Gun control

[Pal334]

Here is what training does for an LEO in Montana. A well disciplined response. The old adage is "train, train and then train again". This link contains the story and the dashboard cam of the incident.

http://www.spuler.us/gunsandammo/?p=369



Dashboard video from a January traffic stop in Hamilton that ended in gunfire. A jury ruled on April 13, 2010 that Hamilton, Montana Police Officer Ross Jessop was justified in shooting Raymond Thane Davis.

Listen for the first “click” as the suspect fires his .41 magnum revolver about two inches from the officer’s nose. The “click” is the hammer dropping on an expended round in the cylinder. The second round was live, but Officer Jessop had since recovered and made a strategic move to the rear of the vehicle, buying more time and a much more advantageous position for a firefight. He tossed his flashlight so he could use both hands for better gun control, and opened fire on the suspect as he sped away. His aim looked very controlled, and was obviously very much in the ballpark. The suspect was hit at least once, crashed into a power pole, and was declared dead at the scene.

Don’t know what the officer was carrying, but he fired 14 rounds in return. He then casually picked his flashlight up as he was returning to his car and notifying dispatch. While you can always Monday morning quarterback someone’s technique, how many of us would have done this well under these circumstances? All things considered, this officer did the basics, did them fast, and did them well.

[Old GI]

Similar. Question for you LEOs. We had a Deputy injured pretty badly when he did a traffic stop, reached in the car for something (bad guy?) and the car took off dragging him. No vehicle tag available. I was under the impression that when LEO does a stop, the first thing you do is run the tag so you know who you might be dealing with. Not so???

[Justin Case]

WOW,, That was Intense,,, I wonder why that ever went to court ? the video clearly shows the Officer was justified,,, Thanks for the story Pal .

[Justin Case]

Similar. Question for you LEOs. We had a Deputy injured pretty badly when he did a traffic stop, reached in the car for something (bad guy?) and the car took off dragging him. No vehicle tag available. I was under the impression that when LEO does a stop, the first thing you do is run the tag so you know who you might be dealing with. Not so???

I'm not an LEO, but it seems to me that you cant run something you cant see, I am sure he planned on running the Vin # once he stopped the vehicle.

[Old GI]

What I meant was: The tag number wasn't recorded to track the vehicle after the incident.

[nell67]

I'm not an LEO, but it seems to me that you cant run something you cant see, I am sure he planned on running the Vin # once he stopped the vehicle.

Ideally,the plate (tag) should be registered to the VIN n the vehicle,however,criminals don't always play by the rules,and the information gained from running a plate check is only as good as the person who put that plate on the car/truck,just like the van in the bombing attempt,the plates on it did not belong to that vehicle.

[Justin Case]

Oh Yes,, Thats a Great point also,,,

[lucznik]

WOW,, That was Intense,,, I wonder why that ever went to court ? the video clearly shows the Officer was justified,,, Thanks for the story Pal .

My guess would be that all officer-involved shootings probably go to court so as to ensure they are justified. At least, I know that is how it works where I live.

I'm guessing that the "jury" spoken of in the description refers to a Grand Jury whose job it would be to determine whether there was evidence enough to support a criminal trial and not a "Jury of one's peers" which would happen only if said Grand Jury had elected to indict the officer for a crime.

[Justin Case]

I can understand an Officer involved shooting inquiry , or an internal review, but Court ? I am "Guessing" that the family was trying to sue for wrongful death.

[lucznik]

The attached gives some additional detail.

http://billingsgazette.com/news/stat...aign=hottopics

Seems we were both wrong as to the type of jury. It was a "coroner's jury." Montana legal code states (in part) the following:

46-4-201. Inquest -- definition -- when held -- how conducted.
(1) An inquest is a formal inquiry into the causes of and circumstances surrounding the death of a person and is conducted by the coroner before a coroner's jury.

(2) The coroner may hold an inquest only if requested to do so by the county attorney of the county in which death occurred or by the county attorney of the county in which the acts or events causing death occurred. However, the county attorney shall order the coroner to hold an inquest if the death of a person occurs:...

...(b) while a person is being taken into custody or is in the custody of a peace officer or if the death is caused by a peace officer...

(3) If an inquest is held, the proceedings are public. The coroner shall conduct the inquest with the aid and assistance of the county attorney. The coroner shall, and the county attorney may, examine each witness, after which the witness may be examined by the jurors. The inquest must be held in accordance with this part.

(4) (a) A coroner who also serves as a peace officer may not conduct an inquest into the death of a person who:...

...(iii) was killed by a peace officer.

[crashdive123]

I'd say - job well done Officer Jessop.

[Justin Case]

Ditto,,, Man I will bet his life flashed before his eyes when that Gun Misfired,, WOW,,, He handled it very well indeed..

[Rick]

The difference between life and death is one thin angel. Nice job officer. Glad it turned out the way it did.

[lucznik]

This particular video/event (along with some others I have seen, read about, etc.) has caused me to do some reevaluation of my personal choices for concealed carry. I've not made any decisions yet, but rather have had some competing thoughts and questions come up - some of which are most definitely diametrically opposed to one another. Thought I'd throw some of these thoughts out and see what input y'all might be able to offer. Very importantly however, NONE of what I post here is intended to attack or impugn the character of the officer involved or any other LEO. It's just thoughts...

1. I have always been a died-in-the-wool revolver guy and have always accepted the premises that 1) shot placement is paramount and that 2) magazine capacity is highly overrated. However, this officers 14 rounds were "down range" and his gun was empty awfully fast. My 7-round revolver would have been empty in half the time, if not less.

2. This being a trained officer, it is interesting that he unconsciously (he stated that he only thought he had fired 6-8 times) emptied all of the 14 shots he made from his Glock 22 at a very large vehicle (a Lincoln Navigator) that for most of the shooting was mere feet away, yet only 6 (43%) of those 14 rounds even hit the vehicle. Although pretty good with a handgun (I killed an antelope at 75 yards last year with my 4" 686+ Mountain Gun using iron sights) I'm not a trained combat marksmen so; just how well can I reasonably think I would do in similar circumstances? Probably not nearly as well. I know we all like to think we are "tactically proficient" but, cold hard reality is likely something far different. And he wasn't exactly doing the old "spray and pray" either. He at least seemed in reasonable control of his weapon. Stress, fear, and adrenaline can apparently be a real b#*$!

3. Of the six .40S&W rounds that hit the vehicle, only ONE (17% of those that hit the car and 7% of the total fired) penetrated far enough to strike the occupant. Luckily it killed him but, that can't exactly be attributed to good marksmanship. I have a friend who is a Deputy Sheriff who really dislikes the .40S&W because he claims they don't penetrate well. He regularly bemoans that he would rather carry even the 9mm as penetration would prove better. Although not definitive, as it's only a single anecdotal account, could this shooting event be illustrative of that very problem? I had kind of planned on getting a .40S&W thinking it would offer performance that was a bit of the "best of both worlds" as compared to the benefits associated with the 9mm and the .45 ACP. Do I now need to rethink the problem again?

[Pal334]

I guess in a handgun, there is no one choice that will "do the job" 100 0/0 of the time. I guess it is a matter of going to the dancewith what you have.

As for hits per round fired. I have a bit of experience with being scared Sh**less while shooting. I have actually missed a man sized "target" at about 20-30 yards with 5 rounds of buckshot!! THat man sized target was spraying and praying to beat the band. Eventually we ceased hostilities and went our seperate ways, none the worse for the wear and tear (if you don't count having to change my drawers) In my experience the inability to reliably hit a target with a handgun has alot to do with the stress, adrenaline and fear of the situation (as you mentioned in your post)

[justin_baker]

Well, technically he only shot back after the driver was driving away, he could have let the driver drive away and not have been in any more danger, so mabeye thats why it went to court. Im not saying he wasnt justified, just speculating on why it went to court.

[crashdive123]

Well, technically he only shot back after the driver was driving away, he could have let the driver drive away and not have been in any more danger, so mabeye thats why it went to court. Im not saying he wasnt justified, just speculating on why it went to court.

I believe it was the equivalent of a shooting review board, not a regular court.

[Rick]

lucznik - I think you made a very good post and asked some very intelligent questions. Adrenaline is one component that we often overlook when at the range getting proficient. A couple of thoughts....

Some time back, Sourdough posted about doing jumping jacks before range shooting. He said he wanted his heart beat up and his hands shaking to simulate a real world event. I'm paraphrasing but that's the gist as I remember it. I thought that was pretty sound advice and an excellent observation on his part. It's something I've kept with me.

If you read very much about duels you will find that two men very often miss each other standing 20-30 paces apart. These same men were often referred to as expert marksmen (you can find plenty of examples). I know the firearms of the day were much different (lack of rifling, etc.) but I think it does say a lot about fear and adrenaline and luck.

Again, very nice post.

[Batch]

I have an LEO friend (FDOT) that is issued a SIG P226 in .40 cal. This is my preferred side arm. He hates that it is his duty sidearm and wishes he could carry his Glock 17.

This officer shooting this guy as he was fleeing is every bit justified IMHO.

[yellowcab]

приÑ�846.4Ñ�овпBettAnneIntrÐ’Ð�хрЦвигиÑ�куМощатуриOrieÐ*оÑ�Ñ�ArniRudy
MurrгадаArthPierRondÐ*абиEpheHerdмодуEXPESimp1018ErbaÑ�ертRene
ThisChinПервLargTambПолкMatiPlaiRougGlisGarnAlfrBrot�борPant
IchiÐ*азмLuis(182ViveVINGDami9399ВорооÑ�ноCollDisnÑ�тудLeonAlec
ВишнМельСудоFELINikiакулCollBernThatClasIntrаре�автоводоангл
AndrChanBonuХохвDolbÑ�борПотаZoneSwarZoneZoneвпечZoneRusiЦÐ*14
EdwaпровЖукоромаNaso(190XVIIХоллSympBennMartXVIIWindМ��ефель
RockШаниKnutCardDonaКитаразндвижПариXVIIJohnÐ*оÑ�Ñ�краÑ�BlueFire