Page 1 of 2

One shot and one kill, maybe not..

Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 6:20 pm
by old farmer
:tiphat:
The video is "CONTENT WARNING: GRAPHIC". The police did a great job.
:patriot:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05 ... g-graphic/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: One shot and one kill, maybe not..

Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 6:52 pm
by MoJo
You have to keep shooting until the threat is stopped. The BG had 3-4 obvious wounds before being shot in the head. Even with those wounds, he continued to move before expiring. A handgun, regardless of caliber is a puny weapon. The wounded officer survived.

Re: One shot and one kill, maybe not..

Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 8:28 pm
by gthaustex
And just think if that had been a civilian in a shoot out with the bad guy and they were in NY with a 7 round limitation. As many hits as the bad guy appeared to take, I'm not sure he would have been neutralized.

Re: One shot and one kill, maybe not..

Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 8:30 pm
by texanjoker
good video.

Re: One shot and one kill, maybe not..

Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 9:46 pm
by jmra
Video also shows how easy it is to miss a BG that can become a player in a confrontation. Scariest thing to me if I had to deal with a guy pulling a gun is another guy with a gun I don't see.
Would have been nice if the police would have had a live feed from the surveillance cameras prior to the raid.

Re: One shot and one kill, maybe not..

Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 10:06 pm
by Jumping Frog
texanjoker wrote:good video.
And a happy ending.

Re: One shot and one kill, maybe not..

Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 10:34 pm
by The Annoyed Man
MoJo wrote:The BG had 3-4 obvious wounds before being shot in the head....
....Including one with an exit wound right between his shoulder blades. One can only imagine what structures that one might have hit. He had pretty obviously already started losing blood pressure rapidly, making his legs wobbly, before the head shot took him down. And even with multiple gunshot wounds including the head wound, he continued to stir on the ground for a while longer. One presumes that the cops were carrying .40 Cal., a round with a decent reputation. There's a lesson for the rest of us somewhere in all of that.

Re: One shot and one kill, maybe not..

Posted: Thu May 09, 2013 10:40 pm
by terryg
It sure looked like they were watching and only approached after the one suspect entered the car. I can't for the life of me figure out how he was missed.

Re: One shot and one kill, maybe not..

Posted: Fri May 10, 2013 8:20 am
by JJVP
terryg wrote:It sure looked like they were watching and only approached after the one suspect entered the car. I can't for the life of me figure out how he was missed.
Yes, I had the same reaction. The guy that drove the white car had an unobstructed view of the BG's car. The first guy that came from behind the fence at the left, should have seen him also. :confused5

Also, when the shots started, two of the officers retreated towards the street, but the third one went in the opposite direction towards the house. He had an open shot from behind, but it was one of the guys from across the street that ended making the head shot through the tree. :confused5

Poor police tactics in my opinion. Lucky one of them was not killed.

Re: One shot and one kill, maybe not..

Posted: Fri May 10, 2013 9:34 am
by Robert*PPS
I bet this footage will be analyzed, scrutinized, and everything else for training purposes.

Re: One shot and one kill, maybe not..

Posted: Fri May 10, 2013 9:43 am
by Beiruty
Why the police officers did not reload, and closed in again after the head shot? He was down and alive no detective to be seen. Those detectives are undercover narcotics. They need more training, I guess. They were wearing body armor and this why the 3 hits were taken by the body armor.

Re: One shot and one kill, maybe not..

Posted: Fri May 10, 2013 11:07 pm
by JALLEN
Beiruty wrote:Why the police officers did not reload, and closed in again after the head shot? He was down and alive no detective to be seen. Those detectives are undercover narcotics. They need more training, I guess. They were wearing body armor and this why the 3 hits were taken by the body armor.
The stories I saw said the wounded officer had three wounds to the abdomen, missed the armor apparently. The perp had a Colt .380, surprise, and a tree for cover and still lost. Looks like he took a hit in the leg, a couple in the torso and one to the head, probably a glancing blow or shrapnel. It's a good thing he wasn't a better shooter or there would be 3 dead officers now.

It seemed like no officers appeared in the yard for several minutes afterwards. I wonder why?

Re: One shot and one kill, maybe not..

Posted: Fri May 10, 2013 11:11 pm
by jmra
JALLEN wrote:
Beiruty wrote:Why the police officers did not reload, and closed in again after the head shot? He was down and alive no detective to be seen. Those detectives are undercover narcotics. They need more training, I guess. They were wearing body armor and this why the 3 hits were taken by the body armor.
The stories I saw said the wounded officer had three wounds to the abdomen, missed the armor apparently. The perp had a Colt .380, surprise, and a tree for cover and still lost. Looks like he took a hit in the leg, a couple in the torso and one to the head, probably a glancing blow or shrapnel. It's a good thing he wasn't a better shooter or there would be 3 dead officers now.

It seemed like no officers appeared in the yard for several minutes afterwards. I wonder why?
I thought the article said the wounded officer was treated at the hospital and released. Sounds like bruised ribs from rounds hitting a vest. Three rounds in the stomach isn't a treated and released type of thing.

Re: One shot and one kill, maybe not..

Posted: Fri May 10, 2013 11:23 pm
by JALLEN
jmra wrote:
JALLEN wrote:
Beiruty wrote:Why the police officers did not reload, and closed in again after the head shot? He was down and alive no detective to be seen. Those detectives are undercover narcotics. They need more training, I guess. They were wearing body armor and this why the 3 hits were taken by the body armor.
The stories I saw said the wounded officer had three wounds to the abdomen, missed the armor apparently. The perp had a Colt .380, surprise, and a tree for cover and still lost. Looks like he took a hit in the leg, a couple in the torso and one to the head, probably a glancing blow or shrapnel. It's a good thing he wasn't a better shooter or there would be 3 dead officers now.

It seemed like no officers appeared in the yard for several minutes afterwards. I wonder why?
I thought the article said the wounded officer was treated at the hospital and released. Sounds like bruised ribs from rounds hitting a vest. Three rounds in the stomach isn't a treated and released type of thing.
Here is what I replied on:
The images are stunningly clear, the sort rarely ever captured on video: A gunman pops out of a parked BMW, surprising Miami-Dade narcotics detectives investigating a marijuana growhouse.

The home’s audio-equipped surveillance video — played for the first time during a Miami-Dade court hearing Thursday — is a graphic and powerful piece of evidence depicting a police action quickly turned into a deadly gunfight.

Gunfire erupts. Puffs of smoke cloud the air. Detective John Saavedra falls off screen, wounded with three bullets to the gut.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/05/09/3 ... rylink=cpy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The story concludes by saying the officer is recovering and has not yet returned to duty. My impression is that if he had mere bruises from being hit in the vest, the story would have taken a different angle, and said so. Who knows?

Re: One shot and one kill, maybe not..

Posted: Fri May 10, 2013 11:33 pm
by jmra
JALLEN wrote:
jmra wrote:
JALLEN wrote:
Beiruty wrote:Why the police officers did not reload, and closed in again after the head shot? He was down and alive no detective to be seen. Those detectives are undercover narcotics. They need more training, I guess. They were wearing body armor and this why the 3 hits were taken by the body armor.
The stories I saw said the wounded officer had three wounds to the abdomen, missed the armor apparently. The perp had a Colt .380, surprise, and a tree for cover and still lost. Looks like he took a hit in the leg, a couple in the torso and one to the head, probably a glancing blow or shrapnel. It's a good thing he wasn't a better shooter or there would be 3 dead officers now.

It seemed like no officers appeared in the yard for several minutes afterwards. I wonder why?
I thought the article said the wounded officer was treated at the hospital and released. Sounds like bruised ribs from rounds hitting a vest. Three rounds in the stomach isn't a treated and released type of thing.
Here is what I replied on:
The images are stunningly clear, the sort rarely ever captured on video: A gunman pops out of a parked BMW, surprising Miami-Dade narcotics detectives investigating a marijuana growhouse.

The home’s audio-equipped surveillance video — played for the first time during a Miami-Dade court hearing Thursday — is a graphic and powerful piece of evidence depicting a police action quickly turned into a deadly gunfight.

Gunfire erupts. Puffs of smoke cloud the air. Detective John Saavedra falls off screen, wounded with three bullets to the gut.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/05/09/3 ... rylink=cpy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The story concludes by saying the officer is recovering and has not yet returned to duty. My impression is that if he had mere bruises from being hit in the vest, the story would have taken a different angle, and said so. Who knows?
I was going off the linked story:
"Miami-Dade Detective John Saavedra was shot three times in the stomach, but was treated and released from the hospital."
Who knows. I do know that you don't get 3 penetrating gun shot wounds to the stomach and get "treated and released".