A hostage in a Church in Amarillo, Texas was shot after taking the gun from the attacker when he and others rushed him. He came out of the chapel and was ordered to drop the gun. He said he was trying to put it down gently and was shot twice in the back.
I’m only going off of news reports, so we all know how accurate they can be. But it appears that he was shot in the back by someone with an itchy trigger finger. Now, I don’t know, maybe there were officers in front of the guy with the gun that the officers in back feared for. I’m not sure how threatening someone is with their back to you holding a gun. I’m concerned about a couple of things here. One is training, the second is marksmanship. I’ve heard many times that law enforcement (LE) and military should be the only ones with guns, or something about LE being the “professionals” or “experts” on weapons. It has improved but let me tell you, it is far from true. Some LE are good but most are just adequate. Departments are trying to improve but it costs money to train, and keep up that training, and keep up the officer’s opportunities for practice of what they learn in training. Many departments are doing the best they can with what they have. I applaud them and still believe we have the best law enforcement in the world. Are there some problems? Sure, but they are trying to address these problems. Often it comes down to funding and that comes from politicians.
As I saw the above news story I thought that if it is accurate, then those officers need better training. I guess it could have been an honest mistake, but if there was no one threatened, what was the point of pressing the trigger? And aside from why he shot, but there is the fact that if he had really been a threat, the two shots that were delivered from a rifle were not very accurate. I don’t know what the officer was actually aiming at but from the look of the wounds (they actually showed a picture) he was quite a ways off from a mass shot or a head shot. If he truly thought there was a threat I would hope that LE does not shoot to injure. That is not stopping the guy from turning and returning fire. It is a flaw within the officer’s training. Like I said, many are quite underfunded. Not only should the departments have a qualification program at least quarterly, but they should provide ammunition for their people to practice with and make a certain practice program mandatory. Then, make sure officers have the right training on making the shoot/no shoot decision. This training should also be ongoing. Some departments and agencies have this, but I fear most do not. Federal agencies usually lead the way in this because they are better funded. I know from my instructor days that many departments do a bare minimum. Practice can sometimes be little to none for officers. Some of it is apathy, some of it is not wanting to spring for the ammo because they aren’t given any or enough. Shooting is definitely a perishable skill. You don’t just learn how to shoot and shoot at a high level forever. Without specific practice, often, skills deteriorate.
I’ve also experienced, not lately mind you, the “not care” attitude in LE and military members. Unless their lack of training is evident to superiors in some form they are not too interested or serious about the training. They have never been in a life threatening situation and don’t think they ever will be. Or they are arrogant and think they will react a certain way confronted with lethal force. It’s my experience that most of us have no idea what we will actually do in a life/death situation. So believing that, I feel the only fall back with not knowing what you will do is intense training. Preferably force-on-force training as close to reality as possible. A live fire shoot house or perhaps paintball or airsoft could provide that. Until you’ve actually had someone coming at you and pointing a weapon at you, can you get a small idea about what the real thing is like in my opinion.
LE departments need to take this problem much more serious than they now do. LE members are being gunned down and need these skills. Plus, I know governments don’t need lawsuits because of mistakes made. Or worse, try to cover up that a mistake was made. LE has had a bad rap put on them from some bad LE members. There will always be bad apples in organizations, especially large ones. But by and large I believe LE does an exceptional job with next to nothing. Attitude comes from the top down. If the top doesn’t care or isn’t willing to support the guys/gals in the trenches, then it will be evident. Some won’t care and will be a problem for everyone including the public.
I’m sure some organizations know that these problems exist. But sometimes it takes a problem like the above news story to bring them to light. I’m grateful no one was killed as a result of this problem. I hope there was a good reason for the shooting and the guy was just in the wrong place trying to help. I also hope all LE departments will look at this and look at their training programs and make the appropriate changes if needed.
We can learn from this too. When commanded by LE comply quickly and non-threatening. I have seen those who use this incident as a reason to not arm teachers. That is the most stupid thing I’ve heard in a long time. If LE is going into a place where they know teachers may be armed they must exercise their professional discretion. I know that teachers will be given thorough and specific training in their role as a protector. Teachers have died at the hands of crazed gunmen. Wouldn’t they have liked a fighting chance? Teachers are the last line of defense for kids. Without them being armed, kids are defenseless.
Semper Paratus
Check 6
Burn
No comments:
Post a Comment