Contributor Post Created with Sketch. Was Michael Brown’s Death Unavoidable?

 

In my most recent contribution over at PJ Media, I examine the Michael Brown-Darren Wilson encounter with a focus on Wilson’s tactics. I’m in complete agreement with the grand jury’s decision not to indict him, but this is not to say there might have been a different outcome had Wilson not made some key decisions in the moments leading up to the shooting. A sample:

But even as Michael Brown’s death recedes from the front pages, there are still aspects of the case that require examination, not least of which are the tactics employed by Darren Wilson in the moments leading up to the shooting. Though I’m in agreement with the grand jury’s decision in declining to charge Wilson in Brown’s death, it doesn’t mean I agree the shooting was unavoidable. If we imagine a counterfactual scenario and back up, step by step, from the moment the first shot was fired, we can come up with a way in which Michael Brown might have been arrested without the use of deadly force. This is not intended as a criticism of Darren Wilson, but rather as a reminder to police officers who may someday find themselves in a similar situation.

Some of the commenters at PJM lit into me, as is often the case, as did some of my friends on Facebook, almost all of whom are LAPD officers. I have no patience for the people still trying to discredit the grand jury’s decision and howling for Wilson’s scalp; the intent of the piece was not to give them ammunition, even though it may have that effect. Still — as in any shooting or other tactical operation — a thorough debriefing is called for so we can learn from our mistakes. My point is, cops must expect the Michael Browns of the world will do things they shouldn’t; the question is how to react when they do.

And now I turn to you, my fellow Ricochetti. Please read the piece, then come right back and post your comments here.

There are 42 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Larry3435 Member

    Jack, your suggestions were to avoid staffing patrol units with one officer (always have a partner) and/or wait for back-up before stopping a suspect (and then track him down if he runs). I don’t know enough about police procedure to form and opinion as to whether these tactics are advisable or not. But I am curious why, if these are obvious and sensible tactics, they are not automatically followed by police all over the country. It sounds like both of your suggestions would require a lot more officers to patrol a given area. Is that what deters police departments from implementing your suggestions?

    • #1
    • December 1, 2014, at 6:10 AM PST
    • Like
  2. Dr. Strangelove Thatcher
    Dr. StrangeloveJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Jack — I think your PJ Media post was thoughtful. All of your points seem to me to be obviously correct.

    What I have wondered was why Darren Wilson didn’t taze Mike Brown when Brown charged him? Was it because Mike Brown was so close and such an immediate danger that there was insufficient time?

    • #2
    • December 1, 2014, at 6:11 AM PST
    • Like
  3. Snirtler Inactive

    John Hendrix:

    What I have wondered was why Darren Wilson didn’t taze Mike Brown when Brown charged him? Was it because Mike Brown was so close and such an immediate danger that there was insufficient time?

    Wilson didn’t have one during the incident. From his witness interview:

    I was just trying to keep him off me and get him back. Um, I tried to go for my mace, I couldn’t reach around my body to grab it and I know how mace affects me so if I used that in that close proximity I was gonna be disabled per se. And, I didn’t know if it was even gonna work on him if I would be able to get a clear shot or anything else. Um, then like I was thinking like picturing my belt going around it, I don’t carry a taser so that option was gone and even if I had one with a cartridge on there, it probably wouldn’t have hit him anywhere …

    (pardon the highlighting; not sure how I did that)

    • #3
    • December 1, 2014, at 6:39 AM PST
    • Like
  4. FightinInPhilly Thatcher

    Jack- it seems pretty thoughtful to me. I expect you got flack from both sides, which is unfortunately inevitable once everyone is this riled up. If I was to nitpick, I suppose the left (if they brought it up) might have a point if they focused on your line about “And is there anyone who believes he has no juvenile record?” While I happen to agree, it can’t be known, and therefor seems needlessly provocative.

    The overall point of your piece is of course excellent, and I think we are duty bound as citizens (as are the police) to constantly revaluate best practices to prevent officers from finding themselves in un winnable situations.

    My observation is that a lot can be learned by taking pride out of the equation. For example “even though this guy (suspect) is acting like an absolute f&%$ as&%##…. what’s the best way to defuse the situation?” The term I’ve heard was “contempt of cop” and that many officers found themselves in ugly situations because they reacted emotionally. I believe this is used when making the case case against high speed chases (in all but the most extreme cases) because the endorphins are running so high at the conclusion of the chase you’re not thinking clearly.

    • #4
    • December 1, 2014, at 6:47 AM PST
    • Like
  5. Jack Dunphy Contributor
    Jack Dunphy

    Larry3435:Jack, your suggestions were to avoid staffing patrol units with one officer (always have a partner) and/or wait for back-up before stopping a suspect (and then track him down if he runs). I don’t know enough about police procedure to form and opinion as to whether these tactics are advisable or not. But I am curious why, if these are obvious and sensible tactics, they are not automatically followed by police all over the country. It sounds like both of your suggestions would require a lot more officers to patrol a given area. Is that what deters police departments from implementing your suggestions?

    Yes, it come down to money. Cars are cheaper than cops, and having more cars on the streets is thought to be more efficient. Whatever the benefit, it doesn’t come without costs.

    I’m off to work now. I’ll do my best to answer more questions when I get home. As always, the thoughts of the Ricochetti are appreciated.

    • #5
    • December 1, 2014, at 6:49 AM PST
    • Like
  6. Profile Photo Member

    Here’s another counterfactual. Suppose the Ferguson police department was thoroughly laden with un-reconstructed racists out to kill black youths, as the protestors, rabble-rousing demagogues, and their media enablers suggest. Do you think Brown or any other sentient person would have escalated a confrontation with a member of such an organization. Leaving aside “suicide by cop,” if Ferguson were a thuggish police state, no reasonable person would have entered into a violent encounter. He would have moved to the sidewalk. One suspects Brown had many brushes with the law as a juvenile, and repeatedly mouthed off and not complied with police officers in the past, with scant consequences. That should make the discovery phase of a potential civil trial illuminating, as Dunphy suggests.

    • #6
    • December 1, 2014, at 6:55 AM PST
    • Like
  7. Doug Watt Moderator

    Although every shooting incident has its’ own specific facts officers, that were not involved in that incident should study them from a dispassionate point of view. I understand the desire of officers to support Officer Wilson. Michael Brown made the decision to try and take Officer Wilson’s pistol. That decision and the decision to confront Officer Wilson a second time cost Michael Brown his life.
    The questions an officer should ask from this incident should be based upon the fact that in most incidents a suspect or subject has the advantage because they can initiate an action and the officer has the disadvantage of being in the position of having to react. Reacting takes precious seconds. Precious seconds that start with the eyes sending the message to your brain that you’re in trouble and in some cases the brain takes moments to process denial, like this can’t be happening to me.
    I was training a new officer one night. It was his first night on the road. As we were passing a tavern the door opened and a guy was tossed out on the sidewalk. He gets up and walks back into the tavern. My rookie said let’s go in and find out what happened. How many people are in that tavern? I asked him His reply was I don’t know. I told him that was why we aren’t going in. Did you hear a dispatcher ask anyone to take a call from that tavern? I told him that you don’t go into any place that serves alcohol from 0700 to 0230 without plenty of cover officers.
    I told new officers that when you make a decision to confront someone you need to slow time down to assess the entire situation before you make contact. Do you have the advantage? If you believe you will have to make an arrest make sure you have a cover officer(s) to assist you.
    Officer Wilson was facing two subjects in the initial stop, perhaps he believed cover was on the way. Whether an officer is experienced or inexperienced reward is measured against risk. Every officer should remove the emotion and ask the question what will keep me alive if I confront a total stranger the size of Michael Brown. Waiting for back-up would be my answer.

    • #7
    • December 1, 2014, at 7:41 AM PST
    • Like
  8. Dr. Strangelove Thatcher
    Dr. StrangeloveJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Snirtler: Wilson didn’t have one during the incident.

    Nice catch. Thank you. This is new information for me.

    • #8
    • December 1, 2014, at 7:46 AM PST
    • Like
  9. James Gawron Thatcher
    James GawronJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Jack,

    In a finite world, with humans with finite training, I think that looking for Wilson’s other options in this is rather a stretch. Of course, there will always be new tactics and procedures that might produce other results but I don’t find this discussion after the fact of the mountain of false accusation at all appropriate.

    What really comes to mind is the fact that Michael Brown was in some way programmed to react in a totally unpredictable violent way. Usually, this kind of behavior would be attached to some deep animus in him. After an endless amount of yammering about Officer Wilson (to the extent of possibly destroying his life) maybe we should be discussing what kind of home environment creates a Michael Brown. Where does the sense of entitlement come from that allowed Brown to first commit petty theft, assault a police officer actually grabbing for his gun, and finally charging directly at a police officer with his weapon drawn because he didn’t think the officer had the guts to shoot him?

    It is obvious to me at least that it is Michael Brown that needs to be analyzed. Of course, in our technology-procedural obsessed society we will be swamped with so called solutions to the “problem”. As the real problem won’t be on the table for discussion, better just relax.

    Regards,

    Jim

    • #9
    • December 1, 2014, at 8:08 AM PST
    • Like
  10. Emerson Member

    It’s been a while, but I recall reading an argument in Malcolm Gladwell’s Blink that not having a partner is better because it general helps encounters stay non-confrontational. The officer will feel less secure and therefore more conscientious, and the other party will feel less threatened. This was in the context of the Amadou Diallo shooting. What are your thoughts on that, Jack?

    -E

    • #10
    • December 1, 2014, at 10:00 AM PST
    • Like
  11. CuriousKevmo Member

    CandE:It’s been a while, but I recall reading an argument in Malcolm Gladwell’s Blink that not having a partner is better because it general helps encounters stay non-confrontational. The officer will feel less secure and therefore more conscientious, and the other party will feel less threatened. This was in the context of the Amadou Diallo shooting. What are your thoughts on that, Jack?

    -E

    I read Blink but I don’t remember that bit.

    I would have thought having a partner would be crucial. I was surprised the first time I saw an officer in my town on her own…just seems too risky to me and I’m not sure I want officers that feel “less threatened”, but then I know bubkus about police work.

    • #11
    • December 1, 2014, at 10:12 AM PST
    • Like
  12. Emerson Member

    CuriousKevmo:

    CandE:It’s been a while, but I recall reading an argument in Malcolm Gladwell’s Blink that not having a partner is better because it general helps encounters stay non-confrontational. The officer will feel less secure and therefore more conscientious, and the other party will feel less threatened. This was in the context of the Amadou Diallo shooting. What are your thoughts on that, Jack?

    -E

    I read Blink but I don’t remember that bit.

    I would have thought having a partner would be crucial. I was surprised the first time I saw an officer in my town on her own…just seems too risky to me and I’m not sure I want officers that feel “less threatened”, but then I know bubkus about police work.

    I’ll double check when I get home. The Diallo shooting as described on wikipedia indicates that 4 plainclothes policeman approached Diallo, which probably scared him enough to run away. I didn’t see anything in there about how strength in numbers may have affected the officer’s behavior.

    -E

    • #12
    • December 1, 2014, at 10:31 AM PST
    • Like
  13. gts109 Member

    I agree that there’s no case against Wilson here, but it does seem there are a number of things Wilson could have done to avoid killing Brown.

    (1) Why not wait for backup, especially after Brown attacks Wilson in the car? This is especially the case if Wilson does not believe he can physically overcome Brown.

    (2) Why not use other non-lethal measures on the sidewalk? Wilson had mace. He didn’t use it. What about a night stick, or some other blunt force weapon?

    • #13
    • December 1, 2014, at 11:50 AM PST
    • Like
  14. Stad Thatcher

    Short answer – yes. The “Gentle Giant” was in reality a monster, and he set in motion a chain of events that led to not only his own death, but the end of a promising police officer’s career, and the destruction of his neighborhood.

    • #14
    • December 1, 2014, at 12:18 PM PST
    • Like
  15. Spin Inactive
    SpinJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Here’s what I think of your article:

    First, you spend way too much time on the “Some of my best friends are police officers” point. You know what I mean: the bit about how you are in agreement with the grand jury and you don’t blame Wilson for shooting him. You could have done that in one sentence. It seems that only three paragraphs cover the subject of the article.

    The paragraph about working alone is confusing to me. Is it safer to work alone or not? I’m not sure why that’s germane.

    You then provide two reasons why if he’d had a partner it might not have ended in a shooting. Those reasons are: Wilson might have known Brown was a robbery suspect, and Brown might not have attacked Wilson had there been a second officer. I’ll accept the second argument, but the first not so much. This is largely because I had read that the whole reason Wilson backed his car up after telling Brown and his friend to get off the street was that Brown resembled a description of a robbery suspect. If that’s true, it would refute that argument.

    Your comments about simply following Brown and waiting for backup are accurate, I would think. If I were a cop on my own and experienced that level of back lash, I’d drive on, and circle back, until backup arrived.

    I was hoping you’d give more details about how Wilson might have dealt with it after Brown attacked him, then began to run. Did he need to get out of his car? Could he have followed from the car? And when he did follow him, are there other options for dealing with a guy like that besides blasting the holy heck out of him? I don’t know the answers there beyond speculation.

    From what I’d read about this situation, I envisioned Wilson as an experienced police officer. Then I saw the televised interview and discovered that he is practically a kid himself. So maybe there should have been not just a partner, but a senior partner.

    I also wonder if our police officers are trained enough in personal combat. I know some folks that would take a guy like Michael Brown (no disrespect intended) out in about 2 seconds flat with no weapon whatsoever. Why can’t our police officers be trained to do the same?

    So, there’s my thoughts on the article, for what they are worth (about two bits).

    • #15
    • December 1, 2014, at 12:37 PM PST
    • Like
  16. Salamandyr Inactive

    Are police even allowed to carry nightstick/tonfas anymore?

    • #16
    • December 1, 2014, at 1:24 PM PST
    • Like
  17. Stad Thatcher

    Spin: I also wonder if our police officers are trained enough in personal combat. I know some folks that would take a guy like Michael Brown (no disrespect intended) out in about 2 seconds flat with no weapon whatsoever. Why can’t our police officers be trained to do the same?

    Michael Brown was 6’4″, 292 pounds (the reports vary). It is highly unlikely anyone could take him down without deadly force. Martial arts are overrated, thanks to decades of kung-fu movies and the like . . .

    • #17
    • December 1, 2014, at 1:45 PM PST
    • Like
  18. Spin Inactive
    SpinJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Stad:

    Spin: I also wonder if our police officers are trained enough in personal combat. I know some folks that would take a guy like Michael Brown (no disrespect intended) out in about 2 seconds flat with no weapon whatsoever. Why can’t our police officers be trained to do the same?

    Michael Brown was 6’4″, 292 pounds (the reports vary). It is highly unlikely anyone could take him down without deadly force. Martial arts are overrated, thanks to decades of kung-fu movies and the like . . .

    Well, if you say so.

    • #18
    • December 1, 2014, at 2:27 PM PST
    • Like
  19. Mantis9 Inactive

    An local police officer gave a presentation to our group (I have a side job as a school bus driver) regarding an incident where he shot and killed a man at close range on a high schools campus. He took us through it step by step, complete with video and audio.

    Personally, the review was a harrowing experience. The decisions he made leading up to firing his gun, as well as his perceptions of the events, (he recalled only firing three time. In actuality, he fired five) were split-second and irreversible. By all accounts, including my unprofessional one, he performed as well as could be expected given the circumstances and saved a lot of lives.

    He took a life, however justified, and expressed sympathy for the man he killed, hoping to avoid the same outcome should a similar situation arise. This, he said, came down to further training because those decisions couldn’t be addressed during these kinds of incidents. He is an experienced officer with a military background.

    Though I don’t know Officer Wilson, if I were a betting man I’d wager he could replay the events leading up to Michael Brown’s death, regardless of the young man’s behavior and the media firestorm, he would.

    Mr. Dunphy, I think the ideas expressed in your article are something Officer Wilson likely thinks about a lot, too.

    • #19
    • December 1, 2014, at 2:40 PM PST
    • Like
  20. gts109 Member

    Mace and a good beating can take down anyone. Again, not trying to say Wilson deserved jail or even an indictment, but there were ways to avoid the shooting.

    • #20
    • December 1, 2014, at 2:41 PM PST
    • Like
  21. Johnny Dubya Member

    “But rather than wait for that backup to arrive, he reversed his car and pulled within a few feet of Brown and Johnson, thus giving Brown the opportunity to attack him.”

    This, for me, is the most important aspect of the incident. I believe the reversing and turning of the car was an imprudent act fueled by anger on the officer’s part. Brown certainly shouldn’t have reached into the car and attacked Wilson, but Wilson could have avoided that situation by not acting rashly.

    For this reason, I would assign to Wilson a small (non-criminal) proportion of the blame for the incident, and I am not sorry that he has resigned from the police department.

    That said, I believe almost anyone is capable of such imprudent actions. I, myself, have done some ill-advised and even dangerous things fueled by “road rage”.

    • #21
    • December 1, 2014, at 2:48 PM PST
    • Like
  22. Locke On Member

    gts109: (2) Why not use other non-lethal measures on the sidewalk? Wilson had mace. He didn’t use it. What about a night stick, or some other blunt force weapon?

    According to Wilson’s grand jury testimony, he did have a telescoping baton, but was unable to use it in the confines of his SUV. IMO, he’d have been nuts to rely on that during the street encounter with Brown, as it would allow an advancing suspect who had already assaulted him to get into contact range.

    The issue about choosing to leave the SUV to pursue Brown seems on point. By the timing on the police radio tapes, the whole incident went down in a matter of two minutes or so, and backup arrived almost immediately thereafter. Waiting those two minutes would have likely resulted in a very different outcome. (Not that I am suggesting that Wilson was culpably at fault. He seems to have acted well within the reasonable discretion of someone in the circumstances.)

    • #22
    • December 1, 2014, at 2:54 PM PST
    • Like
  23. cirby Member

    gts109:Mace and a good beating can take down anyone. Again, not trying to say Wilson deserved jail or even an indictment, but there were ways to avoid the shooting.

    Ummm…. no.

    Mace – or pepper spray, by personal preference – might take someone down, but not always, and has a more than decent chance to take down the victim, too. With a second (potential) bad guy standing nearby, you can’t wait for the time it takes for incapacitants to work.

    “A good beating” is even less reliable, especially when one guy is that much bigger than the other, and that close in. I’m a big guy (6’1″, 240 pounds), and even with a weapon in hand, there’s a much better than even chance that a larger aggressor at close range could take me down before I could even start to do something with that weapon.

    A long time ago, I knew a (very big) guy who was shot – nine times, in the torso – with a 9mm. He beat the other guy unconscious, waited for the ambulance to show, watched them load the other guy into that ambulance, and drove himself to the emergency room.

    • #23
    • December 1, 2014, at 3:02 PM PST
    • Like
  24. Commodore BTC Inactive

    Doug, what are your thoughts on body cameras?

    • #24
    • December 1, 2014, at 3:54 PM PST
    • Like
  25. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western ChauvinistJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    I’m in agreement with the others opposed to second-guessing Wilson. All the counter-factual questions are on Brown’s side of the ledger.

    If he hadn’t gotten high… if he hadn’t minutes previously strong-arm robbed a convenience store… if he wasn’t socialized with hostility to authority… if he was willing to follow instructions even so… if he found assaulting a police officer unthinkable… if he had only been a smaller man who didn’t think himself invincible, or an armed officer impotent…

    It’s tragic that he’s dead. But, the protesters and President Obama have it exactly backward. The question isn’t “What to do about policing” [given that when a police officer’s life is threatened, he has the right to defend himself just like anyone else]. The question is, “What turns young black men into Michael Browns?” But I think the racial grievance industry would find self-reflection on the matter too painful –and costly.

    So, we’re stuck with body cameras. I have the sense of it that officer Wilson wishes he’d been wearing one.

    Personally, I’d like every last petty bureaucrat and public “servant” to have to wear a body camera. Many of them are doing violence to this country and I’d like to have a recording of it. Also, accountability is good for everyone on both sides. It improves performance, if not morale.

    • #25
    • December 1, 2014, at 4:02 PM PST
    • Like
  26. Doug Watt Moderator

    Butters:Doug, what are your thoughts on body cameras?

    They are going to have a limited field of vision. Most police shootings take place very close to the officer and the suspect. There is a chance the camera will not capture the gun being pulled from a waistband. For example multiple cameras are used for instant replay officials in a football or baseball games. Defense attorneys are also having doubts about body cameras. They clean their clients up for a trial. The last thing they will want to see is a jury watching a replay of their client looking like a refugee from the set of the Road Warrior, and hearing their client chanting the “F” you litany.

    • #26
    • December 1, 2014, at 4:13 PM PST
    • Like
  27. Spin Inactive
    SpinJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    cirby: “A good beating” is even less reliable, especially when one guy is that much bigger than the other, and that close in.

    I don’t know about a good beating, but the guys I trained with knew a trick or two about disabling an opponent. I’m not talking about the stuff you see in movies or that you would do in a tournament. I’m talking about specific techniques for disabling an opponent of any size. Having fought some of these 5th and 6th degree blackbelts of multiple disciplines, I can tell you they are fast, and they are accurate and they are strong. I realize it takes years of training, but let’s fact it, the fat cop eating a doughnut isn’t a stereotype for no reason.

    • #27
    • December 1, 2014, at 4:28 PM PST
    • Like
  28. Profile Photo Member

    I’ve been rather critical of cops in my comments at this site, but I cannot fault Darren Wilson for what eventually happened.

    His decision to confront Brown was exactly what I’d like him to have done. It seems irrational to me to suggest that an officer of the law must stay in their vehicle, awaiting backup, because they’ve told a couple teenagers to get out of the road, and the teenagers did not.

    One reason I’ve been critical of police is because I hear locally that teenagers walking in the street- or breaking into peoples’ houses- are allowed to go about their lawbreaking business without interference by police.

    I bet one reason why that happens is because local cops have long since learned that they’ll be left twisting in the wind- just like Darren Wilson now– if they do interfere, because too often the criminals belong to the wrong ethnic group. So they don’t interfere. They’re rational, and they want to keep their jobs, even if only long enough to get experience enough to get employment somewhere sane. One consequence is that locals such as myself get fed up with cops who do nothing more than write tickets- but I suspect that many cops are just as unhappy with that as I am. That’s politics, not policing.

    In any case, yes, I think Michael Brown’s death was unavoidable. Reportedly he taunted officer Wilson, “What are you going to do, shoot me?,” as he attempted to take his gun.

    If you’re so deluded that you decide to attempt to take a cop’s gun merely because he tells you to get out of the road- yeah, sooner or later you’re going to commit a crime serious enough to come to a bad ending via the criminal justice system. Unfortunately, in this example, circumstances aligned with the left’s desire for racial grievance mongering.

    • #28
    • December 1, 2014, at 6:06 PM PST
    • Like
  29. cirby Member

    Spin:

    cirby: “A good beating” is even less reliable, especially when one guy is that much bigger than the other, and that close in.

    I don’t know about a good beating, but the guys I trained with knew a trick or two about disabling an opponent. I’m not talking about the stuff you see in movies or that you would do in a tournament. I’m talking about specific techniques for disabling an opponent of any size. Having fought some of these 5th and 6th degree blackbelts of multiple disciplines, I can tell you they are fast, and they are accurate and they are strong. I realize it takes years of training, but let’s fact it, the fat cop eating a doughnut isn’t a stereotype for no reason.

    Yeah, that’s nice – but you need to realize that the OTHER guys can also learn those tricks – and quite a few of them already have. MMA-style fighting is pretty trendy among the more-violent parts of society, and there’s a helluva lot of folks out there who are really big, AND know a bunch of “tricks,” too.

    Then, of course, there’s the problem of numbers. Even Bruce Lee admitted that, in a real fight with three moderately-trained opponents, he’d lose. All it takes is one good punch from a guy in your blind spot, and you’re done.

    • #29
    • December 1, 2014, at 6:27 PM PST
    • Like
  30. Spin Inactive
    SpinJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    cirby: Yeah, that’s nice – but you need to realize that the OTHER guys can also learn those tricks – and quite a few of them already have. MMA-style fighting is pretty trendy among the more-violent parts of society, and there’s a helluva lot of folks out there who are really big, AND know a bunch of “tricks,” too. Then, of course, there’s the problem of numbers. Even Bruce Lee admitted that, in a real fight with three moderately-trained opponents, he’d lose. All it takes is one good punch from a guy in your blind spot, and you’re done.

    You are right of course. I take back any suggestion that police officers be provided with regular training in hand to hand combat techniques that would make them more physical fit, give them more confidence in dealing with close quarters situations, and help them not have to shoot and kill people. Instead, they will just shoot the people. That’ll be just fine.

    Actually, I take that back too. Since they shouldn’t learn any advance hand-to-hand techniques because a: the bad guys might know them and b: there might be more bad guys than good guys, we should also not train the officers in the use of weapons, since a: the bad guys might have weapons too, and b: they bad guys might outnumber the good guys. plus: Bruce Lee!

    • #30
    • December 1, 2014, at 8:20 PM PST
    • Like

Comments are closed because this post is more than six months old. Please write a new post if you would like to continue this conversation.