Why are police only trained to shoot to kill?

[Richesly]

I don't really understand this logic, but I never was interested in becoming a cop. Cops are only trained that when they shoot, it must be to kill. I guess it's to avoid the excuse of "I was trying to shoot him to slow him down during the chase, but I missed and hit a vital organ."

I asked my uncle, who is a deputy, but he doesn't know. However, he did go through about 120+ hours of gun training. Is that not enough? He's very good with it, but has never had to use it.

[UK2K]

I don't really understand this logic, but I never was interested in becoming a cop. Cops are only trained that when they shoot, it must be to kill. I guess it's to avoid the excuse of "I was trying to shoot him to slow him down during the chase, but I missed and hit a vital organ."

I asked my uncle, who is a deputy, but he doesn't know. However, he did go through about 120+ hours of gun training. Is that not enough? He's very good with it, but has never had to use it.

100% a lie. Carry on.

Then he's obviously a shitty cop.

[9erempiree]

They are not trained only to shoot and kill. There are many aspects of the job that they have to train for. I must say that shooting and the ability to use a gun is important because they have to stop the bad guys.

[KevinNYC]

I don't really understand this logic, but I never was interested in becoming a cop. Cops are only trained that when they shoot, it must be to kill. I guess it's to avoid the excuse of "I was trying to shoot him to slow him down during the chase, but I missed and hit a vital organ."

I asked my uncle, who is a deputy, but he doesn't know. However, he did go through about 120+ hours of gun training. Is that not enough? He's very good with it, but has never had to use it.

interesting article on this
http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index...police_ar.html

[GIF REACTION]

Because they aren't.

[UK2K]

interesting article on this
http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index...police_ar.html

The article starts off super biased, but does say this:

Asked whether police officer training historically teaches a "shoot to kill" philosophy, veteran officers overwhelmingly answered "yes," but said death isn't necessarily the end goal.

"Killing isn't the objective," said Geoffrey Alpert, professor at University of South Carolina who researches high-risk police activity. "The objective is to remove the threat."

You don't shoot to kill. You shoot to eliminate the threat.

You don't shoot at legs or arms or hands because you're likely to miss. You aim center mass (the chest) cause its the biggest target on a body.

[GIF REACTION]

You'd think police have guns for firstly... PREVENTION

If they have to shoot, it most likely is for a good reason. It is sometimes hard to tell though if everyone and their moms are packing heat.

[9erempiree]

I don't think anyone has ever shot a gun when they ask, "How come the officer doesn't shoot at the legs or arms?"

My favorite ones is...."The officer should have just shot the gun out of his hand. I saw Robocop do it."

[UK2K]

I don't think anyone has ever shot a gun when they ask, "How come the officer doesn't shoot at the legs or arms?"

My favorite ones is...."The officer should have just shot the gun out of his hand. I saw Robocop do it."

Even as good a shot as I am, outside of 50 feet or so, its really not as easy as it looks.

Holding the reins of two horses with one hand, Austin Police Sgt. Adam Johnson raised his service pistol and fired a bullseye into the target some 312 feet away.

Down went Larry McQuilliams, and so ended his rampage through the streets of the Texas capital, where he’d fired more than 100 rounds from his AK-47 and .22-caliber rifles at buildings. The shot, from Johnson’s Smith & Wesson M&P .40 pistol, hit McQuilliams square in the chest and made the 15-year-veteran the toast of gun enthusiasts around the country.

Sometimes its better to be lucky than good.

[Richesly]

100% a lie. Carry on.

Then he's obviously a shitty cop.

He's a deputy in a small town, not a damn city police department.

But he can shoot any pistol thats a .17 real nicely, and he said that Cops are trained to shoot to kill, so I guess he meant that cops can't use the excuse of using the gun unless their life is threatened or anyone elses.

You can't shoot an unarmed man on a chase down. I asked him about this situation that just happened, and he thinks the cop had no reason to pull his gun out unless the man in the vehicle had the gun in the car and if he was a felony, but thinks he may have shot the gun as reflex of the car about to pull off. He thinks that the cop ended up shooting by mistake, but doesn't blame him but the people who trained him because there was no reason to pull his gun out just because he was about to drive away.

[UK2K]

He's a deputy in a small town, not a damn city police department.

But he can shoot any pistol thats a .17 real nicely, and he said that Cops are trained to shoot to kill, so I guess he meant that cops can't use the excuse of using the gun unless their life is threatened or anyone elses.

Either he's lying, or he's poorly trained.

You can't shoot an unarmed man on a chase down.

Depending on the instance, yes you can.

I asked him about this situation that just happened, and he thinks the cop had no reason to pull his gun out unless the man in the vehicle had the gun in the car and if he was a felony, but thinks he may have shot the gun as reflex of the car about to pull off. He thinks that the cop ended up shooting by mistake, but doesn't blame him but the people who trained him because there was no reason to pull his gun out just because he was about to drive away.

There was a reason to pull his gun as the car pulled away. His vehicle is now a deadly weapon.

The only reasoning you need to fire at a suspect is if you are in fear of death or serious bodily harm, or to prevent a high likelihood or death or serious bodily harm (the definition of deadly force, ask your uncle if he knows that. He should).

It was not necessary to shoot him. My guess is, your uncle is right, he pulled his gun and had his finger on the trigger (like a poorly trained gun handler would) and fired out of reaction to the car speeding off (which is why we don't have our finger on the trigger). He probably didn't mean to do it, but then again, he wasn't trained very well either (his own department said so).



^^See that?^^ I'm guessing that's what the officer didn't do. Its a habit now for me. Anytime I am holding a gun without intending to fire, my trigger finger is always resting on the trigger guard.

They both ****ed up. One is dead. One is going to prison.

Shit happens.