Amazingly, the perp survived. I think if I were going to draw police fire, I'd rely on something larger than a rimfire revolver. I do like those custom grips, though.

The LEOs had a AR15, pump shotgun, pistol, and a bean bag gun aimed at him. Therefore, I'm going with attempted suicide by cop.

Can't believe he survived all of that.

Did he travel back in time and steal some kids .22 from 1922?

Oklahoma should sue rockstar/red dead redemption based on NYs frivolous law suits.

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:
Did he travel back in time and steal some kids .22 from 1922?

Those Heritage Rough Rider .22 revolvers are around $160 retail.

Criminals love cheap guns.

Ergo, criminals love cheap .22 revolvers.


The guys buying guns to flip onto the black market aren't dropping $4k a pop for a single Staccato. Instead, they're dropping $2k for a dozen Hi-Points and Heritages.

And that's why I don't want them converting our shotguns to less-lethal.

Purpose of bean bag? Doesn't look like it's doing its job.

Why are they standing so close together? Why not have some distance between each other?

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:
And that's why I don't want them converting our shotguns to less-lethal.

Yeah we arent fans but they'd shoot hugs if "our betters" had their way. They work within their operating window but that's a very, very small window.

quote:

Originally posted by konata88:
Purpose of bean bag?

Pain compliance.

quote:

Doesn't look like it's doing its job.

Yep. Pain compliance alone, without additional incapacitation effect, is rarely effective. Bean bag shotguns don't have the best track record.


It was a last ditch attempt to employ some sort of less lethal tool. They could have possibly continued to try to negotiate, but it was clear the negotiations were going nowhere, that he was not going to comply with commands, and that he continued to pose an ongoing deadly threat based on his actions and statements. At that point, he was no longer directly fondling the gun in his hoodie pocket, and both of his hands were at the upper part of his torso. However, they were not close enough to utilize a Taser, and Tasers aren't universally effective either. The only real benefit of bean bag rounds are that they have a longer range than a Taser, even though they have a lower potential effect.

So they tried the best/only other option they had available, hoping that the pain of the bag's impact would be enough to make him change his mind, comply, and surrender. It's not likely, but possible. Instead, once he was hit with the bean bag, he escalated by drawing the pistol, and the officers escalated to lethal force in response.

Here's another video of one having a similar effect in a similar situation. https://youtu.be/9r_ffViqvqk. They're just not effective unless you get a perfect hit at the perfect range. And if you're too close, they can penetrate and be lethal. It's not a good solution.

The shotgun is great at delivering effective lethal force at close to intermediate range. For delivery of less-lethal impact munitions, the 40mm is a much better option.

ETA: Taser would have been a better option for the guy in the video I posted. His shirt was off and provided a pretty good chance of getting good probe contact and resultant neuromuscular incapacitation. The heavy sweatshirt the suspect in the OP's video was wearing would have a pretty high chance of making a Taser ineffective or only intermittently effective, as the probes can get caught up in the material and fail to make good skin contact.

Either way, those cops in both situations got handed a shit sandwitch and the suspect's actions dictated the response.

quote:

Originally posted by konata88:
Why are they standing so close together? Why not have some distance between each other?

Maybe they figured they'd use some retro tactics since the bad guy had a rough rider .22?

All those shots and still couldn't kill the guy.

Years ago, my agency forced bean bag shottie conversions on us. I told the chief no thanks and said “someone else can be the guy holding it- I’ll stick to either my pepper spray or baton, thank you very much”. IMO, they only work with already somewhat compliant folks not under the influence of something.

We toyed with the idea of bean bag shotguns but decided not to since they didn't want to buy new shotguns (we still have ancient semi-auto Benelli M1 Super 90s). Our council voted against Tasers years ago and hasn't budged so we will continue to pepper spray people then beat them with metal pipes.

A newly elected council member wants to push Tasers next year. We'll see.

From the limited perspective of that video, they forced that shooting.

Curious why you think that....because of how they approached him, or are you talking about the beanbag deployment specifically?

From what I saw, he'd already fired a shot in a public place, was armed, volatile, non-compliant, and clearly posed a threat to the public and the officers on scene. He was standing in front of a strip mall with cars parked out front, so presumably there were customers inside and letting him get in there was not an option. They tried negotiating and that didn't work, then attempted to use a less-lethal option backed up by lethal cover, which was also innefective. I'm not sure what approach would have yielded a better outcome (except maybe better, more effective less-lethal tools).

Maybe Jerry's got one of those hug shotguns that Anubismp's brass is wanting to T&E.


Kidding aside, I'm going to go ahead and assume (perhaps incorrectly) that jljones is of the mindset that they should have kept talking. And he's not necessarily wrong. There's pros and cons to both options. It's potentially a little more likely (though still unlikely based on his failure to engage in the dialogue so far and continued attempts at escalation with his words and actions) to resolve peacefully than the pain compliance route they chose. But it also presents the greater opportunity for things to go even more sideways as the failed attempt at negotiation continued to drag on, potentially endangering the people in the building behind them as 92fstech alluded to. Whereas if he had been holed up alone inside his apartment, absolutely keep talking until the cows come home.

As it was, in the immediate run-up to the bean bag deployment, they appeared to deliberately reposition themselves to potentially have the best firing backstop possible out of the available options, then flipped their coin. While the bean bag approach had pros and cons too, it also wasn't necessarily the wrong call. They deployed their sole less lethal option to give it the opportunity to work, while limiting the chances of the guy being able to get to a different position or get inside the building, or for someone inside the building to get injured during an unexpected barrage of gunfire with the guy located in a bad position (like directly in front of that glass door as the backstop). If you're going to have to shoot, as the perp's behavior and words were repeatedly telling them was going to be necessary, it's usually best if you can try to control some of the variables rather than just taking a bite from whichever random shit sandwich you're served.


In the end, the dude had multiple opportunities to simply comply and go peacefully, and chose not to at multiple decision points along his path.

If he’s an articulable threat that you believe you need to shoot him with a beanbag SHOTGUN, shoot him with lethal. And articulate why you did it.

Maybe they negotiate him down by not escalating it, maybe they don’t. Maybe they wind up shooting him anyway, but forcing the shoot was a rookie move.

What I saw was passive aggression at the time of the LL deployment. So they introduce LL by shooting at him with a SHOTGUN. Any first year public defender will argue that the police instigated his client into raising the gun just so they could shoot him. And they’ll probably win. The argument will be that he thought the police were trying to murder him so he had to defend himself. And the city will likely write a check for it.

That scene was checkers and not chess. But, I’m MMQBing something based on a video with really limited perspective. Cameras don’t catch what their eyes did. Maybe I am
Wrong, but based upon what I saw, I would have never used a bean bag shotgun against someone armed with a gun. It’s just not smart at all for the reasons this video shows.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
Any first year public defender will argue that the police instigated his client into raising the gun just so they could shoot him. And they’ll probably win. The argument will be that he thought the police were trying to murder him so he had to defend himself. And the city will likely write a check for it.

You've been a SWAT guy for a long while, right? Does your team ever deploy 40mm tear gas cannisters or flashbangs? Has anyone successfully used the "They shot/threw a grenade at me, I thought they were murdering me, so I had to shoot back" approach against you?

We don’t deploy any of those on someone who is agitated and holding a gun.

We especially wouldn’t do it standing out in the middle of the open using really poor tactics.