There are two possible ways how police can handle a sword-wielding mad-man:

[DetlefK]

https://twitter.com/peterlauer/status/501806768373399552/photo/1

[Uncle Joe]

1. It looks like German Cops have more courage, empathy or both.

Thanks for the thread, DetlefK.

[eridani]

2. I'm betting on better oversight

German cops have a reputation for being real hardasses, as with that joke about the difference between European heaven and European hell. In heaven, the cooks are French, the cops are British and the automotive engineers are German. In hell, the cooks are British, the cops are German and the automotive engineers are French.

[Uncle Joe]

4. Even better oversight would be good.

[Sparhawk60]

21. Love the German Police

I spent a few years in Germany and I loved the police. Very polite and professional. But lift your hand against one, and a van full of Polizi will pull up and open a can of whoop ass on you.

[Live and Learn]

3. So sad, how anyone could shoot to kill someone that didn't pose a

real threat of death to them. Kudos to Germany.

[rustydog]

72. You can't be so ignorant to think or BELIEVE a knife is not a threat to anyone's life?!!!

You obviously have never been in an ER in America. you've never worked on a stabbing victim. you've never been attacked with a knife. I have.

I have a better chance of killing you with a knife than I do with a gun if I get close enough...I can cut, stab, slice and torture you until you bleed to death.. didn't pose a threat...wow.

[TreasonousBastard]

5. Whilst it's fun to point fingers, real NYC cops have told me...

that they are trained to aim for the largest body mass. Even then, they don't always hit the target, and trying to get a leg or arm is often impossible. Perhaps there are occasions when you could wing someone, but too often there's no time to work it all out.

And when a NYC cop misses the target, there's always a bystander in the background who could be hit.

Real cops here who have been through the training, and perhaps even pulled their guns, are invited to chime in.

[TreasonousBastard]

11. Ad you know this, how?

[TreasonousBastard]

16. So, you admit you don't know anything about this, but...

have no problem offering an opinion.

I have no interest in changing your mind. I do, however, have an interest in expanding my own knowledge, and you are not helping.

[thesquanderer]

9. Even the largest body mass probably doesn't have to be shot at 12 times.

And if they were aiming down toward the legs, the risk to a bystander is minimal, less than a miss at chest height would be.

[TreasonousBastard]

12. Another expert chiming in.

[thesquanderer]

24. If every topic on DU could only be discussed by experts

there would be very few posts.

Should none of us comment on a supreme court decision unless we are experts in constitutional law? Etc.

Most human conversation is between non-experts, but that doesn't mean there's no value in bouncing ideas off each other.

As for my post, is it not reasonable to surmise that a bullet fired toward the ground and missing its target is less likely to seriously maim or kill an innocent bystander than would be a bullet fired at chest height that likewise misses its target? And it seems that missing a target is a pretty reasonable possibility, right? I mean, otherwise, 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 shots would probably suffice, rather than 12. (Though as I understand it, they said that no bystanders were close enough to be at risk in this particular incident anyway.)

I understand the point of saying "aim for the largest body mass" but is that an absolute? Maybe some consideration should be given to the risk posed by the assailant as balanced against the likelihood of killing him? I mean, a guy holding a knife, with no bystanders within reach, is not the same kind of threat as a guy with a semi-automatic. But that wouldn't matter if you assign no value to the life of the assailant, and I think that's the concern.

In general, there does seem to be an issue in this country of police sometimes being quick to use what most of us would consider to be excessive force, no? Can we not discuss this unless we are experts?

[daleanime]

28. +1

[Tommymac]

31. +1

[cvoogt]

36. Maybe

TreasonousBastard was saying he/she is an expert and just wanted to chime in.

[TreasonousBastard]

49. I never said I was an expert. I said...

I was told things by an expert.

[cvoogt]

51. ;)

I'm just messing with you

[TreasonousBastard]

48. And fewer posts is a bad thing? Meanwhile...

face it-- most human conversation is silly and meaningless.

Real conversation doesn't mean constantly justifying an irrational thought-- it means someone is learning something. We all throw out ideas, but then we find out whether our ideas are worth something or not. Amazingly enough, I've been wrong about things more than I've been right-- I just prefer not to keep arguing when wrong. Usually. Sometimes I prefer to keep arguing even when I'm right, since it wears you down after a while.

In this case, several people with far more experience than I have have agreed with my understanding and expanded it so that I learned something. Other people are saying things that are demonstrably wrong and refusing to back down.

One former peace officer here mentioned the short time it would take a knife-wielder to be on you. While he didn't go into detail, I have no doubt that cops are trained about circles of safety or whatever they're called and instinctively understand just how dangerous a situation can become whether we agree with him or not.

What has been glossed over is that your average cop isn't combat oriented and suffers some of the same hesitation and nervousness that any of us would feel in a similar situation. The difference is that his training should account for that and allow him to act within whatever personal constraints he might have. He's not a soldier with a kill the enemy mission, he's a cop with a much more complicated mission. I personally don't fully understand how he's trained to deal with that and while there certainly are rogues and hard cases out there, I'm inclined to put the burden of proof on anyone who claims misconduct.

[cwydro]

25. Lots of experts around DU these days...

and superheroes too, who can singlehandedly "wrestle knives" from bad guys.

[daleanime]

29. -1

[former9thward]

45. +2

[Tommymac]

32. A professional well trained LEO should be able to deal with a knife wielder without killing them

But dealing with an unarmed teenager is a whole different ballgame.

[Sam1]

23. That depends, on ground yes on concrete the chance of ricochet and shrapnel makes injury to

bystanders much more likely as does the lack of fire discipline displayed by the police in a lot of cases.

I think there is a lack of training due to the expense of ammunition and good training facilities. Shooting at stationary targets really isn't adequate, neither is qualifying once or twice a year. Expert use of firearms is like any other skill; to keep it you got to do it and not just occasionally.

[Puzzledtraveller]

44. True

You aim center of mass and when you pull the trigger your intent is to stop the threat. Also, the distance a person wielding a knife can close on you before you can draw your weapon is considerable, more than many would think. Even at 25 ft you will not have enough time to draw, aim and take a good shot. Hence the reason perpetrators are sometimes riddled with bullets. I have pulled my gun before. I was a peace officer for 6 years as a deputy, then as a police recruit for LMPD where I later resigned after deciding I did not want to do this anymore.

[kentauros]

69. Then, the obvious fact to take away from this is:

German police are better shots.

Perhaps part of the solution to our problems here would be to bring the firearms-training experts in Germany over here to train our police in how to shoot as well as them

[Heidi]

6. Kick, kick, kick!

[sakabatou]

8. It's like making a zombie slow down, right?

[ReRe]

10. K&R

I agree. Shoot to disable, not to fucking KILL. What's so difficult to understand about that concept? Life is NOT a video game!

[Lee-Lee]

14. The great irony in your statement

Have you ever fired a handgun?

At a moving target?

Under stress?

When failure means that moving target might kill you?

Yeah, it's not a video game alright.

To put this silly little meme in perspective, that German cop had backup ready to shoot center mass if his shot failed. In most US agencies once an officer has that backup they would use a taser or other less-lethal. But none of those are an option when you are alone.

Even the meme also gets it right that the NYC case was mentally ill, the German drunk- way, way different levels of threat and ability from a sober but mentally I'll person in a psychotic break and a drunk.

[ReRe]

17. .

??????

[Live and Learn]

22. If you can't handle the risk or stress, don't take the job.

But a police officer's job is to protect and serve the public and that includes even those they may consider potentially mentally ill, drunk, old, young, white, black, etc..., rich, poor, you get the message.

It seems as if you are actually saying it is okay to kill a mentally ill person or at least saying it would be more okay than killing a drunk. Please tell me you aren't serious.

[Lee-Lee]

30. Not saying that at all

I'm saying they are two very different situations and you have to approach them differently.

The drunk person is under a chemical influence that makes them behave like a fool, but it also depresses the central nervous system making them less able to use a weapon effectively and extending reaction time.

A person in a psychotic break truly believes whatever delusion they see in their mind and has faster reflexes and full control of their physical body.

You can't treat them the same.

[DetlefK]

27. There are two cops in the upper picture. Your argument is invalid.

One cop could have tried to wound the guy with a shot to the leg and if things go out of hand, his colleague would have been ready for a shot to the torso.

[Lee-Lee]

33. That upper picture has so many issues

Both of them are way too close to the suspect with the knife. If he chooses to lunge at one of them they will have less than 2 seconds to get incapacitating shots off or get stabbed.

Given the crowds shown in the area changing a shot at a leg would be foolish- a leg is a small target and moves faster and more often than a torso, making a miss more likely. So given the odds of a round going past or through the leg and hitting a bystander you don't want to try a shot like that- in a crowd like that you don't want to shoot unless you are in a position where there is no choice.

I don't know the background on the picture or story so I don't even know if the caption is accurate or how it went down, so it's just what I see from one picture.

Honestly that top picture is a textbook example of what a taser is perfect for. They get used in situations like this hundreds of time a day across the country, you just don't have people making silly memes about them. Instead they complain about tasers too.

[DetlefK]

37. Because tasers are also misused by cops?

Tasering people that need not be tasered or shouldn't be tasered for medical reasons.


A few years ago, someone invented handcuffs with integrated electro-shockers. If the prisoner gets violent while handcuffed, the cop can taser him by remote. The handcuffs never made it into the police-arsenal, though I doubt the reason were the complaints that they would be the perfect tool for torture and abuse.

[Lee-Lee]

39. When somebody is doing something that warrants getting tasered

The cops on scene don't have access to medical records. Taser has far less risk of death than shooting, but nothing will achieve the level of 100% perfection the cop haters here demand.

That said, most deaths after tasering are more a result of drug use, not medical issues

Best advice is if you have a heart condition don't do stupid crap that will get you tased, and is the cops pull out a taser stop what you are doing regardless of medical issues before you get tased.

I have been tased. Its not fun, but given a choice between being tased and shot tase me all day long.

[Tommymac]

34. With 2 well trained LEOs there was no need to fire a shot.

They should have been able to contain him and take him down easily using non lethal means.

They could also have called for backup and just contained him.

[Angus86]

41. a shot to the leg is still considered deadly force.

Even disregarding the fact that most (probably all) police departments train their officers to aim for center mass because it's the fastest way to stop a threat, shooting at someone is always considered deadly force no matter which part of the body the officer is aiming at.

Imagine this: an officer purposely shoots a knife welding suspect in the leg, but nicks the femoral artery and the suspect bleeds out before he can get to a hospital. It would be very easy for a lawyer to make a case that the officer was not actually in fear for his life (since he aimed for a leg instead of center mass), and therefore was not justified in using deadly force.

[ReRe]

46. I never mentioned...

... shooting them in the leg. Look it, policemen are marksmen. They practice shooting their gun on a regular basis, both still and moving targets. I imagine it is required to stay on staff. There were two police at the shooting in St Louis yesterday (two miles from Ferguson.) They could have shot the wielder of the knife in the hand!

Why is this so difficult to grasp? I don't get the "Oh my God, a man with a knife, kill him!" mentality.

[oneshooter]

59. I'm sorry, are you a expert on combat shooting? Have you ever even fired a firearm,

much less a handgun?

Most, if not all PD's qualify once, maybe twice a year on set range stationary targets. ( yes Hoyt, they are human shaped). I would reccomend that you try it yourself, and see how simple it is.

[ReRe]

62. What???

... What the eff has "combat shooting" got to do with this?

No, I have never shot a firearm, as I don't need a firearm. I am not afraid.

The only "firearm" I ever shot was a cap gun when I was a kid, and that was for the sound.

Like I said somewhere today... it takes all kinds. I'm good at what I do. A Police Officer is good at what he does. A nurse is good at what she does. Get it? And I hope to God that Police Officers are expert marksmen, because if they aren't we are in big trouble.

But more important than that, what is absolutely necessary for a good Police Officer is good judgement. You would agree that "combat" judgement is much different than a "Police Officer's" judgement? No?

[Angus86]

63. well...

You didnt mention it, but the OP used the example of a German cop shooting a suspect in the leg.

I think it would be great if cops could be expected to shoot armed suspects in the hand, or even to shoot the weapon out of their hand without harming anybody. However, real life is not like TV, and it can be very difficult to hit even a man-size target under stress, much less one the size of a human hand.

Police officers are human beings, not TV characters like the Lone Ranger.

[ReRe]

65. Don't agree...

... I used to work in a hospital. I'm sure it's no different for cops. If you're a good one, you handle stress like a charm. Then afterwards, when the stress is over, and you're off by yourself, you relax and let off the steam. You kick a trash can, or weep, or smoke a cigarette (even though you don't smoke). etc., etc.

[Angus86]

67. What don't you agree with?

I'm trying to figure out what you "don't agree" with.

Are you saying that you "don't agree" that cops who shoot someone in the line of duty are in a stressful situation?

I'm sure that as a health care worker, you were often placed in stressful situations, but I don't think your experience is applicable to the example of a police officer having to draw, aim, and fire their weapon at a person who intends to do them great bodily harm.

Frankly, I think we're talking about a whole 'nother level of "stress."

[ReRe]

68. Ahhh...

... it's a "stress" contest. A Police Officer's stress is greater than any other worker's stress?

That right there is pret-ty pompous, Angus86.

[Angus86]

70. I'm not a cop.

How can anything I said be called pompous?

Shooting someone in the line of duty, or in self defense, is a stressful situation that puts strain on a person's body (adrenaline dump, tunnel vision, etc). If your job as a health care professional caused you the same level of stress as someone who's in fear for their life, perhaps it's a good thing you're no longer in that line of work.

I don't mean to insult you, but it appears now that you're just looking to troll. I apologize if this is not the case. My point was made about three posts ago, so with your leave I will bid you adieu.

[ReRe]

73. FYI, I'm not a troll

Sorry i came off like that. We do seem to have an inability to communicate, bad chemistry or something. And it's probably more me than you. Peace.

[NaturalHigh]

15. Glad it worked out for him...

but trying to shoot for the leg against an armed assailant is incredibly stupid. That's a good way to get stabbed and then shot with your own gun.

Real life isn't like television where everyone can hit a moving target with pinpoint accuracy.

[LiberalArkie]

18. In the movies, the police are trained. Real life, not so much.

[NaturalHigh]

20. Well, they're not trained to shoot for the leg. That much is true.

In fact, I don't know anyone who is.

[LiberalArkie]

38. Wen I was growing up, the police used the gun as a last resort

and only when threatened with another gun or a civilian was in danger.

That is why in the 50's - 80's you read about all the complaints about over using the baton and blackjack. Crowd dispersal was the fire hose, batons, dogs and horses.

But then that was back in the day or "Serve & Protect".

[Tommymac]

35. +1

[sarisataka]

60. In the movies

The bullet hits where the director wants it to hit. Misses just vanish.

Real life is not scripted.

[HereSince1628]

26. Assumes only 2 alternatives. Both require guns?

That seems to start consideration by surrendering all other possibilities.

[Lee-Lee]

40. These silly memes are all stupid

Put out by a bunch of people with no clue.

[Matrosov]

42. Not surprising, considering the race

The "crazy" African-American is killed, the white man gets to live.

Then again, I doubt German cops are going around and executing African-Germans either.

[badtoworse]

43. Maybe getting stabbed is in a German cop's job description.

That's not the case in the US. Absent a sniper with a bead drawn on the guy with the sword, the German cop is an idiot.

[DetlefK]

52. Shootings involving police are actually so rare in Germany...

that each incident makes a headline. The german police fired 85 bullets on-duty in 2011 (just counting the cases when they were dealing with humans, not animals). That's at maximum about 1.5 shootings per week. Added up for the whole country!
("Police shot a murder-suspect in New York and a drug-trafficker in Texas. This was a violent week.&quot

Why?

Cops in Germany are less trigger-happy.

Why?

They have no reason to fear for their lives on routine-duty. That speeding driver or that trespasser won't draw a gun and shoot them, because owning a firearm is really, really rare in Germany. German police complains about an eroding respect towards them, instances of hostility, shoving, punching, kicking, threats and insults increasing each year, but actually firing a gun at a perpetrator is rare as fuck for german cops.

[Reter]

47. Or they could just drop the sword and surrender

That would be the smart thing to do.

[cbdo2007]

50. LOL - what a difference a day makes (RE: shooting someone in the leg)...

I basically posted this same thing yesterday, asking "why don't cops just shoot people in the leg anymore" and only got 1 rec and 50 comments basically telling me I'm an idiot.

You post the same thing today and get 26 recs and everyone agrees with you.

Oh, DU, my fickle friend. hahaha

[Eleanors38]

58. You have to serve up just the right buffet dish.

[librechik]

53. i dunno--I think the cops are so deeply disillusioned by the corrupt world

of crime and punishment we all live with here in the states that they have a "what the fuck I'm doing everybody a favor by just eliminating this poor fuck" attitude. Elsewhere (not everywhere) there is a sense of actual justice available to cops and people alike.

we are so screwed.

[Rex]

54. I predict gun nuts will hate your post.

[BainsBane]

55. knives don't slice, people do

?w=640&h=392&crop=1

[Rex]

56. And guns don't kill people, the bullets in the gun however...

[Eleanors38]

57. Read what Gandhi said about just this. nt

[rjj621]

61. Aim for center mass

This is the standard procedure from my understanding, aiming for a much smaller target like the arm or leg, especially when said target is running toward you with a weapon is risky.

Also that picture doesn't seem like a good comparison to me. The police in NYC are obviously in a populated area with innocent bystanders, the other picture appears (could be more public than it looks) that it is well outside of a city and few if any bystanders at risk should the shot to the leg miss.

[NCTraveler]

64. If you don't get why a cop on a busy street in NYC....

If you don't get why a cop on a busy street in NYC wouldn't aim for the leg, no amount of explanation will get you there.

[GOLGO 13]

66. "shooting in the leg to stop them" is a fantasy meme perpetuated by hollywood.

Gun doesn't leave the holster unless you are in immediate fear of your life or the life of others. That fact is drilled into cadets the moment they phase into weapons training. There is no "shoot to wound training" in any police academy.

By the way, how many innocent people would you say are behind the knife weilding man in NYC?

[nomorenomore08]

71. Which isn't to say the second option is possible in all cases.

Just that the first isn't the only imaginable one.