Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. Again with the Legs?

 

At Thursday’s town hall, Joe Biden brought up legs again. No, he wasn’t talking about his own hairy legs this time, instead he was giving his ideas on policing. His advice for police was, “So instead of anybody coming at you and the first thing you do is shoot to kill, you shoot them in the leg.”

BIDEN TOWN HALL | Policing in America

Biden on policing in America: "Most cops don't like bad cops…they get intimidated into not reporting," and adds "we shouldn't be defunding cops," saying police should be more resourced to police differently in today's world.abcn.ws/bidentownhall#BidenTownHall

Posted by ABC News on Thursday, October 15, 2020

This is not the first time made that suggestion. A few months ago there was an excellent post up on Ricochet about that very same topic (and by “excellent post” I simply mean one written by me). Shooting to wound is bad for many reasons. First, it may not stop the threat. Second. it is really hard to hit a moving arm or leg compared to the larger torso. Another interesting point is, if you go with a shoot-to-wound policy, does that lower the threshold for when an officer can pull out his or her weapon? After the Michael Brown shooting in 2014, Criminal Justice professor Candace McCoy said:

As a policy, [shoot to wound] is a really bad idea because it would give the police permission to take that gun out of the holster under any circumstance.

Biden is trying to create policies for better policing. That is a noble cause but who is he consulting? Are men and women who have worn the badge and had to make life and death decisions really telling him that they need to shoot extremities?

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

There are 33 comments.

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

    Vance Richards: That is a noble cause but who is he consulting?

    His own imagination? Hollywood screen writers? It surely isn’t anyone with firearms training and experience.

    • #1
    • October 16, 2020, at 5:54 AM PDT
    • 9 likes
  2. OldPhil Coolidge

    He’s changed from his “Buy a shotgun and shoot both barrels in the air from the balcony” policy.

    • #2
    • October 16, 2020, at 5:56 AM PDT
    • 13 likes
  3. Arahant Member

    OldPhil (View Comment):

    He’s changed from his “Buy a shotgun and shoot both barrels in the air from the balcony” policy.

    No, that’s for civilians. Shoot for the legs is for police.

    • #3
    • October 16, 2020, at 5:59 AM PDT
    • 10 likes
  4. Vance Richards Member
    Vance Richards Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    OldPhil (View Comment):

    He’s changed from his “Buy a shotgun and shoot both barrels in the air from the balcony” policy.

    The musical version is even better . . .

    • #4
    • October 16, 2020, at 6:09 AM PDT
    • 7 likes
  5. DonG (skeptic) Coolidge

    I’ll defend Joe a little bit. It is a common to have the “shoot to wound” thought. But anybody that looks into the subject will understand that a firearm is poor choice for a non-lethal weapon. As a politician, he should make an effort to be informed. He is thus either stupid or a liar. Probably both.

    • #5
    • October 16, 2020, at 6:30 AM PDT
    • 13 likes
  6. Vance Richards Member
    Vance Richards Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    DonG (skeptic) (View Comment):

    I’ll defend Joe a little bit. It is a common to have the “shoot to wound” thought. But anybody that looks into the subject will understand that a firearm is poor choice for a non-lethal weapon. As a politician, he should make an effort to be informed. He is thus either stupid or a liar. Probably both.

    Everyone would prefer nonlethal solutions whenever possible but aiming for a foot or hand? As Joe would say “C’mon man.” As to your question, I think “probably both” is the right answer but where are the advisors?

    • #6
    • October 16, 2020, at 6:41 AM PDT
    • 4 likes
  7. 9thDistrictNeighbor Member

    Vance Richards (View Comment):
    The musical version is even better . . .

    Now that is brilliant.

    One deep caveat, you can’t find a shotgun for sale. Because, you know, the thing.

    • #7
    • October 16, 2020, at 7:28 AM PDT
    • 4 likes
  8. Stina Member

    Arahant (View Comment):

    Vance Richards: That is a noble cause but who is he consulting?

    His own imagination? Hollywood screen writers? It surely isn’t anyone with firearms training and experience.

    Not anyone in Hollywood, either.

    • #8
    • October 16, 2020, at 7:33 AM PDT
    • 2 likes
  9. Stina Member

    Vance Richards: As a policy, [shoot to wound] is a really bad idea because it would give the police permission to take that gun out of the holster under any circumstance

    It does for everyone, not just police.

    Aiming to wound and accidentally killing is far worse than aiming to kill and accidentally wounding.

    Just imagine giving that advice to the average cop after the Breonna Taylor incident (where shots landed EVERYWHERE and on officer was flagged for recklessly endangering the neighbors).

    It’s like pulling out your gun to just scare them a little. You don’t do that, either. Accidents happen and accidents with guns are lethal, so the threshold for pointing a gun is with the intent to be lethal.

    • #9
    • October 16, 2020, at 7:39 AM PDT
    • 6 likes
  10. PHCheese Member

    I think cops should be equipped with cosmic ray guns.They can get them in Area 51.

    • #10
    • October 16, 2020, at 7:51 AM PDT
    • 9 likes
  11. Old Bathos Moderator

    I thought police were trained to shoot the gun out of the hand of the bad guy. Shouldn’t we mandate that? Besides, why would cops even need guns if, as Mr. Biden recommends, they were accompanied by a psychiatric social worker on every 911 call? 

    Further, the very term “resisting arrest” has to go. It should be “citizen suggestion of alternative police-encounter outcome.” 

    To qualify at the range, officers must be able to consistently hit only the outer midpoint of the vastus lateralis muscle to minimize the risk of hitting the femoral artery or one of its main branches. 

    I just don’t get why these policies/procedures are not already in place. I blame systemic racism, Bush, Trump, and Exxon.

    • #11
    • October 16, 2020, at 8:11 AM PDT
    • 13 likes
  12. Vance Richards Member
    Vance Richards Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Old Bathos (View Comment):
    I thought police were trained to shoot the gun out of the hand of the bad guy. Shouldn’t we mandate that? Besides, why would cops even need guns if, as Mr. Biden recommends, they were accompanied by a psychiatric social worker on every 911 call? 

    Now the main job of the officer will be to get the couch out of the trunk of the squad car so the perp can lie down while the psychiatrist asks the violent criminal if he got enough hugs as a child.

    • #12
    • October 16, 2020, at 8:17 AM PDT
    • 6 likes
  13. Arahant Member

    DonG (skeptic) (View Comment):
    It is a common to have the “shoot to wound” thought. But anybody that looks into the subject will understand that a firearm is poor choice for a non-lethal weapon.

    Boleadoras. Issue to and train on for all LEOs immediately.

    • #13
    • October 16, 2020, at 8:21 AM PDT
    • 1 like
  14. Vance Richards Member
    Vance Richards Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Arahant (View Comment):

    DonG (skeptic) (View Comment):
    It is a common to have the “shoot to wound” thought. But anybody that looks into the subject will understand that a firearm is poor choice for a non-lethal weapon.

    Boleadoras. Issue to and train on for all LEOs immediately.

    Although it sounds cooler when you call it a “spiderman gun”

    • #14
    • October 16, 2020, at 8:59 AM PDT
    • 2 likes
  15. Percival Thatcher
    Percival Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Old Bathos (View Comment):
    I thought police were trained to shoot the gun out of the hand of the bad guy. Shouldn’t we mandate that?

    That is what the Lone Ranger did. Joe is probably remembering that.

    • #15
    • October 16, 2020, at 9:16 AM PDT
    • 4 likes
  16. Chuck Thatcher

    Found this picture. Capture the real Joe, doesn’t it?

    • #16
    • October 16, 2020, at 9:24 AM PDT
    • 2 likes
  17. Sisyphus Coolidge
    Sisyphus Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    What, there aren’t enough thugs resisting arrest and killing police already, Joe? What kind of sick monster wants to get more police killed? Not enough widows and orphans in police families to suit your druthers???

    • #17
    • October 16, 2020, at 10:09 AM PDT
    • 4 likes
  18. Old Bathos Moderator

    Percival (View Comment):

    Old Bathos (View Comment):
    I thought police were trained to shoot the gun out of the hand of the bad guy. Shouldn’t we mandate that?

    That is what the Lone Ranger did. Joe is probably remembering that.

    Or maybe he recalls seeing this training video

    • #18
    • October 16, 2020, at 10:18 AM PDT
    • 6 likes
  19. Vance Richards Member
    Vance Richards Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    • #19
    • October 16, 2020, at 1:42 PM PDT
    • 10 likes
  20. Boss Mongo Member

    Percival (View Comment):
    That is what the Lone Ranger did. Joe is probably remembering that.

    As a kid, from the radio. Because TV wasn’t invented yet.

    • #20
    • October 16, 2020, at 5:41 PM PDT
    • 9 likes
  21. Percival Thatcher
    Percival Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Boss Mongo (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):
    That is what the Lone Ranger did. Joe is probably remembering that.

    As a kid, from the radio. Because TV wasn’t invented yet.

    Little Joe would have been five when the original TV show first aired. Sixteen years later, it was still a Saturday morning staple.

    I loved that show. I mean, Roy Rogers was good, but the Kemosabe was the man!

    • #21
    • October 16, 2020, at 5:59 PM PDT
    • 6 likes
  22. OldPhil Coolidge

    Boss Mongo (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):
    That is what the Lone Ranger did. Joe is probably remembering that.

    As a kid, from the radio. Because TV wasn’t invented yet.

    Wait a minute, now. Joe saw on FDR on TV when the stock market crashed, or so he told Katie Couric in 2008. 

    Joe Biden’s denunciation of his own campaign’s ad to Katie Couric got so much attention last night that another odd note in the interview slipped by.

    He was speaking about the role of the White House in a financial crisis.

    “When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn’t just talk about the princes of greed,” Biden told Couric. “He said, ‘Look, here’s what happened.’”

    https://hotair.com/archives/ed-morrissey/2008/09/23/biden-on-fdrs-management-of-the-1929-crash/

    • #22
    • October 16, 2020, at 7:18 PM PDT
    • 6 likes
  23. JosePluma Thatcher

    Vance Richards: This is not the first time made that suggestion. A few months ago there was an excellent post up on Ricochet about that very same topic (and by “excellent post” I simply mean one written by me). Shooting to wound is bad for many reasons. First, it may not stop the threat. Second. it is really hard to hit a moving arm or leg compared to the larger torso. Another interesting point is, if you go with a shoot-to-wound policy, does that lower the threshold for when an officer can pull out his or her weapon?

    Also, shooting at the leg makes it more likely the round will go beyond the target and hit someone else.

    • #23
    • October 16, 2020, at 10:39 PM PDT
    • 4 likes
  24. thelonious Member

    Arahant (View Comment):

    Vance Richards: That is a noble cause but who is he consulting?

    His own imagination? Hollywood screen writers? It surely isn’t anyone with firearms training and experience.

    He plagiarized “shoot em in the leg” from Danny Glover in Lethal Weapon.

    • #24
    • October 17, 2020, at 4:43 AM PDT
    • 3 likes
  25. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    JosePluma (View Comment):

    Vance Richards: This is not the first time made that suggestion. A few months ago there was an excellent post up on Ricochet about that very same topic (and by “excellent post” I simply mean one written by me). Shooting to wound is bad for many reasons. First, it may not stop the threat. Second. it is really hard to hit a moving arm or leg compared to the larger torso. Another interesting point is, if you go with a shoot-to-wound policy, does that lower the threshold for when an officer can pull out his or her weapon?

    Also, shooting at the leg makes it more likely the round will go beyond the target and hit someone else.

    Or hit the femoral artery and bleed out in about 2 minutes.

    • #25
    • October 17, 2020, at 8:34 AM PDT
    • 5 likes
  26. MichaelKennedy Coolidge

    I assume Joe has not heard of the new development called “The Taser.” A number of these cases involve a “victim” who could not be taken down with the taser, suggesting the presence of pharmacology in their system resembling Methamphetamine.

    • #26
    • October 17, 2020, at 9:07 AM PDT
    • 5 likes
  27. Mark Camp Member

    When I read Cowboy Joe’s recommendation, it immediately brought to mind this very similar, but perhaps superior, rule.

    In the Old West, bad guys abided by a universally accepted use-of-lethal-force policy. This bit of history is well-known to anyone who has studied the subject by watching old Westerns.

    When shooting at heroes, the bad guy would aim to inflict only a flesh wound. Initially, it would appear that the hero was mortally wounded, creating a dramatic moment. But when the good guys had won the battle, the hero would immediately put the fears of his comrades and his beautiful female admirer to rest. He would always say, “It’s nothing…it’s only a flesh wound.”

    I see no reason why the good guys should not adopt the proven non-lethal “only-a-flesh-wound” tactic today.

    Non-experts might argue that in aiming for only a flesh wound, the good guy risked being slightly off and hitting a vital organ or artery.

    We who have studied the movie literature know that, on the contrary, bad guys were notoriously bad shots, whereas good guys were consistently high-quality marksmen. Any hero, even an untested rookie hero, could do a spin move, unholster his pistol, fire a single-handed shot, without aiming, while his gun hand was moving in a whipping motion to give the bullet some additional energy, at each of two bad guys, one behind cover at fifty yards and the other on a galloping horse, and bring down both with a bullet through the chest.

    If bad guys could fire thousands of shots throughout the whole cowboy era at heroes and score an only-a-flesh-wound hit 100% of the time, then good guys today could do it even easier.

    • #27
    • October 17, 2020, at 9:26 AM PDT
    • 6 likes
    • This comment has been edited.
  28. Full Size Tabby Member

    Mark Camp (View Comment):

    When I read Cowboy Joe’s recommendation, it immediately brought to mind this very similar, but perhaps superior, rule.

    In the Old West, bad guys abided by a universally accepted use-of-lethal-force policy. This bit of history is well-known to anyone who has studied the subject by watching old Westerns.

    When shooting at heroes, the bad guy would aim to inflict only a flesh wound. Initially, it would appear that the hero was mortally wounded, creating a dramatic moment. But when the good guys had won the battle, the hero would immediately put the fears of his comrades and his beautiful female admirer to rest. He would always say, “It’s nothing…it’s only a flesh wound.”

    I see no reason why the good guys should not adopt the proven non-lethal only-a-flesh-wound” tactic today.

    Non-experts might argue that in aiming for only a flesh wound, the good guy risked being slightly off and hitting a vital organ or artery.

    We who have studied the movie literature know that, on the contrary, bad guys were notoriously bad shots, whereas good guys were consistently high-quality marksmen. Any hero, even an untested rookie hero, could do a spin move, unholster his pistol, fire a single-handed shot, without aiming, while his gun hand was moving in a whipping motion to give the bullet some additional energy, at each at two bad guys, one behind cover at fifty yards and the other on a galloping horse, and bring down both with a bullet through the chest.

    If bad guys could fire thousands of shots throughout the whole cowboy era at heroes and always score an only-a-flesh-wound hit, then good guys today could do it even easier.

    Your reference to the moviemakers’ school of policing reminds me of another technique from that school, which must be better because it is used in so many genres other than Westerns, and which will no doubt be widely used in the new era of “send a social worker before sending a police officer.” With the correct words, facial expressions, gestures, and tone of voice, you can get the bad guy to talk (and talk and talk) about his horrible upbringing, who has done him wrong recently, how bad his circumstances are, etc., all while the bad guy is still pointing his weapon at the good guy or at the innocent bystander, talking long enough for the hero to get into just the right place to execute the perfect wrestling-style move that harmlessly brings the bad guy to the floor and keeps the bad guy pinned with no further struggle. 

    • #28
    • October 17, 2020, at 10:19 AM PDT
    • 1 like
  29. Flicker Coolidge

    Mark Camp (View Comment):

    When I read Cowboy Joe’s recommendation, it immediately brought to mind this very similar, but perhaps superior, rule.

    In the Old West, bad guys abided by a universally accepted use-of-lethal-force policy. This bit of history is well-known to anyone who has studied the subject by watching old Westerns.

    When shooting at heroes, the bad guy would aim to inflict only a flesh wound. Initially, it would appear that the hero was mortally wounded, creating a dramatic moment. But when the good guys had won the battle, the hero would immediately put the fears of his comrades and his beautiful female admirer to rest. He would always say, “It’s nothing…it’s only a flesh wound.”

    I see no reason why the good guys should not adopt the proven non-lethal only-a-flesh-wound” tactic today.

    Non-experts might argue that in aiming for only a flesh wound, the good guy risked being slightly off and hitting a vital organ or artery.

    We who have studied the movie literature know that, on the contrary, bad guys were notoriously bad shots, whereas good guys were consistently high-quality marksmen. Any hero, even an untested rookie hero, could do a spin move, unholster his pistol, fire a single-handed shot, without aiming, while his gun hand was moving in a whipping motion to give the bullet some additional energy, at each at two bad guys, one behind cover at fifty yards and the other on a galloping horse, and bring down both with a bullet through the chest.

    If bad guys could fire thousands of shots throughout the whole cowboy era at heroes and always score an only-a-flesh-wound hit, then good guys today could do it even easier.

    Very good analysis. But you forgot the one shot that bad guys excel at: how many times have the bad guys threatened a good guy with a “gut shot”? One in which it takes a week to die in agony. Usually performed in the desert and with no water to give succor or sustenance. Of course, in supporting your argument, it is still only a flesh wound.

    • #29
    • October 17, 2020, at 11:47 AM PDT
    • 4 likes
  30. Boss Mongo Member

    Flicker (View Comment):
    Very good analysis. But you forgot the one shot that bad guys excel at: how many times have the bad guys threatened a good guy with a “gut shot”? One in which it takes a week to die in agony. Usually performed in the desert and with no water to give succor or sustenance. Of course, in supporting your argument, it is still only a flesh wound.

    Buck wheats.

    • #30
    • October 17, 2020, at 11:54 AM PDT
    • 3 likes