Interesting Statistic

I heard a radio show caller say that when police discharge their firearms while on duty, the rate at which they hit their target is less than 1 in 3.

I researched and found data on NYC that puts it at 34%.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/08/nyregion/08nypd.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

I found that to be interesting and relevant to a discussion of arming teachers in schools.

Here's the thing. We could put crack shots in every classroom and it won't make a difference. The next shooter (and there will be a next shooter) will just shoot up a daycare center. Or a mall. Or a school bus. Or a nunnery. Or a lady's garden party. Or a Starbucks. Or a Congressman's town hall meeting.
 
I always wondered how many of those Al-queda types die when they shoot hundreds of rounds in the air during a celebration.

Yeah. Whenever I see a bunch of yahoos shooting their guns in the air in the Middle East, I always wonder where those rounds are landing.

Israel?

No, actually I always think of Saddam first...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfBIiTQT6jA]Saddam's Secret Weapon Exposed!! - YouTube[/ame]
 
Last edited:
I heard a radio show caller say that when police discharge their firearms while on duty, the rate at which they hit their target is less than 1 in 3.

I researched and found data on NYC that puts it at 34%.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/08/nyregion/08nypd.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

I found that to be interesting and relevant to a discussion of arming teachers in schools.

The Study is Bogus as it does not consider that Cops, Often fire a warning shot. It simply counted the number of Shots fired, to number of perps hit, and did not consider at all warning shots.

They do the same shit when they say if you own a gun you are more likely to be killed by it, than you are to use it in self defense. In that case, they include suicide by guns in their stats, and they only count it as used in self defense if the gun is actually discharged, if you just brandish it and don't have to shoot, they didn't count that.

The Left has real issues with the actual facts on this issue.

cops never fire a warning shot

It is an infraction in the NYPD to fire a warning shot. If ones gun is to be unloaded, the officer must feel a threat to him/herslef or the public.

And if the threat exists, the threat can only be eliminated with a deadly shot.

SO no warning shots and no shots to injure.

Shoot to kill or dont shoot at all.
 
The Study is Bogus as it does not consider that Cops, Often fire a warning shot. It simply counted the number of Shots fired, to number of perps hit, and did not consider at all warning shots.

They do the same shit when they say if you own a gun you are more likely to be killed by it, than you are to use it in self defense. In that case, they include suicide by guns in their stats, and they only count it as used in self defense if the gun is actually discharged, if you just brandish it and don't have to shoot, they didn't count that.

The Left has real issues with the actual facts on this issue.

cops never fire a warning shot

It is an infraction in the NYPD to fire a warning shot. If ones gun is to be unloaded, the officer must feel a threat to him/herslef or the public.

And if the threat exists, the threat can only be eliminated with a deadly shot.

SO no warning shots and no shots to injure.

Shoot to kill or dont shoot at all.

center mass
 
The police do NOT fire warning shots.

What goes up...must come down. And it comes down at the same speed it went up.

I always wondered how many of those Al-queda types die when they shoot hundreds of rounds in the air during a celebration.

FYI, though, this isn't true. It might be true in an airless environment, but falling projectiles reach a maximum speed rather quickly that is limited by air friction.

In other words, bullets leave the barrel in an upward trajectory MUCH FASTER than they return to the ground.
 
I heard a radio show caller say that when police discharge their firearms while on duty, the rate at which they hit their target is less than 1 in 3.

I researched and found data on NYC that puts it at 34%.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/08/nyregion/08nypd.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

I found that to be interesting and relevant to a discussion of arming teachers in schools.

Here's the thing. We could put crack shots in every classroom and it won't make a difference. The next shooter (and there will be a next shooter) will just shoot up a daycare center. Or a mall. Or a school bus. Or a nunnery. Or a lady's garden party. Or a Starbucks. Or a Congressman's town hall meeting.

That is "a" thing, I agree. It is not "the" thing......at least not for this topic.
 
The police do NOT fire warning shots.

What goes up...must come down. And it comes down at the same speed it went up.

I always wondered how many of those Al-queda types die when they shoot hundreds of rounds in the air during a celebration.

FYI, though, this isn't true. It might be true in an airless environment, but falling projectiles reach a maximum speed rather quickly that is limited by air friction.

In other words, bullets leave the barrel in an upward trajectory MUCH FASTER than they return to the ground.

As does a golf ball. If you are hit by the ball off the club, you can be seriously injured, if not killed. If hit by it on the way down, you will feel it, but survive.

But a bullet is designed to penetrate....and if that thing hits you in the head on the way down, it will penetrate and likely kill you.
 
I always wondered how many of those Al-queda types die when they shoot hundreds of rounds in the air during a celebration.

FYI, though, this isn't true. It might be true in an airless environment, but falling projectiles reach a maximum speed rather quickly that is limited by air friction.

In other words, bullets leave the barrel in an upward trajectory MUCH FASTER than they return to the ground.

As does a golf ball. If you are hit by the ball off the club, you can be seriously injured, if not killed. If hit by it on the way down, you will feel it, but survive.

But a bullet is designed to penetrate....and if that thing hits you in the head on the way down, it will penetrate and likely kill you.

I don't think so. Bullets on the way down tend to tumble; as they first leave a barrel, they are rifled and much less prone to wind resistance, but a tumbling bullet is relatively slow (and makes a really weird noise, by the way).
 
FYI, though, this isn't true. It might be true in an airless environment, but falling projectiles reach a maximum speed rather quickly that is limited by air friction.

In other words, bullets leave the barrel in an upward trajectory MUCH FASTER than they return to the ground.

As does a golf ball. If you are hit by the ball off the club, you can be seriously injured, if not killed. If hit by it on the way down, you will feel it, but survive.

But a bullet is designed to penetrate....and if that thing hits you in the head on the way down, it will penetrate and likely kill you.

I don't think so. Bullets on the way down tend to tumble; as they first leave a barrel, they are rifled and much less prone to wind resistance, but a tumbling bullet is relatively slow (and makes a really weird noise, by the way).

People get killed by bullets shot up into the sky all the time.
 
Last edited:
I heard a radio show caller say that when police discharge their firearms while on duty, the rate at which they hit their target is less than 1 in 3.

I researched and found data on NYC that puts it at 34%.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/08/nyregion/08nypd.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

I found that to be interesting and relevant to a discussion of arming teachers in schools.

Here's the thing. We could put crack shots in every classroom and it won't make a difference. The next shooter (and there will be a next shooter) will just shoot up a daycare center. Or a mall. Or a school bus. Or a nunnery. Or a lady's garden party. Or a Starbucks. Or a Congressman's town hall meeting.

But never an NRA meeting.
 
I always wondered how many of those Al-queda types die when they shoot hundreds of rounds in the air during a celebration.

FYI, though, this isn't true. It might be true in an airless environment, but falling projectiles reach a maximum speed rather quickly that is limited by air friction.

In other words, bullets leave the barrel in an upward trajectory MUCH FASTER than they return to the ground.

As does a golf ball. If you are hit by the ball off the club, you can be seriously injured, if not killed. If hit by it on the way down, you will feel it, but survive.

But a bullet is designed to penetrate....and if that thing hits you in the head on the way down, it will penetrate and likely kill you.

Bullshit!
 
As does a golf ball. If you are hit by the ball off the club, you can be seriously injured, if not killed. If hit by it on the way down, you will feel it, but survive.

But a bullet is designed to penetrate....and if that thing hits you in the head on the way down, it will penetrate and likely kill you.

I don't think so. Bullets on the way down tend to tumble; as they first leave a barrel, they are rifled and much less prone to wind resistance, but a tumbling bullet is relatively slow (and makes a really weird noise, by the way).

People get killed by bullets shot up into the sky all the time.

Link?
 
I heard a radio show caller say that when police discharge their firearms while on duty, the rate at which they hit their target is less than 1 in 3.

I researched and found data on NYC that puts it at 34%.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/08/nyregion/08nypd.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

I found that to be interesting and relevant to a discussion of arming teachers in schools.

From your link:

Every shot, from gunfight to accident to suicide, both on and off-duty, is accounted for.
 
The NYC Police need to go to Front Sight.

This is my 50 shots at 50 feet

crusaderfrank-albums-usmb-members-picture5452-50-at-50.jpg
That is good shooting, Frank. But it's a well established fact that the ability to kill a paper target under tranquil conditions has absolutely no bearing on one's ability to deliver accurate shots under stressful circumstances.

The problem with most police departments is their firearms training programs focus mainly on accuracy when what is needed is repetitive confrontation reaction training, which conditions the mind to respond reflexively under stressful circumstances. Most police shooting situations take place within seven to fifteen feet. So long long range accuracy is a secondary concern.

The reason why reflexive reaction training isn't more common is it must take place at least once a month, if not more, and each session is intensive, time-consuming, and expends a lot of ammunition.
 

Forum List

Back
Top