What's new

Guy killed by police after mask dispute

The thing is, there is shoot to incapicitate and shoot to kill
American cops always seem to shoot to kill.
 
The thing is, there is shoot to incapicitate and shoot to kill
American cops always seem to shoot to kill.

Technically not quite.

When you are trained to use a weapon, you aim for the largest available target. On a person, that's the torso.

You never shoot to kill or shoot to incapacitate. You shoot to stop.

Trying to land a round on an arm or a leg on a moving target when your adrenaline is up and there is alot of distractions around you is near on impossible.
 
deleted crossed wires my end
 
Last edited:
The thing is, there is shoot to incapicitate and shoot to kill
American cops always seem to shoot to kill.
Shooting a moving target in the leg to stop them running is a fantasy for films.

cops are not trained snipers, they just need to stop a general target. No way they can calculate a leg or arm shot on a moving target while also calculating the damage to passers by and anyone stood anywhere near that may get hit by a ricochet in the extremely likely event they miss ...
 
my understanding is that the armed response polis “shoot to incapacitate” and this usually means the chest area, but that sometime they need to go for a headshot in the case of terrorists specifically as they may be wearing body armour. i read something about it a while back.

it’s interesting, seems it’s a bit of a grey area, covered by common law and subject to criminal law also. has to be self defence or public protection and only reasonable force.
 
Back
Top Bottom