales” of weapon presence on the offender. Bulges, inappropriate clothing, constant touching of the gun through layered clothing, blading the body away from the officer to protect access to the gun etc.
This is very scary stuff to those of us who work 9-5 and rush home to get the kids to soccer practice. We have so many different things on our minds as we go through the day that often we are not in a position to conduct ourselves appropriately from a personal security standpoint. (Ohio’s laws on “no carry” zones do not help. Gun bans disarm victims, not criminals.) The fact that our sworn officers are perhaps at a training disadvantage to the bad guys should be a stark warning to us civilians. We need to recommit ourselves and our families to living the Warrior mindset while still being normal, functioning members of society.
Otherwise, in an armed encounter, a concealed carry license is just as worthless as a rabbit’s foot carried for luck.
[Attorney Ken Hanson is Buckeye Firearms Association Legislative Chair and author of The Ohio Guide to Firearm Laws.]
They weren’t characterizing all armed criminals, just cop killers.
Most punks carrying a weapon as a fashion accessory aren’t looking to get into a shoot out.
Female cops looking for “bulges”. ;-)
That a person is armed is usually obvious. As the article points out, “the study found police often missed “telltales” of weapon presence on the offender. Bulges, inappropriate clothing, constant touching of the gun through layered clothing, blading the body away from the officer to protect access to the gun etc.”
The cops affect not to notice. (Many cops don’t notice, believe it or not.) For a cop, stopping people because they are probably armed will get you fired as a “racist”. Besides the hoods will be back on the street before the reports are filled out.
Standard handgun training is OK but only if you know what you are doing. Probably the most important rule of self defense with a handgun that is never taught is that the gun is only drawn to shoot to kill. No hesitation, no second thoughts. Shoot. Do not threaten. Do not talk.
Obviously if possible one takes as strong a defensive position as time allows. A defensive position ideally will provide cover from fire, concealment from the enemy, and opportunities for maneuver (read: “running away”).
Stop breathing
Okay, that makes sense.
So you take a study of cop killers and generalize about the entire criminal population. Talk about biasing your argument. What about all the criminals who got killed? What about those who put their hands up. What about those who turned and ran? This article is worthless.
It’s probably not taught because, among other things, in a lot of places it will get you put in prison even if you were the otherwise innocent unoffending participant in the fatal event.
In a lot of places it is or has been the “law” that when you draw and shoot in self defense you should be shooting to stop the offender from committing whatever offense was or was about to be committed. The object is to stop the offense and you can shoot till it is stopped. Killing of the offender can be a side-effect but it is not supposed to be the goal of the shooting. If you say you intended to kill, you may be prosecuted.
Of course, maybe it’s different in Wisconsin.
that's why IPSC is so nice....transfers very easily to firefight. The ability to "stress fire"...using the same clothes or same concealed holster ...whatever. Pulling your weapon, applying the front sight to target and squeezing.....a couple of thousand times...then doing the same week in and week out 50-100 times. Muscle memory...draw, sight, fire, reacquire fire,on and on...
I'm not saying the pucker factor will go away, but I've been in firefights that lasted "hours" and looked at my watch and 10 minutes had gone by...hahahahahaa...
Sometimes I heard this guy cussing his head off and yelling, I found out, it was me.
You're right, nobody knows what they'll do in combat, firefight, fist fight till he does it a couple of times....then it's like anything else. You get used to it. some people have the temperment for fighting and some people think to much and die.
I love shooting IPSC. That’s what I never understood about cops that I’ve met. Range time would be as much time as I could spend on it... I loved shooting.
what it boils down to is that the criminal already knows he’s going to use deadly force in an encounter, meaning he most likely will get off the first shot. And in a close range gunfight, the first shot usually wins.
In every field I’ve worked in there is professional arrogance among many members. “I’m a professional and any amatuer is laughably incompetent.” Think about teachers versus homeschoolers.
Reality is a policeman has to work at his shooting to stay on top of his game. And there are amatuers while on average worse then a ‘highly trained professional’.. there are amatuers that are incredible at every human endevour. Thats one reason we have to respect policemen is there is a risk they are putting on the line even when they do their job well, keep up practice and gun maintenance, professionally approach each situation.
Carrying is one thing, shooting is another. Ya gotta practice, and where are they going to do that without attracting unwanted attention?
Criminals have been through a PhD program in mindset. Most of these thugs have grown up without parents and have learned the lessons of the street. For years and years, their ability to survive has depended largely upon their willingness to do whatever it takes to persevere in an encounter.
That's what their would be victims must also do, whatever it takes to persevere.
The time for thinking is *before* the fight starts.
I have never heard of “The Force Science Institute.” Do you have a link?
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.