Another reason to fly GA...

"AES" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Gary Drescher" wrote:

"AES" wrote in message
...
To quote someone I overhead yesterday: "If there's a 2% chance, based
on all information known at the time, that the guy is a suicide bomber,
and 50 people in the subway car -- well, the choice is unfortunate, but
very clear."

I see several problems with this proposal.

As the one who quoted -- not made -- the assertion above,

Distinction acknowledged; however, when you present a quote without further
comment, and nothing in the context of the presentation suggests
disagreement, then you are reasonably understood to be quoting approvingly.
(The preface "To quote someone..." further affirms the quoted sentiment, as
opposed to the more neutral "I heard someone say...".)

I recognize the merits of essentially all the points made in the
reply appended below.

Thank you.

Simply quoting Ben Franklin's "better that 100 guilty escape punishment
than 1 innocent be convicted" -- an aphorism that validly applies to a
very different situation or set of circumstances -- and concluding from
this, as some apparently do, that the bottom line is clear: the police
should never shoot in any suicide bombing situation, is not a conclusion
I find acceptable.

Nor I; that's why I didn't include that as one of my reasons. (And I've
seen no one conclude that police should *never* shoot in such a situation.)

We're faced, however, with a new and very difficult situation in the
suicide bomber phenomena.

Mass-murder for political ends is hardly novel; it's been going on for at
least millennia. The suicide aspect is perhaps more recent (a quirk of
current technology), but has little bearing on the moral or pragmatic
ramifications of the attacks.

The fact that it's primarily based in, caused
by, and supported by religious fanaticism (not primarily anything we do)
makes it all the more difficult to cope with.

Although the attackers' motivations aren't directly relevant to operational
questions of how to counter a suspected attack-in-progress, I should at
least mention in passing that I disagree with your analysis of those
motivations. Yes, there is a large faction that supports terror bombings for
reasons of religious fanaticism. But among the recent notorious suicide
attackers, many or most had a secular upbringing and lifestyle, and appeared
to be motivated primarily by political opposition to US policies (e.g. in
Saudia Arabia and Palestine, and now Iraq). Moreover, even fanatical
religious motivations, to the extent that they thrive in a given culture,
tend to do so only to insofar as they promote the culture's mundane
(political and economic) goals, which therefore are properly seen as the
ultimate motivators, I believe. (Mystical fanaticism that is substantially
decoupled from mundane interests--e.g. mass suicide to rendezvous with the
mothership--is freakishly rare.)

Again, these considerations don't particularly bear on the tactical choices
under discussion above, but I think they're important to a broader
understanding of the situation.

--Gary

"Gig 601XL Builder" wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote in
news:AkrFe.49$_t.41@okepread01:

Snipola
Assuming that you mean TV cop REALITY show please keep in mind that
sniper is a VERY small subset of police shooting skill and he was
probably shooting for the guys head anyway and missed.

Oh no, the program made it very clear that the intent of the
sniper was to shoot the suspects gun, thus saving both lives.

Snipola
Just to keep this thread somewhat on topic years ago we had a problem of
many deers on the runway at the airport. The PD's Emergency Reaction
Team (AKA SWAT) decided to use it as a training excersise. 5 "snipers"
along with their spoters surrounded the suspect deers and when through
the entire process of setting up their shots just as they might in a
multi badguy hostage situation. When the commander gave the go code
there was much sound and smoke and I will let you guess how many dead
deer.
Snipola

Any idea what the range to target was?

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism

Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Blog: http://www.skywise711.com/Blog

Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

George Patterson wrote in
news:c_sFe.2311$S72.261@trndny06:

Skywise wrote:

However, I recall seeing on one of them TV cop shows once where there
was a standoff situation with a man holding a gun on a hostage and a
police sniper shot the gun out of the suspects hand. Damned impressive.

Then you get into reality. At Ruby Ridge, an FBI sniper shooting at a
suspect standing in a doorway missed by a couple feet and hit his wife
in the head.

No 'hollyweird' special effects.

I'd say a TV show is "hollyweird special effects."


Then I guess you think that the video of airliners hitting the
twin towers on a TV show is "hollyweird special effects" too?

Not everything on TV is bogus. Most is, but not all.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism

Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Blog: http://www.skywise711.com/Blog

Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

Recently, AES posted:

"Gary Drescher" wrote:

"AES" wrote in message
...
To quote someone I overhead yesterday: "If there's a 2% chance,
based on all information known at the time, that the guy is a
suicide bomber, and 50 people in the subway car -- well, the choice
is unfortunate, but very clear."

I see several problems with this proposal.
[...]

We're faced, however, with a new and very difficult situation in the
suicide bomber phenomena. The fact that it's primarily based in,
caused by, and supported by religious fanaticism (not primarily
anything we do) makes it all the more difficult to cope with.

Simply quoting Ben Franklin's "better that 100 guilty escape
punishment than 1 innocent be convicted" -- an aphorism that validly
applies to a very different situation or set of circumstances -- and
concluding from this, as some apparently do, that the bottom line is
clear: the police should never shoot in any suicide bombing
situation, is not a conclusion I find acceptable.

The problems that Gary presented should make it quite clear that the
likelihood is that police shooting in this situation will not be
effective. In the real world example, someone completely unrelated to
suicide bombings was summarily executed, and the reasons could be
attributable to some of these very problems.

To take another view, the fact is that if someone is determined to perform
random acts of violence and murder, there is no way to stop them, even in
a society where personal freedoms are at a minimum. So, the notion that
police should open fire whenever they profile someone is not a situation I
find acceptable.

Neil

"Skywise" wrote in message
...
"Gig 601XL Builder" wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote in
news:AkrFe.49$_t.41@okepread01:

Snipola
Assuming that you mean TV cop REALITY show please keep in mind that
sniper is a VERY small subset of police shooting skill and he was
probably shooting for the guys head anyway and missed.

Oh no, the program made it very clear that the intent of the
sniper was to shoot the suspects gun, thus saving both lives.

Oh, no doubt that there are plenty off snipers who could do it. There are
fewer SWAT commanders that would let them do it. But there are many PD
spokesmen who would tell the media after the shot was taken and missed that
they were aiming for the gun.




Snipola
Just to keep this thread somewhat on topic years ago we had a problem of
many deers on the runway at the airport. The PD's Emergency Reaction
Team (AKA SWAT) decided to use it as a training excersise. 5 "snipers"
along with their spoters surrounded the suspect deers and when through
the entire process of setting up their shots just as they might in a
multi badguy hostage situation. When the commander gave the go code
there was much sound and smoke and I will let you guess how many dead
deer.
Snipola

Any idea what the range to target was?



They were ranging from 50 to 250 yards. Only the 2 that were beyond 100 had
real "sniper" rifles (Model 700). The others had AR-15/M16 variants.

It wasn't a total waste though. It did make some of the deer run away for
about an hour. More importantly though it did get the teams training budget
increased.

--
They were ranging from 50 to 250 yards. Only the 2 that were beyond 100
had real "sniper" rifles (Model 700). The others had AR-15/M16 variants.

----------------------------------reply-----------------------------------------------

The Colts that you mentioned are routinely fired out to ranges in excess of
250 yards during quals. Why the sour grapes regarding the police
department?

Stephen
Foley, Alabama

Skywise wrote:

"Gig 601XL Builder" wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote in
news:SddFe.32$_t.14@okepread01:


"Skywise" wrote in message

I don't know how it is in other countries, or even in other parts of
the US, but law enforcement in the Los Angeles area seems to be trained
to shoot to kill. it seems that if they pull the trigger they
completely unload their weapons then reload before reassessing the
situation.

If this is not actual policy or training, it is de facto policy in
that it is how they respond. There have been two police shootings in
recent months where multiple officers unloaded into the suspect. In
one case something like 120 rounds were fired, only a handful of which
hit the suspect, and at least one round hit another officer.


Police officers are taught to shoot at the center of mass. This is to A.
give them a better chance of actually hitting what they shoot at and B.
To stop the target from doing what ever it is he is doing.

The old cowboy crap of shooting the gun out of the bad guy's hand
doesn't work because as you point they do seem to miss alot.


Well, I tend to agree that in a fluid situation that's rapidly
degenerating there may not be much you can do.

However, I recall seeing on one of them TV cop shows once where there was
a standoff situation with a man holding a gun on a hostage and a police
sniper shot the gun out of the suspects hand. Damned impressive.

And also stupid. If he'd missed, the hostage would likely be dead.

Matt

Jay Beckman wrote:
"Skywise" wrote in message
...

"Gig 601XL Builder" wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote in
news:SddFe.32$_t.14@okepread01:


"Skywise" wrote in message

I don't know how it is in other countries, or even in other parts of
the US, but law enforcement in the Los Angeles area seems to be trained
to shoot to kill. it seems that if they pull the trigger they
completely unload their weapons then reload before reassessing the
situation.

If this is not actual policy or training, it is de facto policy in
that it is how they respond. There have been two police shootings in
recent months where multiple officers unloaded into the suspect. In
one case something like 120 rounds were fired, only a handful of which
hit the suspect, and at least one round hit another officer.


Police officers are taught to shoot at the center of mass. This is to A.
give them a better chance of actually hitting what they shoot at and B.
To stop the target from doing what ever it is he is doing.

The old cowboy crap of shooting the gun out of the bad guy's hand
doesn't work because as you point they do seem to miss alot.

Well, I tend to agree that in a fluid situation that's rapidly
degenerating there may not be much you can do.

However, I recall seeing on one of them TV cop shows once where there was
a standoff situation with a man holding a gun on a hostage and a police
sniper shot the gun out of the suspects hand. Damned impressive.

No 'hollyweird' special effects.

Brian


I recall a similar incident (may have been the same one...but no hostage...)
where a guy was sitting in the middle of an intersection with a handgun and
kept waiving it at the Cops and threatening to cap himself.

Police Sniper did shoot the gun out of his hand when he dropped it to his
side for a second.

Yes, I saw that also. That was an easy shot and no hostage was involved
so not much to lose in that case. I don't think any police sniper would
try that with a hostage involved.

Matt

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:

"Skywise" wrote in message "Skywise"
wrote in message

I don't know how it is in other countries, or even in other parts of
the US, but law enforcement in the Los Angeles area seems to be trained
to shoot to kill. it seems that if they pull the trigger they
completely unload their weapons then reload before reassessing the
situation.

If this is not actual policy or training, it is de facto policy in
that it is how they respond. There have been two police shootings in
recent months where multiple officers unloaded into the suspect. In
one case something like 120 rounds were fired, only a handful of which
hit the suspect, and at least one round hit another officer.


Police officers are taught to shoot at the center of mass. This is to A.
give them a better chance of actually hitting what they shoot at and B.
To stop the target from doing what ever it is he is doing.

The old cowboy crap of shooting the gun out of the bad guy's hand
doesn't work because as you point they do seem to miss alot.

Well, I tend to agree that in a fluid situation that's rapidly
degenerating there may not be much you can do.

However, I recall seeing on one of them TV cop shows once where there was
a standoff situation with a man holding a gun on a hostage and a police
sniper shot the gun out of the suspects hand. Damned impressive.

No 'hollyweird' special effects.




Assuming that you mean TV cop REALITY show please keep in mind that sniper
is a VERY small subset of police shooting skill and he was probably shooting
for the guys head anyway and missed.

We had a police officer here shoot the gun of a crazy that had a revolver
cocked and aimed at his own head. But he spent several seconds aiming and he
got lucky. Later the gun was examinied and the crazy did pul the trigger
after it was hit. The only reason it didn't fire was the hammer was jamed
due to the damage done by the police officer's shot. THe really bad part of
this was that the crazy and his family sued the officer and the city. The
case was setteled out of court.

Just to keep this thread somewhat on topic years ago we had a problem of
many deers on the runway at the airport. The PD's Emergency Reaction Team
(AKA SWAT) decided to use it as a training excersise. 5 "snipers" along with
their spoters surrounded the suspect deers and when through the entire
process of setting up their shots just as they might in a multi badguy
hostage situation. When the commander gave the go code there was much sound
and smoke and I will let you guess how many dead deer.

If you can't guess scroll down.

ZERO

That's pretty funny if it really is true. Our average hunter here in PA
is much better than that.

Matt

Wow that's sad!,
I don't understand why the cops have such poor shots. At 500 meters I am
bullseye 10 out 0f 10 , with a scope that range would get wayyyy on out
there. Really makes the officers look like Keystone Cops when the only
inflicted wound in a 50 round fired shoot out is a bruise from an ejected
9mm empty brass!
"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Gig 601XL Builder wrote:

"Skywise" wrote in message "Skywise"
wrote in message

I don't know how it is in other countries, or even in other parts of
the US, but law enforcement in the Los Angeles area seems to be trained
to shoot to kill. it seems that if they pull the trigger they
completely unload their weapons then reload before reassessing the
situation.

If this is not actual policy or training, it is de facto policy in
that it is how they respond. There have been two police shootings in
recent months where multiple officers unloaded into the suspect. In
one case something like 120 rounds were fired, only a handful of which
hit the suspect, and at least one round hit another officer.


Police officers are taught to shoot at the center of mass. This is to A.
give them a better chance of actually hitting what they shoot at and B.
To stop the target from doing what ever it is he is doing.

The old cowboy crap of shooting the gun out of the bad guy's hand
doesn't work because as you point they do seem to miss alot.

Well, I tend to agree that in a fluid situation that's rapidly
degenerating there may not be much you can do.

However, I recall seeing on one of them TV cop shows once where there was
a standoff situation with a man holding a gun on a hostage and a police
sniper shot the gun out of the suspects hand. Damned impressive.

No 'hollyweird' special effects.




Assuming that you mean TV cop REALITY show please keep in mind that
sniper is a VERY small subset of police shooting skill and he was
probably shooting for the guys head anyway and missed.

We had a police officer here shoot the gun of a crazy that had a revolver
cocked and aimed at his own head. But he spent several seconds aiming and
he got lucky. Later the gun was examinied and the crazy did pul the
trigger after it was hit. The only reason it didn't fire was the hammer
was jamed due to the damage done by the police officer's shot. THe really
bad part of this was that the crazy and his family sued the officer and
the city. The case was setteled out of court.

Just to keep this thread somewhat on topic years ago we had a problem of
many deers on the runway at the airport. The PD's Emergency Reaction Team
(AKA SWAT) decided to use it as a training excersise. 5 "snipers" along
with their spoters surrounded the suspect deers and when through the
entire process of setting up their shots just as they might in a multi
badguy hostage situation. When the commander gave the go code there was
much sound and smoke and I will let you guess how many dead deer.

If you can't guess scroll down.

ZERO

That's pretty funny if it really is true. Our average hunter here in PA
is much better than that.

Matt