Gary got to fisk this because there is too much misinformation in it, and some that I agree with but feel the need to divide the two.
First, the police have not released a round count for how many rounds were fired. This number of thirty is what one news agency was reporting, initially others were saying 20 etc.
Why did the police go in instead of waiting; they saw the criminal point the gun to the cashiers head like he was going to fire, at that point they broke contain and entered. There were two entrances into the building the one with the vestibule where the sound person was shot and another. One officer went in through the vestibule area (followed by the cameraman and sound engineer) and immediately worked his way into the middle of the room, the other officers came in through the other door. I believe that the decision to enter the building when the officers felt that the cashier was in immanent danger was the correct one with the information they had at that time. Unlike you or me in a self defense situation they have a duty to do so to try to protect innocent life.
Point being made, this is the criminals fault not the cops.
First, the police have not released a round count for how many rounds were fired. This number of thirty is what one news agency was reporting, initially others were saying 20 etc. While moving and shooting at a moving object hitting that object is very difficult, add to that the stress of being shot at while doing so...I think this is exactly what a couple of other trainers around here talk about when they talk about training to fire under stress and that accuracy etc. goes down. Your point that this event is something that us concealed carriers can learn from is correct, it shows the importance of this type of training.
Once the criminal pointed the gun at the officers and started to fire the decision was made, by the criminal, the police must return fire. What else can they do when in close quarters with no cover or concealment, it automatically becomes move and shoot your life is the most important issue at that point. I agree with your general premise of knowing what is behind what you are shooting at etc. but in this situation they were correct in moving and shooting until the threat was ended. This criminal did not care about the public and had this been a real gun could have just gone around shooting people at random, the police have a duty to stop this there.
Next this exchange happened very quickly, just a matter of seconds. During this exchange the criminal moved from where the officer had a good backstop (cement walls of the building) toward the door and windows, it was at this door that the sound engineer was trapped behind. This movement by the criminal would have covered about ten yards before he exited the building.
Next the Liability Waiver, another point made by an ill-informed news station. It has already been shown that this information is false, the crew had another week on their shooting contract. This will not cost taxpayers.
The COPS crew following the police in, I'm torn on this issue. I will point out the crew trains to do this (even more training than the police do annually) and know the dangers and takes the protective measures they feel they must. This stuff is covered in the shows contract with the cities they film in and I'm certain they will be reviewing this now.
Now points I agree with (in general), yes the letting criminals out of jail is a problem. They are not "rehabilitated" in reality they have just been made more violent; recidivism rates, like violent crime rates, are much too high and we as a society must find an answer to this.
Militarization of the police is another issue that I would generally agree with you on, but I don't see where it has anything to do with this case. If it had been Andy and Barney from Mayberry there the only difference is that there only would have been seven shots fired because the police ran out of rounds at that point. Andy got off all six of his and Barney finally would have gotten the ability to shoot his one round.
And this was an all around bad deal that got one criminal (actually two there was another arrest) off the street and yes it would have been better if it went through the courts, but the decision for it to end this way was made by the criminal.
Well I guess that Gary took down his post while I was typing this, but I am going to leave it here because it addresses several issues that keep coming up. At this point there is no reason to believe that any officer did anything illegal or against policy and procedure. These officers (and the film crew) did their jobs and we need to support them in this difficult time.
