In the NSFW video below, an officer has a chance to take a shot at a bus hijacker, and fails to do so. It’s a split second thing, the incident ends with success, and chef don’t judge. But it does highlight an important point . . .

https://youtu.be/caoihXxOwgA

When you face an imminent, credible threat or grievous bodily harm or death, and imminence is imminent, take your shot ASAP.

As always, I remind you that your ability to get to your gun quickly and efficiently is more important than the type of gun or its caliber.

At the same time, it’s important to be mentally prepared. It may sound strange, but buying some carry insurance can help you prepare for the reality of what may occur. Not to mention help you survive the aftermath, at least financially. Which is a big deal.

Some kind of close-quarter combat training is good, too. And there’s nothing — nothing — like force-on-force training to prepare you for the possibility of shooting another human being, rather than a paper target, steel or a watermelon.

Speed, surprise and violence of action is an excellent strategy for survival in a defensive gun use. Be ready to use it.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

65 COMMENTS

    • I don’t have a desire to kill anyone. I am, however, very comfortable with it being a side effect of defending myself.

      • ” Desire” is not a word I used. Not all have the ability to kill. I make no judgement on those that can’t. They need to have an honest inner talk and get out of any line of work that might put them in that situation.

        Those are folks that should not have a gun.

    • It seems more like she just didn’t take stock of the situation quickly enough.
      She reacted without thinking, and ran into an ambush.

      Of course, hindsight is 20/20, and armchair quarterbacking is very comfortable when you’ve got nothing to lose from being wrong.

  3. What did he hijack the bus with in the first place?
    EDIT: Cop drew firearm against what looks like an unarmed person who actually didn’t do much in terms of threats. And did not shoot when she needed too, but I don’t know if there was enough of a reason to draw in the first place.

    • Once he jumped on her and tried to get her gun he set himself up to be shot. You don’t try to get a cop’s gun.

      • The hijacker would have had a much harder time had the policeman gone in first instead of the policewoman.

      • Not to defend the criminal actions that happened beforehand, but it concerns me that the logic is: once he was defending himself from someone with a gun, that’s when he was a valid target to be shot.

        • He wasn’t defending himself against a “person with a gun”. He attacked a uniformed police officer that was responding to a situation that he created.

          Should she have had her gun out? Doesn’t really enter into it. She was societies authority figure on scene. When she showed up he had a couple of choices. Run away. Comply with her lawful orders. Or attack.

          He did not chose wisely.

        • “Not to defend the criminal actions that happened beforehand”

          /and yet that’s what you did.

        • “Defense” and
          “I attacked someone for trying to keep me from hijacking a city bus” are NOT remotely related to each other, thank you very much.

      • Agreed, however I’m not sure she had to draw the weapon in the first place. I bet the police were told “hijacking” over the radio and that set the tone.

    • Never NOT a reason draw until you know it is safe.

      Also we need stronger immigration laws to keep morons like this out of America and in the 3rd world were they belong.

    • Yeah, he didn’t do anything worth getting shot over. He just hijacked a vehicle and essentially held a bus full of people hostage (even for a few seconds) while in a highly agitated state. Not a big deal. it probably would have ended well if he wasn’t killed after attacking a police officer.

      • It’s a stretch to call it a hijacking. The driver was better at dealing with him than the cop.

      • “hijacked a bus in a highly agitated state”
        That is the reason a gun should have been drawn. What on earth makes you think a hijacking is not a threat?
        Is there a clause in the ever-expanding “unwritten social contract” whereby hijacking is now a human right?

        Lol, I know I’m exaggerating, but not by much. No one is entitled to commit a violent crime without being forcefully stopped. This includes a crime done under the threat of violence – a threat he expressly made when he picked up the fire extinguisher.

    • “Cop drew firearm against what looks like an unarmed person…”

      The *facepalm* is strong with this sentence.

    • I agree with you. It does not appear he had a gun or knife in his hand, so there was no reason to draw her weapon, other than she was a women and he was a man. Assuming she had a retention holster, it would have just been a wrestling match, which the male officer, if he had been involved from the beginning, might have won. Once she drew her weapon, obtaining it became the goal of the bad guy. Once the gun is drawn, the confrontation is escalated to a whole new level … it’s now life or death. Maybe she should not have drawn it so early, but once drawn, she should have shot as soon as he charged her. Another consideration for drawing the weapon so early is that if the bus still had passengers on it, she would have put them in line of fire and in danger of being injured by gunfire. I assume she expected him to “comply”, since she was a police officer, and did not expect him to act so explosively. His actions illustrate that if you are going to be violent, be explosively so. If the second officer was not present, the outcome might have been much different.

  4. Calling it a bus hijacking is a bit sensational.

    Also the female cops lack of restraint and eagerness to draw caused that situation to escalate.

    • +1.. her tactics sucked and she entered that situation way too fast. But, it was a lawful shoot. Unnecessary, but still a lawful shoot.

    • LOLWUT? That’s gotta be the dumbest thing I ever read.

      He violently took control of the vehicle under the threat of murder – that is the definition of hijacking.
      When he picked up that fire extinguisher, he declared a threat of violence with a deadly weapon against anyone who wouldn’t let him take control of the vehicle.

      The cop made some big tactical blunders – the primary one being when she ran headfirst into an ambush, but her level of force was not one of them.

  6. That officer was lucky her colleague was there to back her up. It looks like the crazy bus hijacker had just about succeeded in taking her gun away from her. She didn’t have it when she ran off the bus.

  7. Wow, lack of training and multiple mistakes all over this.

    First off, why did the first officer just rush right up to the guy instead of maintaining distance and issuing commands?

    Second, why the hell did she try to draw her weapon at bad breath distance in a confined space?

    Third, this guy seemed unarmed. Was he a dangerous felon or something?

    Food for thought:
    If the police were replaced by armed citizens and they shot an unarmed guy, they would likely be up for manslaughter or murder.

    • She saw too many delta force seal team 6 dynamic tubular assault bus take down training videos…. Entered that bus WAAAAAAYYYYYY too fast there teir 1 girlfriend.

    • Nix my previous comments about the officer drawing her gun. Rewatched the video.

      Main mistake was rushing a blind corner fast without being at retention and hesitating when she saw him come at her.

        • Hindsight is 20/20, and armchair quarterbacking is always comfortable because you have nothing to lose from being wrong.

          That said, as a learning exercise, I agree. He had nowhere to go. Why run into a closed space after him?

  8. It is a miracle that neither the female police officer nor the bus driver acquired any additional orifices.

  9. In a confined space drawing and holding it out like that was asking for trouble. She should not have gone in alone. The other cop could have entered through the rear door behind him. Talked to him from the doorway, keep a few feet between.

    She was in too big a hurry. Did not assess what was going on. I don’t mean to second guess it but slow down and see what the situation is.

    • If the cops had approached from opposite ends of the bus they would have created a crossfire situation. Neither could fire without fear of hitting the other.

      • The only reason to cover both doors would be to prevent escape. 2 door entry is stupid. They were more interested in contacting the threat, hence right through the front door full speed…. a little too fast though. She practicality gave the guy her gun before she even realized what was going on.

      • Why would they need to fire on that crazy clown?? Take him into custody the old-fashioned way.

        • 50 years ago if you had jumped on a cop and tried to take his gun you would have gotten shot. That is the old fashioned way.

    • “The women reported that he was “flipping out” in their car and said, “No. No, they (are) coming to shoot us.” – Well, he wasn’t entirely wrong.

  11. 20-30 years ago it took a knife or a gun in hand and a threat for a police officer to pull their weapon.

    Nowadays you fart or just are in the vicinity and a police officer will draw down on you.

    When did escalation to deadly force become the default tactic for the police? What about attempting to de-escalate?

    Dangerous game to play in an armed society.

    Self defense rules apply to everyone. If I draw my weapon on an unarmed person, or provocate a situation that results in a death, I face all sorts of legal trouble. Police should not be exempt.

    • There are far more cops today who are completely unable to use any force but lethal because millions of years of evolution have made them physically weaker than others.

    • “20-30 years ago it took a knife or a gun in hand and a threat for a police officer to pull their weapon…”

      You might have mistaken Mayberry for real life. If you think cops in weren’t pulling their guns 30 years ago in response to the civil unrest and crack-related violence in that era, you either weren’t alive, were in a very rural area, or weren’t paying attention. That was the time period when the butt of a handgun was considered an acceptable weapon.

  12. As Dirty Harry said,” that’s a hell of a price to pay for being stylish.”, if yo know what I mean. Sheez. But we’re too damned P.C. to point it out.

  13. Seriously, an incompetent mess. How many times did that second cop shoot this guy? He was done from shot one from what I could tell. He may have even almost shot the female cop. Total panic on the female cop’s part.

    Cops over-react these days. It’s an effect of constant police complaints that police are “hamstrung” by policies that prevent them from killing everyone they meet. Try reading some police magazines. EVERY TIME there is an incident you get editorials complaining how the cops are NEVER at fault when someone gets killed. Cops read this stuff and they get it reinforced in the locker room and from their sergeants, if not their officers and civilian authorities.

    Reminds me of a video I saw years ago where cops were called to an incident where a black male armed with a handgun was present in some public place. When the cops arrived – and there were several present – the man was leaning against a wall with his right hand holding the handgun up beside his head. Not pointing it at anyone. The cops ordered him to drop the weapon. He stood upright, dropping his hand with the gun to his SIDE – still not pointing it at anyone. ALL the cops unloaded on him immediately, dropping him instantly to the ground. Granted he was a real potential threat with a gun in hand, but who knows if he was planning on surrendering? If you don’t give them a chance, you’ll never know.

    When it takes 600 cops to take down the Patty Hearst gang of five or six individuals by ventilating and nearly burning down a building, or dropping bombs on a house held by radicals and burning down the whole block, you know there’s an issue with police cowardice and/or lack of control.

    And as the cops get more violent and the sentences get harsher, the criminals feel the need to get more violent. They start carrying higher caliber guns and being more ready to use them on a traffic stop.

    There used to be a time when New York cops would wait days to defuse a hostage or barricade situation, figuring it was cheaper than getting into a firefight or getting hostages killed or playing wannabe-SAS-Iranian-Embassy games. Now it seems cops everywhere prefer the SAS “speed, surprise and violence of action” modality. Well, that works against terrorists in specific situations and in the military. It’s not designed for civilian arrests.

    Bottom line: There are two problems: 1) Vetting the sort of person who becomes a cop to weed out the wannabe military heroes and thugs, and 2) police training – and lack of repetitive training – sucks.

  14. As that struggle went on she missed a couple opportunities for a good leg trip that would have wrecked that guy, but hey, I might not have had the presence of mind to do that either given that this was a struggle over a gun at that point.

    Other than that I’m not in the mood to Monday Morning Quarterback this other than to say that the last three rounds the other cop fired seemed unnecessary from my point of view but… I wasn’t there and I couldn’t see the guy’s hands.

  16. Typical MMQB from someone who had probably never worn the badge. I very much disagree with your assessment. Based solely on the video, the criteria for using lethal force was not met until the first (female) Officer closed with the perp and allowed him to take control of her firearm. Now if she knew something about the perp beforehand, like he had attempted, threatened or actually killed someone, that would be a different story.

    Hijacking a bus, unless he did so with the use of a weapon, and ws threatening to kill someone, is not grounds to use lethal force.

    • So.. what if, I don’t know, he grabbed a big steel fire extinguisher off the wall and threatened to club anyone who got in his way. Would that satisfy your weapon and threat of violence criteria?

      lol

    • I find it interesting people throw out “MMQB!” for any opinion that differs from their own.

      First off, analyzing video footage or evidence is not MMQB. It’s analysis. MMQB is more for when there is zero evidence and it’s all hearsay.

      Same strategy the Left uses when they call people racists / mysogynists for having an opinion on anything.

      So knock it off.

      • Agree. MMQB is a metaphor based on the fact that the second guesser will never take a snap in the NFL.
        However one of us may be involved in a DGU. It’s helpful to learn from other’s as well as our own mistakes. I prefer other’s.

    • ” Based solely on the video, the criteria for using lethal force was not met until the first (female) Officer closed with the perp and allowed him to take control of her firearm.”

      So, are you saying that the criteria for using lethal force was not met until after the female officer ineptly employed lethal force?

  17. I don’t get it. The article talks about how hesitation kills, but most of the comments are stating that she rushed in too fast.
    Hesitation does kill so how about a video that shows that. I thought I saw her discharge the weapon but miss because he has fending off her gun. Those might have been flashes from the mounted light.
    I don’t fault her for containing the psycho withing the bus. I just think she did not anticipate him going in on her drawn weapon, which is a lesson that this video teaches us more than hesitation.

    • Too many news stories have taught us that being in the presence of a LEO with a gun in his/her hand means you are about to die, no matter how slowly and carefully you obey that LEO’s orders or how pitifully you plea for your life while doing it.

      He might have just made the rational decision that it was better to die fighting for his life than on his knees, when she introduced herself to him at gunpoint.

  19. I don’t have a problem with the number of shots the officer put into the nutcase. As a D.A. from my area once said, ‘If you have the right to shoot someone dead, you can shoot him dead, dead, dead.’
    I was a Sheriff Reserve and transferred to warrants. My first day we went to serve a warrant and as we were going up some stairs, all the other deputies pulled their weapons and held them down by their leg as we near his apartment, no big deal.
    I find it amazing the number of Bleeding Hearts on this website.

  20. Ya, nice plug for insurance.

    “nothing — like force-on-force training to prepare you for the possibility of shooting another human being,” This can be done quite quickly and cheaply even with laser tag / airsoft ranges / paint balling.

    Watch out though, the little kids’ll really whip up on you and you’ll find out very quickly how vicious they are and what incredible lack of compunction they have.

  21. 1. This illustrates that we have a mental health problem in this country. Dude was released from a mental eval just before this.

    2. I’ve heard a lot of stories about how our troops aren’t allowed to fire until fired upon. Our cops can shoot before they even see a gun. That dichotomy seems messed up to me. These are two groups of people who “put their lives on the line, so we don’t have to.” I’d rather soldiers shoot foreigners who didn’t deserve it than cops shoot Americans who didn’t deserve it. If cops are jumping the gun, then we are putting our lives on the line, so they don’t have to.

  22. Hmm, looks justified on a strictly legal sense, but pretty poor judgement and clearly a fail as a social outcome, i.e., a law abiding person having a schizophrenic episode ended up dead.

    From a legal perspective it’s clearly justified. He was breaking the law, she gave him a legal order, he refused to comply. She drew. He retreated. She attempted to apprehend him. He attempted to take her gun. Her partner shot him.

    Her judgement is suspect throughout. He never displayed a weapon to her, his hands were empty when he stood in the door. Even if someone said,”Look out he’s got a fire extinguisher!” That’s hardly a deadly weapon. She could have noted how agitated he was and tried talking him down while maintaining enough space to draw or retreat. Once she drew, she didn’t need to follow him into the enclosed space, much less holding out her gun saying ‘take me’ instead of the retention position. It suggests that she knows she isn’t strong enough to be a police officer and use a continuum of force. All of that said, it was a chaotic situation and I would give her the benefit of the doubt.

    Finally, from a social perspective this is a complete fail. One percent of the population will be schizophrenic. It’s a medical disease that could affect anyone. I’ve been stuck on public transportation with crazy people and it’s frightening. But imagine if it were your brother, ranting and raving with paranoid ideation, acting up, maybe destroying property, but *NOT HURTING ANYONE* and *NOT DISPLAYING A WEAPON*. In that case I would want the police to not escalate the situation by drawing their firearms and assume some personal risk by using non-lethal force to restrain him.

    One could argue that it’s unfair to demand that. But the truth is we already ask that the police assume risk. We give them tremendous leeway in applying force, but as a democratic society we have a right to set the ground rules. “Take unarmed crazy people alive” should be one of them. Police officers who are unwilling to assume that risk or unable to perform that function should not be on the streets.

    Source:
    http://www.koco.com/article/court-documents-man-killed-in-city-bus-shooting-called-police-the-devil/4310729
    http://www.koco.com/article/widow-of-man-killed-in-city-bus-shooting-says-he-did-not-deserve-to-die/4310750

Comments are closed.