Why do people think Cops should shoot to Disable?

Question

there are some people out there that think that when a officer is in danger they should aim for the leg or the arm. why do people think cops shouldnt shoot to kill? say a person is high on cocaine and just stabbed his sister for stealing a french fry off of his dinner plate runs into his bedroom and says if you come in ill kill you too? you have your weapon drawn you open the door and he charges at you. would you shoot for the leg on someone who is so out of it he would keep running and end up stabbing and possibly killing you?

also lets say you have 1-2 seconds to react (in real life 2 seconds could be too long)

well the situation was kinda true... like the boy being high off cocaine and killing his sister over a french fry is true. the rest i jsut kinda rushed through. this happend to my instructer. and it acctually ended with the person not having a weapon and he tried to push him out the window

also im not a cop yet i will be in a few years. and yes i know situations like the one i mentioned only happen like 0.5% of the time but where i live and where i grew up ive been in a few situations where i had to protect myself in some way. but no i never shot anyone. the closest i came was the simulation trailor that came to my criminal justice class and we got to use it. it was pretty cool and it pretty much dragged you into the situation. and its weird talking to a screen and have the screen talk back to you

Answer 1

The people who think shooting to wound is appropraite are either....

1) related to the nimrod you smoked.....

2) like to hug trees.....

3) watch too much tv

4) have never tried to hit a bad guy running at them with a gun while their own heart is beating 170bpm with enough adrenaline to power a small tugboat.

Answer 2

unless you have done this, (I suggest you try it sometime) then you should know IT'S NOT POSSIBLE, it is literally an impossible feat, it cannot be done without something short of a miracle or mistake. What you see in the movies and on TV is far from the truth.

The probablity and chances of hitting the SMALLEST part (a hand) of a wildly moving target is less than 1% even for an expert marksman. In training, you are taught that if you EVER have to draw your firearm and go past that point of non lethal force, then you MUST shoot to kill, you get no second chance at it. Because at that point, it's you, him, or some third party victim, and I frankly, don't like explaining to some innocent family why a cop couldnt stop some lunatic man in time to keep him from killing their kid.

There have been wild suspects that have been drugged up on crack and such that have had 30+ bullets put into them and still be standing, you dont have the time or luxury to try to disable someone if they are in that sort of condition. At the point when a weapon is drawn and fired, that is the point of no return, the objective is to stop the subject where he stands, he cannot take 1 more step because lives are in danger, you dont have ANY other option, you have to drop him THEN and THERE.

It's our job to serve and protect, we aren't always given the easiest choice, we take the safest and best choice we can when the moment presents itself, and don't think it's always easy for the officer either, precincts put TONS of money into psych therapy and such every year for officers who have had to gun down suspects, it's not like it's something we do for fun, it effects us just as badly for doing it.

As Chuck stated above, double tap and triple tap, 2 shots to center mass, one shot for the head. It's the largest part of the body and easiest to hit.

Other myth

Bullets DO NOT go directly through windows to the other side, when a bullet hits a windowed surface with ANY angle, it deflects to another angle, 90% of the time missing the person on the other side.

Answer 3

People that have these types of opinions, have never been in a situation that involves having to defend their lives against an attacker. They also do not understand or are aware of the types of situations that happen when dealing with criminals. People need to wake up and realize there are people out there that want to kill you and rape you if given the chance, and a half a second is all they really need to end your life or someone else's. That is why officers cannot take that chance.

Someone that has never had to deal with murderers, rapist, and drug dealers on the street have no business telling the professionals who do this everyday how they should go about saving lives.

Answer 4

Depending on the department, officers are taught either the "double tap" which is 2 shots to the center mass of the body, or a "triple tap" which is 2 to center mass and 1 to the head. There is no such thing as shooting to wound. A handgun being fired is by definition the use of deadly force. People need to grow up. If an Officer is pointing a weapon at them, that person better get REAL compliant REALLY damn quick.

Answer 5

Politico, you have obviously never been "under the gun". Let someone shoot at you or be under the pressure described and tell me where you will put a bullet a little over a third inch wide into a specific, non-lethal, spot on a suspect, Then I will show you case after case, where that perfectly placed bullet to the forearm ( example) hit the bone and went through the top of the suspects head killing him. Get out of TV land. When you need to shoot, you need to kill. I'd love to see how well you shoot in the listed circumstance.

Answer 6

Let's not talk about real life and hypotheticals at the same time- they don't mix.

Cops should shoot to disable, because they aren't executioners. We respect due process of the law in this country, and suspects are to be considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Even coked out lunatics are less of a threat to public safety than a rogue police officer. Law enforcement should use only the level of force necessary to apprehend a suspect, and no more. If a kill shot is necessary to preserve a life (including their own) that's one thing, but most often it isn't the case.

Answer 7

Any force we use is used until the suspect stops whatever it is he/she is doing that brought us to use force. If a suspect draws a gun then we shoot until they are no longer a threat. If they give up we stop shooting, if they fall to the ground and stop shooting then we stop shooting, etc. We are trained to fire center mass on a person. The chest is the easiest part of the body to hit because it is larger then the head or leg. It is very difficult to shoot an arm or leg in a combat situation. The bad guy is probably moving and your adrenaline is pumping. Because of this we do not try to aim for legs or arms (unless that is the only part of the bad guy we have to shoot at).

Answer 8

There are lots of reasons. By disabling them you are reducing the threat, which gives you an advantage. Plus if they are alive you can prosecute them and get justice.

On a separate note, if the cops killed everybody they shot, they would get a worse reoutation for using exessive force than they already do.

Then would have whiny liberal democrat douchebags saying that the police are violating the civil rights of criminal scumabgs with no respect for decent society.

Answer 9

People are stupid and stupid people never think before opening their mouths. They need to realize that someone who just got shot in the leg can still pull a gun and shoot you....or pull a knife and stab you and is still capable of driving a car to run you over. If you are using deadly force you are using it to protect your life. Really any civilian in the same position would shoot to kill....I think they just enjoy stirring the pot and giving honest working police officers a hard time.

Answer 10

Shoot to kill everytime. You never get trained on warning shots, you never aim for anything but the chest or head. Baseballbat, pipe, knife, gun - if you choose to assualt a police officer with a weapon you deserve to receive LETHAL force.
Criminals do not use less than lethal force. Why should law enforcement get a hand tied?