Cops kill Costco pizza lady....

Hellbound said:
I would note, however, that I said nothing about the frequency or number of posts. Only that mine was a counterweight to a specific subset. I never claimed a majority of anything.
Click to expand...
I didn't claim otherwise. Just an observation on my part that may or may not be right (don't feel like analyzing all posts again).
 
Simon666 said:
Pissed off you made the demonstrably wrong statement of "nobody"? What is there to respond to? Did I make any claims police officers are trained to shoot in the arm or leg? Or did I make claims it IS possible for them to do so and to do so successfully (I can also give a link where a guy was shot in the arm and leg and bled to death)? Why don't you just accept I'm right? Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus?
Click to expand...

Actually, not many people accept you are right. You're twisting of "viable" into "possible", and thus a claim of impossibility, is some serious manipulation of the words. It's semantic games.

Definition three of viable is exactly what was meant, and no more: Capable of success or continuing effectiveness; practicable. No one is saying it's impossible in a specific situation. They are saying that as a policy is is impossible in practice, because most people (trained) are not that good of a shot in a stressful situation and you greatly increase the chance of injury to officers and bystanders, as well as reducing the chance of stopping the target.

One gets the feeling you are not arguing in good faith.

ETA: Just as an aside, a dictionary does not determine word meanings, it records word meanings. Just because the dictionary includes possible as a synonym of viable, does not mean they're exactly the same. The usage earlier was clear (to most of us, anyway) on the meaning. Now, if you wanted to "score points" by trying to make your opponent look so stupid that they think shooting someone in the arm can't be done, ever, then your tactic would be perfect.

Basically, you set up a straw man argument so you could be right.
 
Last edited:
Hellbound said:
Actually, not many people accept you are right. You're twisting of "viable" into "possible", and thus a claim of impossibility, is some serious manbipulation of the words. It's semantic games.
Click to expand...
I am not native English speaking okay? For me, viable is and always has been synonym with possible and that's what I see also in the dictionary. The way you're saying is not even definition 3 but the second part of definition 3, practicable.
 
Simon666 said:
I am not native English speaking okay? For me, viable is and always has been synonym with possible and that's what I see also in the dictionary. The way you're saying is not even definition 3 but the second part of definition 3, practicable.
Click to expand...

That makes more sense, then. I apologize for coming on so strongly, you speak English well enough that I assumed a greater familiarity.

But, no, I meant the first part of 3. capable of continued success. Shooitng for an arm or leg might work sometimes, in some situations. Most of the time, though, it's more dangerous than aiming for center mass. Thus, while it might be successful in a specific circumstance, it would not remain successful as a long-term strategy for all situations.

Hope that clarifies.
 
Simon666 said:
I am not native English speaking okay? For me, viable is and always has been synonym with possible and that's what I see also in the dictionary. The way you're saying is not even definition 3 but the second part of definition 3, practicable.
Click to expand...

Do you at least concede, given evidence in this thread (#84 and others) that its stupid, unprofessional and potentially dangerous for police to try to shoot someone in the arm or leg?
 
Simon666 said:
I did not make any claims with regards to how they are trained. I make claims it is not impossible to shoot in the arm and/or leg. Those claims are true unless if you can point out the link I provided was completely wrong. But I seriously doubt it.
Click to expand...

A couple of remarks about the Dutch Volkskrant article you referenced.

1) The article only says he was shot in the arm; it doesn't say the officer actually aimed for the arm.

2) There is a material difference, in that the Dutch incident took place outdoors, so there was enough room for the police to manoeuvre and evade the man if needed.

3) I found one article claiming an aimed shot at the arm, at a volunteer-run website with local news. Take that as you will; the relative lack of professionalism is offset by the fact that the volunteer-journalist was on the spot while the man was still being loaded into the bus. Translation of the article:
Sunday 21 April, the emergency services were alerted because of a medical incident in the Libellebos ("Dragonfly forest").

When the ambulance and police arrived, it quickly became clear there was a disturbed man who was injuring himself. He stabbed himself repeatedly with a sharp object.

In order to prevent worse, the police shot aimed at his arm. The disturbed man has immediately been transported to the hospital with a trauma team.
Click to expand...
 
Simon666 said:
Considering several shots were fired, probably. It is doubtful if they aimed at center mass he would not have been much more seriously wounded with at least one shot.
Click to expand...

Just as a technical point,what training have you had in this area?
 
Simon666 said:
Do you know what a pizza knife looks like? Hint below.

http://i00.i.aliimg.com/img/pb/702/458/475/475458702_145.jpg
Click to expand...

3point14 said:
Must have been one scary lady and one seriously large pizza knife.
Click to expand...


The pizza knives used by restaurants are about 20 inches long. The following description comes from a restaurant supply site:

Large volume pizzerias that turn out hundreds of pizzas during a rush often have several pizza knives on hand to quickly slice the pies. This is the fastest method for cutting a pizza and both rocker- or straight-blade knives are available. Pizza rocker knives look like a half-moon and have handles on either end, because they are meant to be used with two hands. All the employee has to do is rock back and forth and in a circle around the pizza to quickly slice it.
Click to expand...


Many different pizza knives are pictured at that web site.

I don't know whether the woman was wielding a serious pizza knife, but the phrase "pizza knife" does not imply a tiny knife.
 
Bikewer said:
It's surprising that this still comes up. "Why didn't the officers just shoot him in the leg." Or the arm, or whatever.
After all, this worked perfectly well for The Lone Ranger or Roy Rogers....Why, they hardly ever killed anyone. And the bad guys, neatly shot through the leg (with nary an artery severed...) simply fell down and lay helplessly till the sheriff came along.

Alas, it doesn't work that way.

First, under the stress of a shooting incident, it's about average for officers to achieve 25% hits. That's hits on the entire bad guy... Not a particular body part.
I have written before as to why this is the case. Neurological and physiological and psychological effects come into play, and fine motor control goes out the window.

Second... Handguns are not particularly good stoppers. Even with modern ammunition, it's unusual for someone taking a peripheral hit to actually stop their attack. Under whatever stresses THEY are experiencing...They may not even be aware.
Handguns "stop" people by disrupting the central nervous system, or by causing them to bleed out. This may or may not be instantaneous, but likely not.

Third. The above "double tap and access" has been abandoned. Too many people getting shot during the "access" period as the bad guy was not "stopped".

Now, the paradigm is that one fires, center-mass of the target, until the threat is ended.
Period.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong here (and no offence intended, I have great respect for LEOs):

This sounds a little like "shoot them until there is no possible way they could have survived the onslaught". I was half expecting it to end with "and then shoot them in the face to be extra careful".
 
lionking said:
Do you at least concede, given evidence in this thread (#84 and others) that its stupid, unprofessional and potentially dangerous for police to try to shoot someone in the arm or leg?
Click to expand...
No. Not in all cases, such as the one I linked to it might have been the better option. I do concede I misinterpreted viability as possibility instead of practicality. I also concede it indeed may not be practical in most cases.
 
Last edited:
It's the spec-ops lads that put another one in 'em after they're down... They don't want any possibly-living enemies behind 'em...

No, "shooting until the threat is ended" generally means that the individual is down. Note that "down" does not mean that the threat is necessarily over. Some people are very determined. We just had a video of a shootout (it was a "suicide by cop" situation) where the individual went down and as the officers approached, he tried to raise up and aim at the officers again.
So, you have to exercise judgement. These things do not often go down as portrayed on TV.
 
lionking said:
Yeah? So this woman didn't have a knife? You know this? You know any cops?

Some fantastic armchair quarterbacking in this thread.
Click to expand...

The article claimed she had a pair of scissors, a pizza knife, threatened co-workers (hadn't injured any), and was somewhat despondent over running out of free samples. Sounds like she may have needed help (psychologically). Had she sported a gun, or had already injured someone, I could understand officials acting in a more expeditious manner. .. Do I know any cops? Why sure. My daughter is one who, along with several co-workers, agree authorities could have been a little more pro-active. .. As for this being fantastic armchair quarterbacking? I'd rather call it common sense instead.
 
The Central Scrutinizer said:
I'd love to see some crazed person come at you with a knife, just so I can study how you disarm them. Maybe you could even make a video and sell it to police departments so they will know how to do it.
Click to expand...

Uh, um, really now? With a nightstick in hand?
 
lionking said:
Do you at least concede, given evidence in this thread (#84 and others) that its stupid, unprofessional and potentially dangerous for police to try to shoot someone in the arm or leg?
Click to expand...

I actually know of a case where it was done, though I doubt I'll be able to find any evidence and I'll be the first to admit that it was under completely different circumstances. It was back in the late 80s or early 90s, and it was a stand-off between cops and a man who was threatening to shoot himself. The police sniper was able to actually shoot the gun out of the guys hand. It made the national news.

ETA: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHvWaviIXsk
 
Last edited:
joesixpack said:
I actually know of a case where it was done, though I doubt I'll be able to find any evidence and I'll be the first to admit that it was under completely different circumstances. It was back in the late 80s or early 90s, and it was a stand-off between cops and a man who was threatening to shoot himself. The police sniper was able to actually shoot the gun out of the guys hand. It made the national news.

ETA: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHvWaviIXsk
Click to expand...

This exception (and Simon666's) proves the rule. Police are trained to, and actually do, fire at the body mass.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom