Re: Gunner and co must be so proud

On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 23:23:12 -0600, "David J. Hughes"
<davidjhughes.tx@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Nicholas wrote:
On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 09:00:27 -0800 (PST), rigger <dgrup@xxxxxxx>
wrote:


On Feb 17, 3:20 pm, Nicholas <nob...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 14:40:52 +0530, Gunner Asch



Perhaps YOU feel "COPS" are well trained? The neophyte will
often believe this; after all you see police with guns all the time,
right?

I am led to believe that cops have to pass certain test programs where
they are put into a threatening environment, and are scored on how
well they react (shooting the *bad guys, not shooting innocent
civilians." This isn't the case with any civilian gun owners AFAIK.

No actually. Only in a very few departments is such testing given.

But records of police shooting reveal abysmal records of marks-
manship.

Here is what resembles the average police shoot-out:

"A necropsy of the tiger conducted by the zoo's veterinarian revealed
the
animal had been shot by police three times during the attack,
including once
in the skull ..."

apparently, most shots missed the target.
_____________________________________________________________________
MY NOTE: I CALCULATE APPROX. 16 ROUND PER OFFICER
(IF THEY DID NOT RELOAD) TIMES 4 OFFICERS, IS 64 ROUNDS
FIRED AND ONLY 3 WOUNDS AND THEY WEREN'T EVEN
BEING FIRED AT.
_____________________________________________________________________

Saturday, December 29, 2007


... The police log indicates the distraction took 26 seconds. Then for
about
four seconds, four officers fired at the tiger with their .40-caliber
handguns. After that fusillade, the command came over the dispatch
system:
"Stop shooting." '
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/12/29/MNDVU65TO...


" Zoo officials have suggested something must have provoked the tiger
into
making the deadly escape. Police are still investigating.


"To our knowledge nothing like this has ever happened before," zoo
spokesman
Sam Singer said. "Animal experts have said as well it's unusual for
an
animal to leave its enclosure unless it's been provoked."


The Dhaliwals, who attended their friend's funeral Tuesday, have said
nothing publicly about what happened Dec. 25. Their lawyer has
repeatedly
said they did nothing to goad the animal.


A necropsy of the tiger conducted by the zoo's veterinarian revealed
the
animal had been shot by police three times during the attack,
including once
in the skull, and that the claws on her hind paws were "torn/frayed,"
the
newspaper reported. It also said the stomach of the animal was full
of
"undigested meat," apparently from an earlier feeding. "


http://cbs13.com/local/tiger.attack.vicitm.2.627035.html

dennis
in nca



Yah, well, so their marksmanship sucks. What else is new. Firing a
..40 is a bit of a handful. Otoh, they were trying to take down a very
pissed off animal capable of killing with one swipe of its' paw.

If I were in that situation, a rifle would have been used. Or if they
had the balls to get close enough, a 12 gauge with a slug or 00
buckshot.

Close enough?
Rifled slug, 75 yards for a head shot.
OO buck. In 12 ga., 9 balls of 0.33" diameter, 0.81 ounces (23 grams,
354 grains) each. Each ball packs roughly the same energy as a .357
Magnum at 40 yards.
10 yards puts the whole pattern in a pieplate ( 8").
40 yards puts 3 to 4 balls in a man size target.
.40, effective range, 25 feet.
Since they actually hit the cat, presumably they were already well
within the effective range of a shotgun.


Pistols are for *in your face* combat. They suck for much of anything
else unless you train a lot and get really good with it.

Now a .44 Magnum jacked hollowpoint to the kill zone (heart lung area)
would have done the job. 1 shot.

My preferred "clanging" round (in wadcutter), at 50 yards <G>

But you know when people are given
a semi auto they'll just keep banging away without aiming until the
gun runs out of ammo. Because they are not _aiming_. You aim, you
hit. You *point* you miss. Not difficult to understand.


If the cops are just banging away without aiming, that's pretty much
proof that they have little or no training.
In properly trained hands, EVERY round is intended to be effective.

Most cop encounters beyond *in your face* require at least a 12 gauge
and maybe a rifle.

Nick

You usually don't see S.W.A.T. just running around with pistols. They
_all_ have rifles. Even for *in your face* encounters. Same goes for
Military. You don't see them kicking in any doors with just pistols
drawn. Only the cops are that fucking stupid.

Having said that, I am a pistol *fan* but know it is only for close up
and personal. It wouldn't be my *preferred* firearm for an encounter
with a full grown Siberian Tiger, that's for damn certain.

These animals are never found in petting zoos, because they have a
propensity to Eat People. But that's what the average patrolman
carries because?

For in your house, a pistol works. For on your lawn or in your yard,
try the shotgun, for reaching out and touching someone, go to the
rifle. You have those 3 weapons, with ammo, and you've got the bases
covered.

IMO, S.W.A.T. should have been called in to dispatch the animal. Then
again, I'm not the Chief of Police, and didn't make the call.

Nick

.

Loading