Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

IcedT
Posts: 867
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 8:34 pm UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby IcedT » Wed May 18, 2011 9:47 pm UTC

Dauric wrote:Completely, and especially in this circumstance where both the homeowner, and the SWAT team were trained to react to combat situations. I have a friend who's ex-marine, and if a no-knock was executed on my apartment when he's over I have no doubt that he would react to the threat the way he was intensively trained to react to combat situations.
That was my main point: they went into a situation knowing they'd be putting tensions on high, and then someone was sloppy enough to "accidentally" shoot the doorway and was then dishonest enough to lie about it. Every statement I've read from the sheriff's office stinks like hell- that lieutenant says the Marine was kneeling in front of the door with the shot lined up, and that he said some douchey, threatening actionhero line. With his safety on. And then they shot this supposedly kneeling man 60 times, hitting him only in the upper body. The fuck? Am I supposed to believe that?

Dauric wrote:That's not how SWAT works though. SWAT secures the site, makes sure any occupants are secured or neutralized, and a quick search for any obvious threats (booby-traps, bombs, etc.). Once SWAT is finished securing their objectives -then- detectives and investigating officers go through the house taking pictures and securing evidence that -confirms the suspicions- they operated on to get the warrant in the first place.
In cases where SWAT is deemed necessary, yes. I'm attacking the logic that it makes more sense to do a SWAT team no-knock on a Marine's house than to send in regular cops and investigators. The guy had no criminal record but, as you said, the documents are sealed so this is just speculation. Suffice it to say that I think their handling of the raid itself was so incompetent and sleazy that it wouldn't surprise me to learn the warrant was mishandled too.

User avatar
mosc
Doesn't care what you think.
Posts: 5403
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:03 pm UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby mosc » Wed May 18, 2011 9:52 pm UTC

IcedT wrote: Did you read the articles? A call was sent in but they prevented response units until he was already dead, using a variety of bullshit excuses. This was not a large house and besides the Marine, there was a woman and a toddler. Either they're bastards or they're impossibly negligent or both.

The articles said his emotionally distraught wife thought he needed medical attention, not that he was alive. Those are two entirely different conditions.

IcedT wrote:They were apparently servicing search warrants against several houses. Sounds like investigator's work to me.

Sounds like you're blindly speculating without any subject matter expertise or context.
Title: It was given by the XKCD moderators to me because they didn't care what I thought (I made some rantings, etc). I care what YOU think, the joke is forums.xkcd doesn't care what I think.

IcedT
Posts: 867
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 8:34 pm UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby IcedT » Wed May 18, 2011 9:58 pm UTC

mosc wrote:The articles said his emotionally distraught wife thought he needed medical attention, not that he was alive. Those are two entirely different conditions.
It's the police's job to determine whether or not it's safe for EMT, not to decide whether medical attention would be "a waste." It's extremely unlikely he survived 74 minutes with 60 gunshot wounds, but regardless, SWAT had complete control of the house but prevented any medical responders from arriving on the grounds of a bullshit suspicion of "a barricaded suspect."

mosc wrote:
IcedT wrote:They were apparently servicing search warrants against several houses. Sounds like investigator's work to me.

Sounds like you're blindly speculating without any subject matter expertise or context.
See my above post for clarification. Not every investigation calls for a SWAT raid.

edit: fixed quotes

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3995
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Dauric » Wed May 18, 2011 10:02 pm UTC

IcedT wrote:That was my main point: they went into a situation knowing they'd be putting tensions on high, and then someone was sloppy enough to "accidentally" shoot the doorway and was then dishonest enough to lie about it. Every statement I've read from the sheriff's office stinks like hell- that lieutenant says the Marine was kneeling in front of the door with the shot lined up, and that he said some douchey, threatening actionhero line. With his safety on. And then they shot this supposedly kneeling man 60 times, hitting him only in the upper body. The fuck? Am I supposed to believe that?


Actually a shooter kneeling is braced and more accurate than a person standing, and the torso presents the larger target than the legs being (more) perpendicular to the attacker's line of sight, where the legs will be (more) parallel to the line of sight and presenting a smaller target than the body. Also professional firearms training teaches to aim for the "Center Mass", AKA the torso, to ensure a hit. It's only special secondary training that focuses on hitting specific body parts.

Otherwise though I agree that the reports are suspect, especially about the first shot. Unfortunately we may never know what actually transpired.

I'm attacking the logic that it makes more sense to do a SWAT team no-knock on a Marine's house than to send in regular cops and investigators. The guy had no criminal record but, as you said, the documents are sealed so this is just speculation. Suffice it to say that I think their handling of the raid itself was so incompetent and sleazy that it wouldn't surprise me to learn the warrant was mishandled too.

I don't even think that they had enough to send -anyone- in. Again, speculation on my part, but a hispanic name and some informant's hearsay were probably all that were in the warrant.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

IcedT
Posts: 867
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 8:34 pm UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby IcedT » Wed May 18, 2011 10:16 pm UTC

Dauric wrote:Actually a shooter kneeling is braced and more accurate than a person standing, and the torso presents the larger target than the legs being (more) perpendicular to the attacker's line of sight, where the legs will be (more) parallel to the line of sight and presenting a smaller target than the body. Also professional firearms training teaches to aim for the "Center Mass", AKA the torso, to ensure a hit. It's only special secondary training that focuses on hitting specific body parts.

I'm aware of the fact that kneeling is advantageous, I just found it pretty hard to believe that the man got into the "I'm gonna shoot you" pose, then said "I'm gonna shoot you," all with his safety on. The fact that the 5-man team fired over a dozen shots each in a small timeframe and didn't hit his lower body suggests to me (but does not prove) that he wasn't fired down on while in a kneeling position.

Dauric wrote: I don't even think that they had enough to send -anyone- in. Again, speculation on my part, but a hispanic name and some informant's hearsay were probably all that were in the warrant.
All I can say is: Tucson. Maricopa cops, particularly Phoenix PD, have been known to do shady stuff but are generally considered well-trained and professional. Pima... not so much.

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3995
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Dauric » Wed May 18, 2011 10:27 pm UTC

IcedT wrote:
Dauric wrote:Actually a shooter kneeling is braced and more accurate than a person standing, and the torso presents the larger target than the legs being (more) perpendicular to the attacker's line of sight, where the legs will be (more) parallel to the line of sight and presenting a smaller target than the body. Also professional firearms training teaches to aim for the "Center Mass", AKA the torso, to ensure a hit. It's only special secondary training that focuses on hitting specific body parts.

I'm aware of the fact that kneeling is advantageous, I just found it pretty hard to believe that the man got into the "I'm gonna shoot you" pose, then said "I'm gonna shoot you," all with his safety on. The fact that the 5-man team fired over a dozen shots each in a small timeframe and didn't hit his lower body suggests to me (but does not prove) that he wasn't fired down on while in a kneeling position.


I'm not familiar with the safety on the AR15, but professional shooters releasing the safety is the last thing you do -just- before pulling the trigger. Being the civilian version of the M-16 I'd say he was probably quick on that safety. If anything the fact that the catch -hadn't- been released means he recognized the SWAT after they broke in and didn't release the catch to fire.

Of course being on the other end of the gun there's no way to see that safety.

I agree that the reported "Action Hero" phrase was most likely bullshit, or selective memory on th part of the officer involved (and too many action movies), but transposing memories like that is a recognized issue with post-event reports.

As far as not hitting the "Lower Body"... "Torso" typically includes chest, abdomen and sometimes groin depending on who you ask. If the SWAT are really action-hero-gung-ho that one or more imagines the marine spouting movie lines in defense of his family, I'd wager they spend enough time on the range to be decent shots. Again, with the exception of specialized sniper training most professional marksmen are trained to shoot for the torso or "Center Mass".
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

User avatar
Vaniver
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:12 am UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Vaniver » Thu May 19, 2011 2:14 am UTC

mosc wrote:Yeah, you don't use SWAT for subtle situations. It's a sledgehammer designed for jobs so dangerous and so deadly that maximum aggression is justified.
And, just like the taser, it is never misused to make the lives of cops easier at the expense of the lives of the citizenry.

Wait, no, I was hallucinating for a minute there.
I mostly post over at LessWrong now.

Avatar from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, owned by Hasbro.

User avatar
podbaydoor
Posts: 7548
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 4:16 am UTC
Location: spaceship somewhere out there

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby podbaydoor » Thu May 19, 2011 2:55 am UTC

Did mosc make that claim?
tenet |ˈtenit|
noun
a principle or belief, esp. one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy : the tenets of classical liberalism.
tenant |ˈtenənt|
noun
a person who occupies land or property rented from a landlord.

User avatar
Aikanaro
Posts: 1801
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 1:43 pm UTC
Location: Saint Louis, MO

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Aikanaro » Thu May 19, 2011 3:49 am UTC

Side question: Has there ever been a case of a no-knock warrant being issued, and the (innocent!) owner of the home in question successfully slaughtering all trespassers? And if so, how did it play out in court? For some reason, I'm just imagining if the guy had had 1: a panic room, 2: locks on the doors to seal people in, and 3: neurotoxin emitters. Yes, I'm daydreaming, but don't wake me if it's not pertinent to my daydream, it's a happy place in there.
Dear xkcd,

On behalf of my religion, I'm sorry so many of us do dumb shit. Please forgive us.

Love, Aikanaro.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu May 19, 2011 4:29 am UTC

The point of a SWAT team is to never lose a fight.

These teams are required, but we can only hope that they're used correctly. In this case, they were not, and its not clear to me why.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
mmmcannibalism
Posts: 2150
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 6:16 am UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby mmmcannibalism » Thu May 19, 2011 6:47 am UTC

Aikanaro wrote:Side question: Has there ever been a case of a no-knock warrant being issued, and the (innocent!) owner of the home in question successfully slaughtering all trespassers? And if so, how did it play out in court? For some reason, I'm just imagining if the guy had had 1: a panic room, 2: locks on the doors to seal people in, and 3: neurotoxin emitters. Yes, I'm daydreaming, but don't wake me if it's not pertinent to my daydream, it's a happy place in there.


To be more realistic, I can definitely imagine someone with a shotgun taking out half a dozen guys in their own home. Which makes me wonder, how big is a swat team when it enters a house?
Izawwlgood wrote:I for one would happily live on an island as a fuzzy seal-human.

Oregonaut wrote:Damn fetuses and their terroist plots.

User avatar
TheKrikkitWars
Posts: 2205
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 3:08 pm UTC
Location: Bangor, Gwynedd, Gogledd Cymru
Contact:

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby TheKrikkitWars » Thu May 19, 2011 8:46 am UTC

Now, in a land where it's perfectly legal to own all kinds of weapony goodness (even RPG's if you file the correct tax stamps each year); How it is reasonable for police officers to go if I see an openly armed person in the course of my duties I'll gun him down without even a warning?

It's not acceptable to say that "it would expose myself to risk, not to just blast away"...
That's why you're a SWAT member, you take an extra risk because your extra training is intended to prepare you for that risk, so that the public you protect will remain safe.

If you shoot innocent members of the public because you're scared of exposing yourself to risk, then you're hopelessly failing at your job;

Also... if they fired 72 bullets what kind of trigger control do they have? it only takes a couple of well placed rounds to incapcitate or kill; more than 10 rounds each is wasteful, and in a case where the aim isn't actually to kill but merely to cause disabling injury is arguably negligent, it's increasingly normal for someone who's shot several times to make a reasonable recovery, someone who's shot close to a hundred times, not so much.
Great things are done when Men & Mountains meet,
This is not Done by Jostling in the Street.

Nordic Einar
Posts: 783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:21 am UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Nordic Einar » Thu May 19, 2011 9:24 am UTC

TheKrikkitWars wrote:Also... if they fired 72 bullets what kind of trigger control do they have? it only takes a couple of well placed rounds to incapcitate or kill; more than 10 rounds each is wasteful, and in a case where the aim isn't actually to kill but merely to cause disabling injury is arguably negligent, it's increasingly normal for someone who's shot several times to make a reasonable recovery, someone who's shot close to a hundred times, not so much.


There's a famous FBI report from the 90's discussing the merits of various handgun calibres for their field agents and rapid response teams. One of the "myths" the study debunked was the importance of using 9mm's over .45 or .40S&W due to "over penetration" of the target by the higher caliber rounds. The idea that a police officer or rapid response team needs to worry about whether a round will hit their target, pass through them, and injury a bystander beyond them was deemed not worth worrying about in the slightest.

The reason? Because something like 90% of rounds fired by police officers miss their intended target. (The study cites many other studies showing this). Combat is fucking *chaotic*, shooting at a human being isn't like shooting at a target at the range, and 72 shots or ~12 per person to take down one guy is pretty much par for the course.

Hell, look at that shootout in California that lead to their draconian gun bans - fully automatic weapons and hundreds of rounds of ammunition and basically the only two people seriously wounded were those shot by police - after the police expended an absurd amount of fire to hit them.

People On The Internet tend overestimate the accuracy of even the most professional shooters in a firefight.

**EDIT**

Aikanaro wrote:Side question: Has there ever been a case of a no-knock warrant being issued, and the (innocent!) owner of the home in question successfully slaughtering all trespassers? And if so, how did it play out in court? For some reason, I'm just imagining if the guy had had 1: a panic room, 2: locks on the doors to seal people in, and 3: neurotoxin emitters. Yes, I'm daydreaming, but don't wake me if it's not pertinent to my daydream, it's a happy place in there.


Not quite exactly what happened, but I recalled a news story I read about on the fora that was similar to this. I couldn't find the thread, but digging around google found me the case in question.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basil_Parasiris

Spoiler:
On March 2, 2007, Laval police executed a search warrant at Basil Parasiris's home on a quiet Brossard street on Montreal's south shore. The warrant, authorized by Gaby Dumas, a justice of the peace, gave Laval police the green light to use a dynamic entry – meant to surprise the person being investigated – to carry out their search for evidence.[1] The warrant was executed before dawn and with dynamic (forced) entry. In general, dynamic entry is only allowed to be used in cases where there is a risk of a suspect destroying evidence if alerted that police are on the premises. A team of armed and plain clothed Laval police officers knocked down the door to Mr. Parasiris's home and rushed into his bedroom where he and his wife were sleeping. Unaware that they were police officers executing a search warrant, Mr. Parasiris assumed it was a home invasion; he rushed to his .357 Magnum revolver and shot at the presumed invaders. The first shot fired hit constable Daniel Tessier in the head, the other pierced his heart. Tessier's partner, Stéphane Forbes, was also wounded by one of 4 bullets fired from Parasiris's revolver in the 30-second shootout with police as was Mr. Parasiris's wife Penny, as she fled to a closet. Mr. Parasiris's two children aged 15 and 7 were terrified at hearing gunfire in their fathers house. The older son rushed and called 9-1-1 who informed the young boy to stay calm.


Essentially the police burst into this man's bedroom where he's sleeping with his wife - his kids in the other room - without announcing who they are and dressed in street clothes. Assuming it's a home invasion the man grabs his .357, kills one officer and wounds another while the police shoot his wife. His son calls 911 and the operator is horrified when she realizes he's reporting " a robbery" of the house the police had decided to raid. He's arrested, charged with 1st degree murder, and acquitted on the grounds of self-defense. The no-knock warrant was deemed illegal and inappropriate.

So, yeah. There's precedent for something like that - albeit in Canada.

User avatar
Thirty-one
Posts: 342
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 1:13 pm UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Thirty-one » Thu May 19, 2011 9:51 am UTC

Nordic Einar wrote:The reason? Because something like 90% of rounds fired by police officers miss their intended target. (The study cites many other studies showing this). Combat is fucking *chaotic*, shooting at a human being isn't like shooting at a target at the range, and 72 shots or ~12 per person to take down one guy is pretty much par for the course.

..

People On The Internet tend overestimate the accuracy of even the most professional shooters in a firefight.


Police officers in these studies are probably not defined as just SWAT though. If my skimming of this thread has gotten me the right numbers,
these guys hit on 60/72 shots, so roughly 83%.
While I'm sure most people on the internet overestimate, you seem to be doing the opposite.
Annoyed, getting worked up or bored by the post above? Help is here.

Nordic Einar
Posts: 783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:21 am UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Nordic Einar » Thu May 19, 2011 10:04 am UTC

Thirty-one wrote:Police officers in these studies are probably not defined as just SWAT though. If my skimming of this thread has gotten me the right numbers, these guys hit on 60/72 shots, so roughly 83%.
While I'm sure most people on the internet overestimate, you seem to be doing the opposite.


I'm confused, here - I never said the SWAT team missed a ton. The point of my post was that people's idea of, frankly, ridiculous trigger discipline is not reflective of reality. The fact that ~83% of shots fired hit their target is incredible, and if the SWAT involved in this raid deserve to be ridiculed about something it's certainly not their firing discipline.

I believe you may have missed my point - though I accept perhaps I was unclear in making it.

User avatar
Thirty-one
Posts: 342
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 1:13 pm UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Thirty-one » Thu May 19, 2011 10:08 am UTC

Nordic Einar wrote:
Thirty-one wrote:Police officers in these studies are probably not defined as just SWAT though. If my skimming of this thread has gotten me the right numbers, these guys hit on 60/72 shots, so roughly 83%.
While I'm sure most people on the internet overestimate, you seem to be doing the opposite.


I'm confused, here - I never said the SWAT team missed a ton. The point of my post was that people's idea of, frankly, ridiculous trigger discipline is not reflective of reality. The fact that ~83% of shots fired hit their target is incredible, and if the SWAT involved in this raid deserve to be ridiculed about something it's certainly not their firing discipline.

I believe you may have missed my point - though I accept perhaps I was unclear in making it.


I think that you may have missed the original point, which I read to be something along the lines of
"how come these guys, who know how to hit their targets in general, didn't stop shooting until they'd doubled this guy's BMI?".

Average cop who doesn't go to the range much doesn't really factor in when discussing what one can expect from SWAT.
Annoyed, getting worked up or bored by the post above? Help is here.

Nordic Einar
Posts: 783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:21 am UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Nordic Einar » Thu May 19, 2011 10:17 am UTC

Thirty-one wrote:I think that you may have missed the original point, which I read to be something along the lines of
"how come these guys, who know how to hit their targets in general, didn't stop shooting until they'd doubled this guy's BMI?".

Average cop who doesn't go to the range much doesn't really factor in when discussing what one can expect from SWAT.


No, I understand that point, but that still relies on "Trigger discipline in highly stressful, life threatening situation is totes to be expected." You don't fire a gun with the intent of incapacitating someone. The first thing you're taught is never to fire your gun at something you don't intend to kill.

SWAT very efficiently killing a man is exactly what I expect from SWAT - the fact that they did it so well is actually commendable*, because most people trained to fire guns at others tend to hit everyone but who're their shooting at.

Besides, we have no idea what kind of firearms SWAT was armed with. 60 rounds in a couple of seconds from 4 (or more?) guys isn't even remotely surprising at the ranges we're discussing. It's not like they were calming humming to themselves while they fired on the guy for 30+ seconds before finally going "Yeah, he's probably dead. We should stop firing soon."

*in terms of just, efficiency and such. No-Knock warrants are horrific and this incident is a perfect example of why militarized police forces w/ little oversight are terrible things.

User avatar
Thirty-one
Posts: 342
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 1:13 pm UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Thirty-one » Thu May 19, 2011 10:25 am UTC

Efficient killing is what I'd expect from military, not from police. From police I'd expect a lot more restraint.

And no, I don't think it went on for 30 seconds. My guess would be 2-5. I do expect every one of the officers to be able to keep count to some degree though.
Unless they're counting on missing more than half their shots, do they need to fire 12 shots each?
Annoyed, getting worked up or bored by the post above? Help is here.

Nordic Einar
Posts: 783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:21 am UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Nordic Einar » Thu May 19, 2011 10:36 am UTC

Thirty-one wrote:Efficient killing is what I'd expect from military, not from police. From police I'd expect a lot more restraint.


That's what differentiates SWAT from regular police though - military-esque training and deployment. That's the whole point - it's why people object to the militarization of the police force, which is essentially objecting to SWAT and it's excessive use.

Thirty-one wrote:And no, I don't think it went on for 30 seconds. My guess would be 2-5. I do expect every one of the officers to be able to keep count to some degree though.
Unless they're counting on missing more than half their shots, do they need to fire 12 shots each?


We have no idea what they were armed with. Have you ever fired an automatic weapon? I'm from MI - firearms are common and shooting is a big deal here. There are plenty of fully automatic weapons that could put out 12 rounds with a single hard trigger pull, and while I'm certainly not a military trained shooter there are automatics I have difficulty keeping in >6 round bursts. This is, of course, firing at a range on non-moving targets when the life of me and my friends isn't on the line.

There are plenty of reasons to be upset by what happened here - the issuance of the warrant, the denial of medical services afterwards, etc. But SWAT shooting a man efficiently is what SWAT is supposed to do. Be happy they didn't hit anyone but him, tragic was it was that he was killed at all.

**EDIT**

Formatting at 6:30 is hard D:

User avatar
Thirty-one
Posts: 342
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 1:13 pm UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Thirty-one » Thu May 19, 2011 10:50 am UTC

Nordic Einar wrote:We have no idea what they were armed with. Have you ever fired an automatic weapon?


I have*, I've been in the army**, but that's hardly the point. If you find yourself unable to limit the number of bullets you place on a target
to the number you wish for you've obviously picked the wrong setting on your selector.



*Just the AG-3 and MP5 though.
**Norwegian though.
Annoyed, getting worked up or bored by the post above? Help is here.

Nordic Einar
Posts: 783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:21 am UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Nordic Einar » Thu May 19, 2011 11:10 am UTC

Thirty-one wrote:
Nordic Einar wrote:We have no idea what they were armed with. Have you ever fired an automatic weapon?


I have*, I've been in the army**, but that's hardly the point. If you find yourself unable to limit the number of bullets you place on a target
to the number you wish for you've obviously picked the wrong setting on your selector.


Fair enough - but is it really that unreasonable that you might, in the heat of the moment during a life or death situation, pull off a longer burst than you had expected? I find it difficult to believe, both from my own experience with automatics and discussions I've had with people who've seen combat, that perfect trigger discipline is maintained 100% of the time in a combat situation.

I still maintain that bitching about the number of rounds they put into the man is irrelevant - had they shot him 10 times in total and he been denied medical treatment for an hour the outcome would likely have been the same. Of all the things to be bitching about regarding the handling of this incident, trigger discipline seems like the last one we should be concerned with. Especially seeing as how, all things being equal, they had a pretty fantastic hit rate.

dedwrekka
Posts: 152
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:39 am UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby dedwrekka » Thu May 19, 2011 11:18 am UTC

TheKrikkitWars wrote:Every single one of them should lose their jobs and be tried for manslaughter or accessory to same... Won't happen though;
There'll be an 'Investigation' it'll be an 'accident', no specific officer will be named as responsible and they'll all retain their SWAT status and firearms priveledges.

I wont begin to explain why that's an over-reaction, because you probably wont understand, and a post on the internet wont make you understand. But it was a panicked reaction in the same manner as anyone could make in their daily life, but with an infinitely different result when the power of life and death is thrust into someone's hands. You try not to make the mistake, but it happens. Burning everyone at the stake for that is as bad as doing nothing about it.

Tirian wrote:
TheKrikkitWars wrote:Every single one of them should lose their jobs and be tried for manslaughter or accessory to same...


*shrug* If the guy standing in the window with the AR-15 had been with a Mexican drug cartel lookout instead of a citizen exercising his constitutional right to self-protection, then firing 71 rounds into him would have been the right decision. I'm all for calling folks out on police misconduct, but I can't quite imagine how a SWAT agent could have made the correct assessment here without putting their own lives in jeopardy.

If I'm looking for some murderers here, then my search would be for the person who approved sending a paramilitary unit into such a vague mission where there was such a significant risk to civilians.


I'm guessing that the warrant included a smidgen of information about the property owner or residents that might have given some idea that this person was likely trained and armed. It also would have warranted some kind of common courtesy so I doubt that they bothered to look too far into who the person on the other end of the warrant was.

Belial wrote:
Garm wrote:The drug war is such a blight on society. Legalize and tax, assholes.


Man, but then what will assholes do when they want to play soldier without having to travel or sleep in a barracks?

Do what the ATF always did before or join the Coast Guard. Nothing against that branch, mad props to the people who actively fight drug smugglers and literal pirates on the shores and ocean. Or hell, just do the exact same thing, but call it "gang related" instead of "drug related".

Legalize and tax doesn't destroy black markets, but it does throw some of the sources for a loop. Tell you what, if various drugs get legalized, who do you think is going to be the major suppliers? Who's already got the set up to ship, export, distribute or get around taxes in place, at this time? It's not the nice local distributors. It'll be the same situation it was with prohibition, the guys who had the greatest supply lines before legalization were suddenly in a place and with the capitol to turn it into a full time legitimate business. Not that it shouldn't happen, but just saying "Legalize" or "Tax" is the kind of ignorance or brevity that leaves the entire legalization movement open for attack by those opposing it.

Edit: Additionally I think listing number of tours or previous occupation smacks of sensationalism, every time. Non-combat troops deploy all the time, and not everyone with a gun is particularly good with it, even in the military.
Last edited by dedwrekka on Thu May 19, 2011 11:23 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Thirty-one
Posts: 342
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 1:13 pm UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Thirty-one » Thu May 19, 2011 11:20 am UTC

Nordic Einar wrote:Fair enough - but is it really that unreasonable that you might, in the heat of the moment during a life or death situation, pull off a longer burst than you had expected? I find it difficult to believe, both from my own experience with automatics and discussions I've had with people who've seen combat, that perfect trigger discipline is maintained 100% of the time in a combat situation.

I still maintain that bitching about the number of rounds they put into the man is irrelevant - had they shot him 10 times in total and he been denied medical treatment for an hour the outcome would likely have been the same. Of all the things to be bitching about regarding the handling of this incident, trigger discipline seems like the last one we should be concerned with. Especially seeing as how, all things being equal, they had a pretty fantastic hit rate.



*shrug* People expect much from guys who spend a lot of their week practising scenarios like these.

And I agree that the number of rounds might be irrelevant beyond a certain point. I'd have found comfort in knowing they were somewhere in the ballpark
of that point though. But yes, they could have hit him with one and still managed to kill him if they just denied him treatment for long enough.

And yes, again, the hit rate part of trigger discipline was excellent, but I find them all the more lacking in the "knowing when to stop" department.

You're probably right that I'm spending too much time on that specific point though, when the main concern should be militarization of police. I
just wanted to point out that trigger discipline can mean more than hitting your target.


As a side note to an earlier post of yours up there.

You don't fire a gun with the intent of incapacitating someone. The first thing you're taught is never to fire your gun at something you don't intend to kill.


That's only partially true. It's what I've been told when firing guns in civilian settings, but not what we were told in the army. Not because the army was so
overall nice though, they just had different motives. "Don't shoot at someone you'll regret dying" might be more accurate for them, but they definitely told us
that the most favourable outcome would be the enemy soldier spending a fair amount of time bleeding and screaming.
I don't expect this is universal though. The US Army where they're currently at probably trains their recruits differently, and the same would, I'm sure, be true
for SWAT. My point is just that it's not a universal rule, though it could be universal in civilian settings.
Annoyed, getting worked up or bored by the post above? Help is here.

User avatar
Oregonaut
Posts: 6511
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Oregon

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Oregonaut » Thu May 19, 2011 12:51 pm UTC

Err...just the voice of military experience here, don't mind me.

I think someone took a shot at one of me and mine? I'm emptying a clip towards them unless it is readily apparent that I've done sufficient damage to kill them.

Let's not compare military to cops. Bad, bad comparison.
- Ochigo the Earth-Stomper

The EGE wrote:
Mumpy wrote:And to this day, librarians revile Oregonaut as the Antichrist.

False! We sacrifice our card catalogues to him in the name of Job Security!

User avatar
Thirty-one
Posts: 342
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 1:13 pm UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Thirty-one » Thu May 19, 2011 12:56 pm UTC

Oregonaut wrote:Let's not compare military to cops. Bad, bad comparison.


Wasn't at all my point though. The point was that you'll be taught to treat firearms differently depending on where you learn to use them.
Annoyed, getting worked up or bored by the post above? Help is here.

User avatar
Oregonaut
Posts: 6511
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Oregon

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Oregonaut » Thu May 19, 2011 1:00 pm UTC

Yeah, I was reading through a lot of people's comments, seeing that they were talking about "military-esque training" and whatnot. That's really not a good way to say it. SWAT would never be deployed in a warzone, nor should military be deployed in a peacekeeping situation. Bad juju.

That wasn't directed at anyone in particular, just...at the thread in general.
- Ochigo the Earth-Stomper

The EGE wrote:
Mumpy wrote:And to this day, librarians revile Oregonaut as the Antichrist.

False! We sacrifice our card catalogues to him in the name of Job Security!

User avatar
Thirty-one
Posts: 342
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 1:13 pm UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Thirty-one » Thu May 19, 2011 1:03 pm UTC

Argh, we agree. I'll have to find someone else to argue with.. :?
Annoyed, getting worked up or bored by the post above? Help is here.

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Belial » Thu May 19, 2011 1:07 pm UTC

Oregonaut wrote:Yeah, I was reading through a lot of people's comments, seeing that they were talking about "military-esque training" and whatnot. That's really not a good way to say it.


Man, "military-esque" is a perfect way to say it. Just not "military". The military is definitely what they're meant to emulate, which is why it's so fucked up that they're deployed so carelessly against civilians. You can argue that it's a particularly poor emulation, and I'd agree with you. But a bunch of people doing a shit job of playing soldier are still playing soldier
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
Oregonaut
Posts: 6511
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Oregon

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Oregonaut » Thu May 19, 2011 1:11 pm UTC

I'm not sold on the fact that they're "playing soldier", I think that's expressing an inadequate understanding of what the specific missions of the military are. A police force should never expect to kill first and capture second, which is a mission the military is specifically designed for. Capture and control of territory, not people.
- Ochigo the Earth-Stomper

The EGE wrote:
Mumpy wrote:And to this day, librarians revile Oregonaut as the Antichrist.

False! We sacrifice our card catalogues to him in the name of Job Security!

User avatar
TheKrikkitWars
Posts: 2205
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 3:08 pm UTC
Location: Bangor, Gwynedd, Gogledd Cymru
Contact:

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby TheKrikkitWars » Thu May 19, 2011 1:13 pm UTC

Oregonaut wrote:Let's not compare military to cops. Bad, bad comparison.


Exactly, police officers need to be very careful about the use of lethal force and should be taking every possible action to avoid using it... It would be highly unreasonable to expect that of combatants in a warzone.

It would appear that SWAT units are not being trained hard enough or are not being trained in an appropriate range of Scenarios, Skills and Environments if they're unable to stay calm and collected enough to achive the best possible resolutions (which in this case would have been as simple as issuing a challenge "Sherriffs Department drop your weapon" as they booted the door in).

Currently it would seem that they're trained not much differently to soliders who carry out rapid entry in urban warfare... That's an inappropriate model for use in 99.9%* of policing scenarios.

*In case it wasn't obvious from the cliche, that's a number I pulled out of my arse to make the point.
Great things are done when Men & Mountains meet,
This is not Done by Jostling in the Street.

User avatar
Ortus
Fluffy
Posts: 569
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 7:09 am UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Ortus » Thu May 19, 2011 11:07 pm UTC

TheKrikkitWars wrote:
It's not acceptable to say that "it would expose myself to risk, not to just blast away"...
That's why you're a SWAT member, you take an extra risk because your extra training is intended to prepare you for that risk, so that the public you protect will remain safe.

If you shoot innocent members of the public because you're scared of exposing yourself to risk, then you're hopelessly failing at your job;




I actually only wanted to say this. Thanks for saying it for me xD
roband wrote:Face, yes. Chest, probably. Pubic area, maybe. Scrotum, not a fucking chance.

LtNOWIS
Posts: 371
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 4:21 pm UTC
Location: Fairfax County

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby LtNOWIS » Fri May 20, 2011 12:22 am UTC

Oregonaut wrote:Yeah, I was reading through a lot of people's comments, seeing that they were talking about "military-esque training" and whatnot. That's really not a good way to say it. SWAT would never be deployed in a warzone, nor should military be deployed in a peacekeeping situation. Bad juju.

That wasn't directed at anyone in particular, just...at the thread in general.

Well... a lot of what the US military is doing today is peacekeeping, no? Often alongside national police forces. But I guess for the Afghan National Police, over-lethality is probably the least of their concerns.

User avatar
Oregonaut
Posts: 6511
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Oregon

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Oregonaut » Fri May 20, 2011 12:27 am UTC

Small units, certain careers, those are fine for peacekeepers.

I wouldn't send the Big Red 1 to a drug bust.
- Ochigo the Earth-Stomper

The EGE wrote:
Mumpy wrote:And to this day, librarians revile Oregonaut as the Antichrist.

False! We sacrifice our card catalogues to him in the name of Job Security!

KittenKaboodle
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 6:36 am UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby KittenKaboodle » Fri May 20, 2011 2:37 am UTC

Nordic Einar wrote: Of all the things to be bitching about regarding the handling of this incident, trigger discipline seems like the last one we should be concerned with.

Considering the the shooting started with one of the cop's gun "missfiring, and the dead guy never fired at all, I suspect trigger disipline is one of the first things to be concerned with.
Another question, If one is wearing body armor, is part of a team considerably out numbering the suspect and entring a house with a child present, does one realy need to have ones weapon on full automatic? And, while I understand wanting to be sure the guy you think shot at you (but who did not in fact fire at all) is dead, is firing 70 round into a house with a child in it really that great of idea ?

User avatar
Vaniver
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:12 am UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Vaniver » Fri May 20, 2011 4:25 pm UTC

podbaydoor wrote:Did mosc make that claim?
Implicitly, yes. If the SWAT is designed for situations where maximum aggression is justified, then shouldn't we be worried about it being used where it isn't justified?

The relevance of the taser is that it was initially introduced as a pistol substitute. If you were willing to shoot someone (and possibly kill them), then you could instead tase them, and they probably wouldn't die, and probably would be incapacitated. In situations where you were willing to shoot someone with a bullet, switching to tasers is a net win. Likewise, if you are facing situations where you are willing to use maximum aggression against the residents against a building, having a SWAT team is superior to just throwing beat cops at it.

The problem is that the taser is taken nowhere near as seriously as a pistol, and thus is dramatically overused. The situations where tasers are a positive influence are drowned out by the situations where the taser is a negative influence. Likewise with SWAT teams.

I mean, let's be explicit. What does maximum aggression mean, in the context of police units? SWAT teams are death squads. Sometimes, it is justifiable to have a death squad on hand: when someone is barricaded in a building or hostages have been taken are two ready examples. But in Maryland, the first state to require SWAT teams to actually track and release what they do, 94% of SWAT team deployments are to serve search or arrest warrants. When you send death squads to do no-knock search warrants because of the suspicion of a non-violent crime, something has gone horribly wrong. (Maryland requires this level of transparency because one of the victims of SWAT incompetence was a mayor, who was able to use his public position to successfully push for transparency.)

This isn't "sometimes SWAT screws up." This is "in the only state with a shred of transparency, SWAT teams are being misused 94% of the time."

Aikanaro wrote:Side question: Has there ever been a case of a no-knock warrant being issued, and the (innocent!) owner of the home in question successfully slaughtering all trespassers? And if so, how did it play out in court?
The tragedy of Ruby Ridge is one case where a victim was able to defend himself in combat and in court.
I mostly post over at LessWrong now.

Avatar from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, owned by Hasbro.

Роберт
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 1:56 am UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Роберт » Fri May 20, 2011 4:31 pm UTC

Vaniver wrote:This isn't "sometimes SWAT screws up." This is "in the only state with a shred of transparency, SWAT teams are being misused 94% of the time."

Wow. Seriously.
The Great Hippo wrote:[T]he way we treat suspected terrorists genuinely terrifies me.

Tirian
Posts: 1891
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 6:03 pm UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Tirian » Fri May 20, 2011 5:04 pm UTC

Vaniver wrote:This isn't "sometimes SWAT screws up." This is "in the only state with a shred of transparency, SWAT teams are being misused 94% of the time."


Maybe misused, maybe underused. Those officers work full-time, and so they're going to have to do some "slumming" between hostage standoffs. Personally, I've got no trouble on keeping the units together during the week to build teamwork and sending them on missions where the shit is close to the fan.

The key question is whether those teams are serving arrest warrants in their full paramilitary gear. I don't live in Maryland, but my guess is that they start out in ordinary police gear with the option to upgrade if the situation warrants, noting as you do that this is obviously a state that closely monitors their SWAT teams and have deservedly high expectations.

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3995
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby Dauric » Fri May 20, 2011 5:13 pm UTC

Tirian wrote:
Vaniver wrote:This isn't "sometimes SWAT screws up." This is "in the only state with a shred of transparency, SWAT teams are being misused 94% of the time."


Maybe misused, maybe underused. Those officers work full-time, and so they're going to have to do some "slumming" between hostage standoffs. Personally, I've got no trouble on keeping the units together during the week to build teamwork and sending them on missions where the shit is close to the fan.

The key question is whether those teams are serving arrest warrants in their full paramilitary gear. I don't live in Maryland, but my guess is that they start out in ordinary police gear with the option to upgrade if the situation warrants, noting as you do that this is obviously a state that closely monitors their SWAT teams and have deservedly high expectations.


If they're not in full gear, they're not operating as SWAT. Typically (from my understanding having had friends who were police themselves) SWAT is made up of police officers that have received "SWAT Training/Certification". When SWAT is called up those officers are pulled from their regular duties, given their SWAT gear and told where to report for briefing. If they're on their regular duties they're just police officers.

If 94% of the time SWAT is being called in for duties that aren't what they're supposed to be for, it's just as bad as it sounds.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

IcedT
Posts: 867
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 8:34 pm UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby IcedT » Fri May 20, 2011 7:53 pm UTC

Vaniver wrote:This isn't "sometimes SWAT screws up." This is "in the only state with a shred of transparency, SWAT teams are being misused 94% of the time."

Dauric wrote:If 94% of the time SWAT is being called in for duties that aren't what they're supposed to be for, it's just as bad as it sounds.

Gentlemen, you have just successfully made me paranoid.

User avatar
mosc
Doesn't care what you think.
Posts: 5403
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:03 pm UTC

Re: Marine serves two tours in Iraq, killed by SWAT.

Postby mosc » Tue May 24, 2011 2:49 pm UTC

Vaniver wrote:
podbaydoor wrote:Did mosc make that claim?
Implicitly, yes. If the SWAT is designed for situations where maximum aggression is justified, then shouldn't we be worried about it being used where it isn't justified?

If you actually READ my posts, I implied quite the opposite. SWAT is a weapon, but it's trigger is pulled by others. I am definitely worried about when it's abused. That doesn't mean I have a problem with the actual SWAT response to the task though. Those are two entirely different issues. The only reason I posted in this thread is because people were whining about denying medical treatment to a corpse.

And you quoting 94% is ridiculous. You are saying that all arrests are perfectly safe for plain clothes officers? Have you missed the stead rise in officers killed in the line of duty over the past few years?
Title: It was given by the XKCD moderators to me because they didn't care what I thought (I made some rantings, etc). I care what YOU think, the joke is forums.xkcd doesn't care what I think.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests