Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Law enforcement studies Orlando response.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Bwaha View Post
    Huh I didn't know much about body armor and the shelf life was something I never heard about.

    And the V-50 thing doesn't fill me with confidence either.

    http://www.policemag.com/channel/pat...ody-armor.aspx
    Yah, Kevlar only lasts about 5 years. After that the fibers start to break down. Its tough enough keeping every officer in regular body armor at $850 a pop.

    5.56mm is definitely a V-50 round.
    Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

    Comment


    • #47
      Rather than looking at sending ordinary patrol officers in wouldn't it be better to look at the time taken for the tactical team to deploy and speed that up? Maybe have fewer but better trained and equipped tactical teams supporting multiple agencies. Use of helicopters to deploy faster iif necessary.
      "To be free is better than to be unfree - always."

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Surrey View Post
        Rather than looking at sending ordinary patrol officers in wouldn't it be better to look at the time taken for the tactical team to deploy and speed that up? Maybe have fewer but better trained and equipped tactical teams supporting multiple agencies. Use of helicopters to deploy faster iif necessary.
        There really isn't an option. OPD's team was extremely well-trained and equipped, as the events show.

        Multiple jurisdictions have tried inter-agency teams, but they seldom do well. In the USA police agencies are autonomous, so getting an agreement and funding across multiple agencies is very difficult. And it only works if the agencies are literally adjacent to each other in terms of city boundaries.

        Helicopters are pretty uncommon in police use, and in any case the tac team is scattered to their homes at 0200. My agency requires that officers live within 30 minutes of the City limits.

        This is not a new problem, and there aren't going to be any radical new solutions.
        Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

        Comment


        • #49
          I just heard it reported on the radio that some survivors of the attack are telling police investigators the shooter had help. Someone blocked the doors.
          So far officials are adamant there was only one shooter.
          But there are conflicting reports from eye witnesses. We all know eye witnesses are not always reliable.
          However, the investigation will take time. There may have been an more than one involved in the attack.
          Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
            Two reasons:

            1) The idea of children being hurt is a powerful emotional motivator. It will cause officers who would not normally be willing to take on an active shooter to join in.

            2) Access opportunities. Schools, hospitals, malls all have multiple entrances and breach-able points (big windows) that will allow your ad-hoc group to enter safely.

            The key to this sort of situation is access to the interior. The point of entry is the place of greatest risk; once safely inside the risk is high, but the odds swing towards the police's greater firepower and numbers.

            In a bar, the shooter can cover most if not all points of entry, and that means he will be one-on-one with the first officer through the door; he might have night vision, he might be behind cover, his eyes are adjusted to the current conditions...the advantage is completely in his favor. As a point in fact Orlando tactical blew holes in the wall to gain entry, and still had an officer shot.

            It is a matter of tactics. Smoke-eaters do not enter a building that is structurally unsound, and the police don't storm buildings where the shooter controls the points of entry.

            My agency doesn't have the capability to breach walls, so our tactic is to pump the structure full of CS gas and advance behind a shield. Last time we did it for real we had two officers wounded. Within a month the tactical team disbanded because our wives put their foot down and made us quit the team. It took years to get another team together.
            CS gas and a shield wall sounds a good plan. How did the shooter evade the gas and how were the officers injured behind the shield wall? We're they shot in the feet or lower leg?
            Ne Obliviscaris, Sans Peur

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Escape2Victory View Post
              CS gas and a shield wall sounds a good plan. How did the shooter evade the gas and how were the officers injured behind the shield wall? We're they shot in the feet or lower leg?
              He braced himself against the wall with his weapon pointed at the door on a chair; even blinded by the gas he fired when he heard us breach the door. The first two officers were hit in the lower leg, which tangled all of us in the narrow entry, unable to advance, unable to withdraw without the wounded. It was the 'fatal funnel' with a vengeance.
              Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
                He braced himself against the wall with his weapon pointed at the door on a chair; even blinded by the gas he fired when he heard us breach the door. The first two officers were hit in the lower leg, which tangled all of us in the narrow entry, unable to advance, unable to withdraw without the wounded. It was the 'fatal funnel' with a vengeance.
                As you say, entry point the danger zone.

                Any experience with 'flash bangs' that are designed to disorientate?
                Ne Obliviscaris, Sans Peur

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Escape2Victory View Post
                  As you say, entry point the danger zone.

                  Any experience with 'flash bangs' that are designed to disorientate?
                  Yeah, we use them, but not in conjunction with CS gas as there is a danger of ignition.

                  The problem with flash-bangs is that you have to have an idea of where the shooter is in order to bring them to bear. Or you can bang each room before you enter, but that has its risks, not the least of which is someone fumbles a 'bang, or throws it and has it bounce back. Once the pin is pulled, Mr. Flash-bang has no friends.

                  There is no good way to enter through a known entry point. The best is to come in a distance from the bad (like in a school or large building) so that when you do meet, the team is spread out and can bring their firepower to bear.

                  Or knowing exactly where the shooter is. If you know that, you can really work some distraction angles.

                  Going in blind...that always is bad. You really want to explore every single other option before you decide to go in blind.
                  Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Sounds like we ought to invest in combat bots. It'd be cheaper and safer for all concerned...
                    Credo quia absurdum.


                    Quantum mechanics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd! - Richard Feynman

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Bwaha View Post
                      Sounds like we ought to invest in combat bots. It'd be cheaper and safer for all concerned...
                      They are looking at modifying a bomb defusing remote control drone to do something along that line.

                      The trouble is that if the shooter has hostages, the instant you hit the door you are running against the clock.

                      An agency in the Southwest got a couple team members into the attic in a barricaded subject with hostages and located the room by the shooter talking to the negotiator. They made a hole in the ceiling with an ice pick and used a under-door cam* to spot the shooter, then dropped him shooting blind through the ceiling using the camera as a guide.




                      * = http://www.army-technology.com/contr...lmann-cp3.html
                      Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Bwaha View Post
                        Sounds like we ought to invest in combat bots. It'd be cheaper and safer for all concerned...
                        There is quite a bit of experience using Bots for explosives. A moving, intelligent target presents a sterner challenge but I agree it seems like way to go, once the tech is mature enough. Not sure we are there yet.
                        Ne Obliviscaris, Sans Peur

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Escape2Victory View Post
                          There is quite a bit of experience using Bots for explosives. A moving, intelligent target presents a sterner challenge but I agree it seems like way to go, once the tech is mature enough. Not sure we are there yet.
                          Here's a example of one. Also if the perp is running and dodging he's not doing much shooting...

                          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foster-Miller_TALON
                          Credo quia absurdum.


                          Quantum mechanics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd! - Richard Feynman

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Bwaha View Post
                            Here's a example of one. Also if the perp is running and dodging he's not doing much shooting...

                            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foster-Miller_TALON
                            I really think that is the wave of the future for tactical police work. The initial response and prep time would remain the same, but you would remove officer safety from consideration, which means you could just blitz in.

                            And an operator safe inside an armored vehicle a block away would be capable of much more accurate shooting under pressure than a officer wondering if his or her body armor was proof against the incoming rounds.
                            Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Plus with all the kids playing shooter video games the training is already done...
                              Credo quia absurdum.


                              Quantum mechanics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd! - Richard Feynman

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Bwaha View Post
                                Plus with all the kids playing shooter video games the training is already done...
                                Not a joke. They drew upon Xbox when designing the Stinger vehicle launcher system.

                                Training would be a lot cheaper, too. Major agencies could create an operator career path so that you could draw upon years of experience, instead of investing thousands of dollars in a team member only to have him promote out or get sick of maintaining the standards.
                                Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X