Help support WeTheArmed.com by visiting our sponsors.

Author Topic: less lethal, moved from Rifles  (Read 2612 times)

Chief45

  • WTA LEO
  • Senior Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 2483

  • Offline
less lethal, moved from Rifles
« on: December 14, 2010, 12:12:50 pm »
DO NOT LIKE mixing less lethal and lethal on the same weapon.

That is a tragedy waiting to happen, I don't care how much you train.

Mike
potential ? maybe.  no more of a risk then everything else we do.

well,  we don't have the luxury of having sufficient money to support 2 entirely different 12 gauge weapon systems per unit.  Our training is set up as best we can for what we have to work with in the real world. Our training emphasis that, If Time Permits,  the officer grabs the shotgun,  Less Lethal is the first round in the magazine.
If time does not permit, then the officer remains with the Lethal option he is already carrying on his belt.

If time permits to grab the shotgun, and time permits, the officer may up load slugs for the lethal option in the long gun.

If time permits, the officer may grab a rifle from the trunk for the lethal option.

The concept here is,  if time permits, the officer has the option of using a less lethal option, as long as he is not alone and as long as the other officers present retain the lethal option.  Otherwise, no.

For an officer to grab the shotgun from the cruiser, it has to be a deliberate action and there has to be time.  If the officer has chosen the shotgun and chosen to remain with less lethal, it is a deliberate action and not a panic grab.

If the officer has chosen to upload slugs instead of beanbag, it is also a deliberate action and not a panic response.

remember also, that the beanbag is Less Lethal,  not  Non Lethal.  if SHTF, you can still make a kill shot with a beanbag round.
KansasUN-Retired LEO.

Non Timebo Mala . . . . . . . I will fear no evil. . .

It is what it is. . . . . .It's All Good.

WeTheArmed.com

  • Advertisement
  • ***

    JesseL

    • Gun Mangler
    • WTA Staff
    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 12451

    • Offline
    Re: less lethal, moved from Rifles
    « Reply #1 on: December 14, 2010, 12:17:46 pm »
    Stupid question from a non-LEO:

    Would I be correct in understanding that beanbags are at the same level on the use of force continuum as slugs, and would only be deployed in situations that would justify lethal force?
    Arizona

    StevenTing

    • WTA Staff
    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 4651

    • Offline
    Re: less lethal, moved from Rifles
    « Reply #2 on: December 14, 2010, 12:42:39 pm »
    I'm coming in the middle of this discussion.  Less-Lethal/Lethal on the same weapon sounds bad to me.  It makes me think of the Oscar Grant Situation.  In that case, the Officer had both a Firearm and a Taser.  In this case, this was a deadly mistake.  Does it make any difference to call it Less-Lethal?  I think it should all be classified as Lethal and should be used under conditions where lethal force is necessary.

    http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/state&id=7520748
    Utah

    Chief45

    • WTA LEO
    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 2483

    • Offline
    Re: less lethal, moved from Rifles
    « Reply #3 on: December 14, 2010, 12:59:09 pm »
    Stupid question from a non-LEO:

    Would I be correct in understanding that beanbags are at the same level on the use of force continuum as slugs, and would only be deployed in situations that would justify lethal force?

    no.

    Bean bag, kinetic energy impact rounds, less lethal.  On the force continuum, they class as an impact weapon, below lethal and deadly force. (that which may cause, that which will cause )
    A beanbag can cause death, if impact occurs in the wrong area. same with a baton strike.  When properly deployed, it should not cause significant injury.

    My last deployment did leave a scar, but no permanent injury.  Individual with a club, OC spray did not have any effect.  Options (no taser available) were deadly force, hands on or beanbag.  Beanbag deployed, he surrendered.  no one else hurt.  Deadly force could have been justified as he was not complying, engaged in active resistance and had a weapon. Hands on could have sent someone, or several someones to the hospital with injuries.

    As far as tragedy.  I believe the departments using 2 different but fundamentally identical weapons systems are more likely to incur the tragedy then we are.  For discussion purposes, there is no practical difference between a Remington 870, a Mossberg 500 or a Winchester 1200.   I'm not talking placement of safety switches as being a practical difference.  I'm not talking "color" being a practical difference.  Do you have color blind or color deficient officers ?  are you in compliance with ADA ?

    2 pm on a bright sunny day or 2 am on a pitch black stormy night with no lights.  when my officer grabs the shotgun, he knows: It's a Remington 870, chamber is empty, if he racks the action, the first round is a beanbag.

    The entire concept is,  IF TIME PERMITS, and circumstances justify it, then the officer has the option of using less lethal.  PERIOD.

    otherwise, the officer is going to use lethal force.  Period.



    KansasUN-Retired LEO.

    Non Timebo Mala . . . . . . . I will fear no evil. . .

    It is what it is. . . . . .It's All Good.

    coyotesfan97

    • WTA LEO
    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 3081
    • Life's Short Bite Hard!

    • Offline
    Re: less lethal, moved from Rifles
    « Reply #4 on: December 14, 2010, 01:51:09 pm »
    Quote
    potential ? maybe.  no more of a risk then everything else we do.

    well,  we don't have the luxury of having sufficient money to support 2 entirely different 12 gauge weapon systems per unit.  Our training is set up as best we can for what we have to work with in the real world. Our training emphasis that, If Time Permits,  the officer grabs the shotgun,  Less Lethal is the first round in the magazine.
    If time does not permit, then the officer remains with the Lethal option he is already carrying on his belt.

    If time permits to grab the shotgun, and time permits, the officer may up load slugs for the lethal option in the long gun.

    If time permits, the officer may grab a rifle from the trunk for the lethal option.

    The concept here is,  if time permits, the officer has the option of using a less lethal option, as long as he is not alone and as long as the other officers present retain the lethal option.  Otherwise, no.

    For an officer to grab the shotgun from the cruiser, it has to be a deliberate action and there has to be time.  If the officer has chosen the shotgun and chosen to remain with less lethal, it is a deliberate action and not a panic grab.

    If the officer has chosen to upload slugs instead of beanbag, it is also a deliberate action and not a panic response.

    remember also, that the beanbag is Less Lethal,  not  Non Lethal.  if SHTF, you can still make a kill shot with a beanbag round.

    Whoever separated the thread missed my response in the original about ARs.  

    Your concern about identical weapons systems is why we went to Mossberg 930s.  I didn't add that Officers who want to carry them have to purchase them.  The department issues 870s for beanbags and we do not certify everyone with bean bags.  

    Two different weapons systems with a completely different manual of arms.  Officers who carry lethal shotguns are not permitted to carry beanbag shotguns.  Officers who carry ARs can carry beanbag shotguns.

    Just my two cents but if you have the option of using rifles for your long guns the shotguns probably should be dedicated to less lethal.  Then there is no chance of slugs getting in the tube accidentally.  I have heard of slugs and breaching rounds getting in the mix with fatal results.


    I understand the argument about the cost of two different shotgun weapon systems ( and that its probably not your choice) but if Mr Murphy shows up and something bad happens whatever the savings your city has achieved by not buying the two systems will be wiped out by the cost of the lawsuit/settlement.  :shrug

    ArizonaThe bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding, go out to meet it.  Thucydides 471BC

    "Hey!  Let's be careful out there." Sgt Phil Esterhaus played by Michael Conrad

    MacLean

    • WTA LEO
    • Contributor
    • ****
    • Posts: 1688
    • Just another instructor.

    • Offline
    Re: less lethal, moved from Rifles
    « Reply #5 on: December 14, 2010, 02:50:40 pm »
    We do not allow lethal shotgun rounds in the cars or kit bags, and the less lethal shotguns are kept unloaded in the car, so the officer has to visually identify each round placed in the tube as a less lethal round.
    Ged tha mi bochd tha mi uasal; buidheachas do Dhia is ann de Chlann 'Ill Eathain mi'

    coyotesfan97

    • WTA LEO
    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 3081
    • Life's Short Bite Hard!

    • Offline
    Re: less lethal, moved from Rifles
    « Reply #6 on: December 14, 2010, 03:20:07 pm »
    Our beanbag shotgunners are issued 10 rounds.  They load the 870 at the start of the shift with their rounds and unload them at the end of the shift.  The unloaded shotgun is stored in the arms closet until the next Officer takes it out.
    ArizonaThe bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding, go out to meet it.  Thucydides 471BC

    "Hey!  Let's be careful out there." Sgt Phil Esterhaus played by Michael Conrad

    MacLean

    • WTA LEO
    • Contributor
    • ****
    • Posts: 1688
    • Just another instructor.

    • Offline
    Re: less lethal, moved from Rifles
    « Reply #7 on: December 14, 2010, 04:04:44 pm »
    Our beanbag shotgunners are issued 10 rounds.  They load the 870 at the start of the shift with their rounds and unload them at the end of the shift.  The unloaded shotgun is stored in the arms closet until the next Officer takes it out.

    Pool cars, shotguns are issued to the car.

    We found that people would skip verifying the load on the gun at the start of the shift, so it was easier to simply require empty tube and full sidesaddle.

    The rifles are the "go to" option for lethal force scenarios known in advance, and the LL requires lethal cover anyhow.
    Ged tha mi bochd tha mi uasal; buidheachas do Dhia is ann de Chlann 'Ill Eathain mi'

    Coronach

    • WTA Staff
    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 6791
    • Armorer: Colt 1911, M16, Glock, M&P, Rem 700 & 870

    • Offline
    Re: less lethal, moved from Rifles
    « Reply #8 on: December 16, 2010, 08:42:40 pm »
    I missed that this got split out.

    Quote
    potential ? maybe.  no more of a risk then everything else we do.
    I would argue that it is a lot higher. We just had an officer in Oakland shoot a man with his gun because he thought he grabbed his Taser. Are you advocating carrying less lethal and lethal rounds on/in the same weapon? Because that was what the OP was describing. I submit to you that this is a completely, utterly terrible idea. It is a lawsuit waiting to happen.

    Lethal/less lethal situations are fluid. You can go from a scenario in which less lethal is a good response to a scenario where you need to go lethal in the blink of an eye, and back again. Now...what load do you have in the pipe? In the tube? Do you know for sure? Are you about to go to a gunfight with a beanbag, or are you about to shoot the suicidal guy with a slug?

    Better yet, officer down! You roll up and take fire as soon as you get there. You bail out of the car with just your sidearm, find the fallen officer, and grab his shotgun. Several rounds have been taken from the sidesaddle, a couple of empty shells are on the ground. What's in the pipe? What's in the tube? Do you know? Are you sure? A round whizzes past your ear and you see the bad guy shooting at you, outside of your effective pistol range. Better take your shot because he is taking his, no time to check...sure hope you're not about to lob a beanbag at him.

    I doubt VERY highly that you can effectively train every officer to correctly handle the ammo selection process every time with any sort of reasonable budget...not if you're doing effective, "stressed" training.

    This is a serious, serious liability.

    Mike
    OhioNot stressed, but I am a carrier.

    Help support WeTheArmed.com by visiting our sponsors.