Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I would have shot the knife twice. Once out of his hand and a second time to clear the knife approximately 28 ft from the assailant. I would then finish him off with my MMA spectator experience. As insurance I’ve also studied Bruce Lee. (Enter the Dragon, Fists of Fury)
Shooting at his legs he could simply hop over the rounds until the shooter is out of bullets. Common knowledge.
Last edited by Leona Valley; 01-11-2020 at 01:37 PM..
Always practice the Tueller drill and the Mozambique drill and Remember the 21-Foot Rule,
" which concluded if a bad guy armed with a knife or a club was within 21 feet of you, the reasonable conclusion would be you were within his danger zone. In other words, the bad guy could cover 21 feet in about 1.5 seconds—before you could draw your handgun and neutralize the threat.
It still does show the need for increased knife control. The Brits are way ahead of us on this. Why should a guy like this be able to walk into a hardware store or a Walmart, plunk down cash, and walk out with a deadly knife, without even having to show ID?
there are a lot of problems with shooting suspects in the legs
1) it's hard to shoot a moving and small target like a leg
2) let's say you successful shoot the legs, it doesn't mean the suspect will stop hurting or killing you, especially if he is on some kind of drugs
3) then there's legal issue like if you shooting for the legs, then the suspect is not an imminent threat to you. if the suspect is not an imminent threat, then why are you using a deadly weapon (a firearm) to deal with a non-imminent threat?
there are a lot of problems with shooting suspects in the legs
1) it's hard to shoot a moving and small target like a leg
2) let's say you successful shoot the legs, it doesn't mean the suspect will stop hurting or killing you, especially if he is on some kind of drugs
3) then there's legal issue like if you shooting for the legs, then the suspect is not an imminent threat to you. if the suspect is not an imminent threat, then why are you using a deadly weapon (a firearm) to deal with a non-imminent threat?
It's also extremely dangerous for the officer to be focused on a suspect while walking backwards (particularly for the prolonged distance and the length of time that this interaction lasted).
It still does show the need for increased knife control. The Brits are way ahead of us on this. Why should a guy like this be able to walk into a hardware store or a Walmart, plunk down cash, and walk out with a deadly knife, without even having to show ID?
I have to wonder whether a "smart gun" as advocated by VP Joe Biden, could not make it possible for a leg shot could be used in situations like this? The video seems to show that the officer's gun had virtually no electronics to allow for this.
I also think the video shows clearly the need for increased knife control, as the Brits have done. Right now we have virtually no controls in this area. No background checks, no nothing. There is even the increased availability of switchblade knives.
Excuse me? You would need smart bullets that would automatically go for the legs. Cops are trained to shoot center mass of the body. No electronics in any gun would have mattered.
I advocate for cops to carry .45 ACP with Black Talon rounds. One or two rounds and that idiot would have been dead before he hit the ground. A 9mm round is too wimpy.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.