I just went through CST training and one of the AF cops warned us of this senerio:
You are in a fire fight with a terrorist in a street with civilians behind you and him. You MUST tell the civilians to move or move yourself to protect their safety. But, if you do NOT tell them to move or you do NOT move yourself and you accidently kill a civilian behind the terrorist shooting at you then you can get charged. (I think it's manslaughter or worse)
Also, if HE kills a civilian behind you then he gets charged with murder and YOU get charged with manslaughter!
Can you explain this further? That is exactly how he explained it. How is that fair? Especailly the part about getting charged if the bad guy kills someone.....
WTF?
2006-11-15 14:44:19 · 10 answers · asked by ur a Dee Dee Dee 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
oh, my job in the Air Force is a weapons troop for the F-15 and I do mechanical and electrical work on the jets too
2006-11-15 14:50:42 · update #1
WOW! I'd like to know too! I'm with you right up to you being charged with Manslaughter after he kills a civilian - after you've done everything you can to protect them and yourself.
The Military is different than local law enforcement, though. If you took the oath and those are the rules of engagement - you're stuck with them. Stay in the Air Force.
2006-11-15 14:54:58 · answer #1 · answered by 34th B.G. - USAAF 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The question here isn't the exact specifics it is the word "reasonable and appropriate force". If your being shot at by some SOB it is reasonable for you to return force. However the manner in which you do it may not be classified as appropriate force. If this SOB is standing in a crowd of civilians and you lob a gernade at him this is not appropriate force for the situation. It is a judgment call on your part but realize that your judgment may differ than what someone in doing an AAR (after action review) might consider appropriate.
Also combat is rarely fair. And someone judging your actions when your under fire is also rarely fair but that is how things are done. Bottom line is that regardless of the situation you are responsible for where your rounds go. Spray and pray fire rarely works anyway so just don't do it. If you ever find yourself in a crap situation like that the best thing to do is to disengage.
2006-11-15 23:39:25 · answer #2 · answered by travis R 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Your first duty is to protect innocent lives. High noon at the OK Corral with a street full of bystanders places at risk the very people you are duty-bound to protect. By moving before engaging, you draw his fire away from the innocent bystanders (who should be doing some moving of their own), thereby increasing their safety, rather than have a shootout which decreases their safety.
The salient point in this scenario, I think, is whether you engage the suspect while people are behind you. If you're ducking down or haulinass while he's shooting up the place, you wouldn't be responsible. It's when your actions show disregard for the safety of others that you get in trouble. Dirty Harry don't cut it in the real world.
2006-11-15 22:58:39 · answer #3 · answered by normobrian 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It looks difficult and unfair on paper but the reality is, if you see a civilian near by, you will automatically scream MOVE! GET OUT!
This kind of rule is what separates our troops from guerrillas. Your primary job is to protect the civilians and destroying the terrorist is just part of it, not the other way around.
2006-11-15 23:00:29 · answer #4 · answered by tkquestion 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The senerio is very flawed. From my experience in Afghanistan and Iraq. When you are firing and they are firing there isn't going to be a crowd of people standing behind either of you. The citizens of Afghanistan and Iraq have seen more war than any human should. Most of them will know before the gunfire starts if an insurgent is in the area. Some warn us some don't. Most civilians are killed by IEDs than will ever be killed reckless gunfire.
2006-11-15 23:29:05 · answer #5 · answered by ursnafu 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Don't worry about it. If someone starts shooting at you.. Take cover, drop to the ground. RETURN FIRE. Shoot the SOB.
If people don't start running to get out of the way or dropping to the ground when the firing starts, then they are stupid, etc. Don't sweat the small stuff, the main concern is PROTECT YOURSELF!
What base/instructor told you this? They are wrong. I would talk to your supervisor/leadership. Granted if you returned fire with a 60 Cal or something then that is different than using the M-16 single shot to fire at the enemy. Yes, we consider civilians, but we still have the right to defend ourselves. Shoot, shoot, shoot. Better for him/her to be dead than you or your brothers/sisters in Arms.
Also, being alive and tried is better than being dead. Think about it. I haven't heard of anyone yet of being tried for returning fire over there and civilians are around.
2006-11-15 23:00:02 · answer #6 · answered by Shiva07 2 · 4⤊ 0⤋
You are the law in that sititutation , you are to protect the people before dealing with the terrorist and if you don't follow protol call, you are held responsiable as unfair as it may seem! This is what makes one a good or bad cop! You took an oath and you are to live up to it!
2006-11-15 22:49:57 · answer #7 · answered by MagikButterfly 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The Rules of Engagement can be so dam annoying ,A civilian is considered a non combatant so if you kill him/her you get screwed and if the Tango kills him/her you still get screwed .Doesn't it suck. I believe in a war zone the only Rule of Engagement should be effectively dropping your target.
2006-11-15 23:03:04 · answer #8 · answered by spyderman131 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
In Canada rules of engagement are differant and defined for each mission. so to say rules of engagement as a set procedure is wrong.
2006-11-15 22:51:45 · answer #9 · answered by kevin s 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
shouldn't be any rules
2006-11-15 22:50:51 · answer #10 · answered by goodtimesgladly 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋