When civilians would shoot…and when they think you should

[Keorythe]

Fascinating experiments by 2 California researchers show that young civilians who might someday be on an OIS jury overwhelmingly disagree with veteran officers about when police are justified in shooting armed, threatening perpetrators.

Interestingly, tests also reveal that when facing shoot/don’t shoot decisions of their own, civilians tend to be quick on the trigger—and often wrong in their perceptions. Even in ideal lighting conditions, civilian test subjects show “a very low capacity for distinguishing” a handgun from an innocuous object, such as a power tool. Forced to make a time-pressured decision, the vast majority would shoot a “suspect” who is, in fact, unarmed.

“On one hand,” says Dr. Bill Lewinski, executive director of the Force Science Research Center at Minnesota State University-Mankato, “this research should make civilians more sympathetic to officers who mistakenly shoot unarmed subjects under high-stress, real-world conditions.

“But on the other hand, the study shows the woeful lack of understanding most non-cops have about the larger legality and appropriateness of using deadly force. And this can result in serious ramifications in the courtroom.”

Full Story Here


So many LEO's have heard the old story by some civilian "well I wouldn't have done that..." Kind of funny when the shoe goes on the other foot. Police Academies will improve recognition skills and technique but they don't give the LEO's the ability to slow time like some video game where they can evaluate the situation for a few minutes.

 

[Polynikes]

It is evolutionarily hard wired in untrained civilians head to shoot first and ask questions later during life threatening situations. It takes repetition and training to reconfigure this instinct.

 

[stevenb]

Wow... neat.

I'm glad the police are so highly trained... Must be the explanation on why they shoot at perp 17 times and hit him 3 times... I'm so glad they're displaying such awesome trigger control.

:roll::roll: </sarcasm>


Giving a firearm to a normal person isn't the same as training them to use it effectively. In that same respect, normal people stop way more crime than the cops ever will, because they're there when the crime is happening, not the cops.

Nice push on the agenda that only LEO / Military should have firearms though. :2wave:

 

[Ikari]

Full Story Here


So many LEO's have heard the old story by some civilian "well I wouldn't have done that..." Kind of funny when the shoe goes on the other foot. Police Academies will improve recognition skills and technique but they don't give the LEO's the ability to slow time like some video game where they can evaluate the situation for a few minutes.

They are trained to be better, and that is also one reason why they must be held to tighter standards than regular civilians as well.

 

[Shewter]

Wow... neat.

I'm glad the police are so highly trained... Must be the explanation on why they shoot at perp 17 times and hit him 3 times... I'm so glad they're displaying such awesome trigger control.

:roll::roll: </sarcasm>


Giving a firearm to a normal person isn't the same as training them to use it effectively. In that same respect, normal people stop way more crime than the cops ever will, because they're there when the crime is happening, not the cops.

Nice push on the agenda that only LEO / Military should have firearms though. :2wave:

This isn't about leo/military firearm possession. This is about how average people view the police decisions on "to shoot, or not to shoot" and then seeing how they react when in the same situation.

It's about hypocrisy my friend.

Re-read this part. In it's entirety.

Fascinating experiments by 2 California researchers show that young civilians who might someday be on an OIS jury overwhelmingly disagree with veteran officers about when police are justified in shooting armed, threatening perpetrators.

Interestingly, tests also reveal that when facing shoot/don’t shoot decisions of their own, civilians tend to be quick on the trigger—and often wrong in their perceptions.

To me it suggests that the people who may be making the decision between Justifiable homicide, Excusable Homicide, and inexcusable homicide, are deciding based on a double standard, maybe even one that they don't know they hold.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

lol. most police officers are not really trained, but rather "qualify". That said, qualification is based on initial training and maintaining the basice.

That is why hit rates hover around 30%.


What can we learn from this. Untrained and you own a gun does not make you one who has planned for his self defense.


Even police officers often lack the proper training and the maintenence training required to make a good shoot.


bottom line is training is as important as the tool.


I know this was not the intent of the thread starter, but I find this an opportunity.

 

[Keorythe]

Wow... neat.

I'm glad the police are so highly trained... Must be the explanation on why they shoot at perp 17 times and hit him 3 times... I'm so glad they're displaying such awesome trigger control.

:roll::roll: </sarcasm>


Giving a firearm to a normal person isn't the same as training them to use it effectively. In that same respect, normal people stop way more crime than the cops ever will, because they're there when the crime is happening, not the cops.

Nice push on the agenda that only LEO / Military should have firearms though. :2wave:

Whoa, I need whatever you're smoking there dude.

First, those high round count per shooting numbers come from multiple cops firing on the same target. 4 cops firing 4 rounds each adds up really quick and 4 rounds isn't much when a cop is put in his first real shooting situation. Personally, some of the situations I've had to profile have me wondering if I wouldn't have reloaded a few times myself.

Trigger control is great on paper but when you finally get into that real life situation its only a tiny leap from "double tap and left/right head scan" to "keep shooting till he stops moving". Experience is a great training integrator but many LEO's retire with never having fired a round on a hostile target.


Guns in LEO's hands only? What are you talking about? This article makes no such reference. Anyone who's had a bit of combat firearms training is already 1 step above the average joe who hasn't.

 

[Lerxst]

lol. most police officers are not really trained, but rather "qualify". That said, qualification is based on initial training and maintaining the basice.

That is why hit rates hover around 30%.


What can we learn from this. Untrained and you own a gun does not make you one who has planned for his self defense.


Even police officers often lack the proper training and the maintenence training required to make a good shoot.


bottom line is training is as important as the tool.


I know this was not the intent of the thread starter, but I find this an opportunity.

Unfortunately you are quite correct. You would be shocked at the lack of training police officers are actually required to attend. It usually amounts to two range days (read two or three hours waiting to get up to the line to shoot) a year to qualify...not train. If you show up and pass the pass/fail you are qualified, now move on.

I argued like crazy to get this changed. I said we needed four hours of range time minimum with stress related shooting and night shooting events thrown in. And not just show up, draw your ammo, load, shoot, and leave...but real training. Trigger control, breathing control, how to calm yourself after a sprint to take a shot, threat recognition, how to engage moving targets, how to shoot, move, and communicate. I was basically told "costs too much, guys can hit the range on their dime, we can't afford it." We eventually got it to four 4 hour blocks of instruction a year. Still not enough.

We spend so much money training cops to know statutes, seize evidence, write reports, etc. But when it come to firearms training, meh...it's too expensive.

Sad, very sad.

 

[Lerxst]

Oops on edit...what I meant was we needed four hours of range time each month.