Friday, April 2, 2010


The headline reads, "Man shot thirty-five times by police." Activists claim excessive force was used on the suspect.

Recently I took a young man to the range who had never fired a pistol. After a few dozen rounds and a little bit of instruction, we performed a little exercise. I told him that most police shooting take place in about three seconds and from about six feet away from the target.

I had him load a Glock Model 22, .40 caliber pistol and stand at the low ready position. Both hands on the gun, trigger finger indexed along the frame of the pistol, and the gun pointing about 45 degrees in front of him. I told him I wanted him to shoot the target, a standard, man size, photograph target, six feet in front of him, as many times as he could in three seconds. I told him to start shooting when I said "Threat" and to shop shooting when I said "Three."

He started shooting on command and stopped shooting almost a full second after I said "Three." We counted the bullet holes in the target and there were seven holes, all in a nice little group. Five rounds in three seconds, seven rounds in only four seconds. Two rounds, at least in theory, that were fired after the threat was discontinued. This from a guy who had almost no firearms experience prior to that day.

Now imagine this scenario. Seven officers are at the front of a house when the barricaded suspect bursts from the door and shoots at one of the officers. Five rounds, in three seconds, times seven officers and the suspect is shot thirty-five times! I suspect that trained officers would fire even faster, especially with the stress of their lives at risk. Is thirty-five rounds excessive? Maybe not, that's what the SGT Says.


Ann T. said...

Dear Bunkermeister,
This post, along with the one about false or misleading statistics from AI, are exactly the kinds of information the public doesn't have the experience to know, or, doesn't think through.

Way important. I wish you were live on CNN. I wish more agencies would try to get this kind of message out. Most have settled in to endure.

Ann T.

Bob G. said...

Sounds like 35 rounds was an adequate "force multiplier" for SEVEN officers...

Plus, we ALL know the "drive-by" media LOVES to exacerbate an already complex situation with sensationalistic rhetoric.

WE call them FACTS for a REASON, don't we?

Nicely presented.

Stay safe.

Bunkermeister said...

Thank you Ann T. I try and get the word out as best as I can. And if CNN calls, I will pick up the phone.

Bunkermeister said...

Bob G, you are so right.

Protect_and_Serve said...

How about this for a headline:

Idiot attacks American Heros who respond professionally.

The sub-headline could read:

Dead idiot's family forced to pay $3 million for Officer's pain and suffering.

The articel could end like this:

Local stretch of Highway named for these heroic Officers

Bunkermeister said...

If only the media were more pro-police we might get those headlinds.