Gun safety
From the cops and guns department:
After officers fired 22 shots at a fleeing man without hitting him, Boise and Garden City police departments say they’ll pay nearly $7,000 to repair bullet holes in homes that were hit during the wild confrontation.
According to insurance claims filed with both departments by residents, shots fired by four officers in pursuit of 39-year-old Harlan Hale hit doors, windows, window moldings, garage doors, an all-terrain-vehicle and a clothes dryer. No one was injured in the March 9 chase.
A few things: 1) Are you supposed to shoot at someone who is fleeing? 2) If you can, should you maybe reconsider in what appears to be a residential area? 3) Sight alignment and trigger squeeze, fellas.
May 6th, 2005 at 1:05 pm
Geeze, even the “Liberal Hollywood” cops don’t shoot indiscriminately like that.
I can recall a lot of scenes where a cop is sighting in a fleeing bad guy, but there are too many innocents around and he lets off.
Geeze…
And – in a classic case of “Me not you” – we’d be prosecuted if we shot at a fleeing goblin, no?
May 6th, 2005 at 3:27 pm
It varies state by state but it’s not uncomon for shootig at someone who si fleeing to be justifiable IF the person presents a danger to the public at large. A guy who hauls ass after shoplifting wouldn’t qualify, but a guy who just beat up an old lady might. Someone who violently resists arrest might as well. Shooting two people, especially cops would probably be more than enough to justify trying to hit him in the back.
In the cops defense (yes it’s really me) it’s hard as hell to hit a moving target with a handgun. It ain’t easy with a rifle either. But discretion being the better part of marksmanship perhaps they should have waited til they had a more sure shot.
It presents an unusual problm though: let’s say your hanging out at Che Uncle & all of a sudden a bunch of projectiles pierce your home. Wouldn’t your second reaction (after making sure everyone has ducked & is behind cover) be to shoot back? The cops in question are fortunate that A: they didn’t hit anybody & B: that the people whose homes they hit didn’t return fire first & ask questions later. (Yes, I know there’d be a world of court proceedings if the occupants had returned fire but in the presence of an uplifted bullet I think the most detached reflection would be “how do I get them to stop shooting at me?” & shooting back is a reasonable answer.)
May 6th, 2005 at 3:45 pm
So they shot at the guy 22 times, hitting houses, cars, et al, because HE was a danger to the public?
May 6th, 2005 at 4:14 pm
Hale “shot at” two police officers. Apparently he had a marksmanship problem, too. (And there’s nothing about how the gunfight started.)
If he had shot two people, I would agree that the risk of him shooting more people if they let him get away was worse than the risk involved in shooting 22 rounds at a moving target in a residential neighborhood. As it is, it’s questionable.
One thing for sure – those cops need both more range time, and training in the proper difference between military tactics (spray everything that might be hostile) and police tactics (shoot only when you are sure).
May 6th, 2005 at 4:55 pm
Where the heck can i get a job like that. Shoot all you want, and you never had to pay for the ammo.
May 7th, 2005 at 12:03 am
Just remember: These are the people whom the anti-gun crowd says are “trained” and “qualified” to actually carry handguns, unlike the rest of us vast unwashed…
Yeah, right!
May 7th, 2005 at 10:17 pm
cube: The problem is, most departments will only pay for a ridiculously small number of rounds for the shooting range (often something like 100 rounds, and one range trip a year). Shooting at a moving target that might shoot back is NOT the time to be getting feedback on your markmanship!
May 8th, 2005 at 7:35 am
Policeing isn’t about upholding the “law”. It’s about reacting to threats, both real and percieved, to LEO power and ego.
May 9th, 2005 at 9:55 am
markm ,
But it sure would be a heck of a lot of fun. Can you imagine the freedom, from…well…most basic safty rules. No responiblity for…well…anything, inculding your own actions. (/scasam…I forgot this tag on the previous comment)
If those two officers can escape punishment for this, i wonder what else they can get away with.