Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ Heh Rayman, check it out.

Posted by: The Question Man Jun 4 2004, 09:28 PM

Hoi Chummer, thought you might get a kick out of this one. When Science Fiction becomes Science Fact.

http://www.discover.com/issues/jun-04/rd/electric-bullets-save-lives/

Fades to Black

QM.

Posted by: tjn Jun 4 2004, 09:44 PM

So, in effort to pull it to SR... does John LeBourgeois win Dunk's nonlethal bequest some 50 years before he dies?

My second thought is... okay, one shot does 50k volts and does bad things to muscles and nervous systems to shutdown the individual.

Would that really be much of a difference in the case that supposedly inspired this guy? 40 rounds before he hit the floor? Um... that much stun overflow, even at one box a stage... Guess Mr. Amadou Diallo would have had to have been a Troll.

Posted by: Arethusa Jun 4 2004, 10:02 PM

Gun. Raygun. Though I do find the image of a machinegun toting, armless, legless cartoon character vaguely amusing.

In any case, point about the Diallo case was that they could've put him down with one round had they had Shockrounds, or so the advertisements claim. Of course, lots of people would suggest that cops just be better trained, but that's neither here nor there.

Posted by: Siege Jun 4 2004, 10:35 PM

True. Their marksmanship in the Diallo case was horrible.

-Siege

Posted by: Number 6 Jun 4 2004, 10:37 PM

Yep. By being better trained they coulda saved the taxpayers almost $5 in bullets.

Posted by: JaronK Jun 4 2004, 10:41 PM

Well, and not killed the guy, which some would consider more valuable.

JaronK

Posted by: Siege Jun 4 2004, 10:53 PM

Without video evidence, it is impossible to determine what actually happened.

However, if Mr. Diallo did something like reach in a pocket while turning around, most cops would assume that to be a threatening gesture.

Especially in the face of three officers with drawn weapons.

Now, since we don't have video evidence, it's equally possible the officers opened fire without any provocation and were just incompetent.

However, the fact remains the marksmanship was atrocious, especially for close quarters work.

-Siege

Posted by: Arethusa Jun 4 2004, 10:57 PM

Not to mention that 40 rounds on target and many more off tends to ring false with most people as professional, cool headed action.

Posted by: Siege Jun 4 2004, 10:58 PM

QUOTE (Number 6)

Yep. By being better trained they coulda saved the taxpayers almost $5 in bullets.

And not discharged so many rounds, endangering innocent bystanders which are relatively abundant in urban settings.

But the $5 dollars in expended ammo counts too.

-Siege

Posted by: Hasaku Jun 4 2004, 11:46 PM

3 cops managed to put 40 rounds into him. I'm assuming nobody stopped to reload just to be a dick about it. Allowing for high capacity magazines that's, what, 5 missed shots? Hardly "many more off."

Posted by: Siege Jun 4 2004, 11:51 PM

QUOTE (Hasaku)

3 cops managed to put 40 rounds into him. I'm assuming nobody stopped to reload just to be a dick about it. Allowing for high capacity magazines that's, what, 5 missed shots? Hardly "many more off."

http://www.courttv.com/trials/diallo/010604_settlement_ap.html's story.

41 rounds discharged, 19 actually struck the target.

-Siege

Posted by: Raygun Jun 5 2004, 12:04 AM

More info http://www.mdmgroupinc.com/.

Posted by: Hasaku Jun 5 2004, 12:17 AM

Ah. Discover needs to realize that “the police put 40 bullets in him before he hit the ground" is not the same as "the police fired 40 bullets at him before he hit the ground."

But it sounds more dramatic, so run with it. It's only news after all.

Posted by: Phaeton Jun 5 2004, 01:11 AM

Put these puppers in an Ares Alpha and street sams REALLY have the playing field levelled for them against spirits.

Posted by: otomik Jun 5 2004, 01:19 AM

NYPD is one of the worst places a cop would work for. At the time all the weapons they issued or authorized were fed a standard pressure 115gr. 9mm Ball from 15-shot magazines. 9mm is NYPD's only authorized cartridge and police departments are notorious for cutting weapons training at any budget crunch.

The four cops at the diallo shooting carried a Glock 19 (with modified horrible NY heavy trigger), 2 Sig-Sauer P-226 (DAO) and a S&W 5946 (horrible DAO).

I wouldn't feel comfortable if the only choices i had in sidearms were DAO 9mm FMJ, and it gives me the feeling that their training program is little more than spray n pray.

http://www.thegunzone.com/glock/phase3.html

about the Taser Bullet, he says he has yet to test it. nuff said.

Posted by: Phaeton Jun 5 2004, 01:40 AM

What does DAO mean, again?

Posted by: Capt. Dave Jun 5 2004, 01:42 AM

Double Action Only

Posted by: Siege Jun 5 2004, 01:43 AM

QUOTE (Phaeton)

What does DAO mean, again?

Double Action Only.

It means the gun lacks a cocking hammer and can be pulled without cocking the hammer first.

A DA and DAO pull are significantly heavier than a SA (Single Action) pull.

By comparison, a SA requires the hammer to be manually cocked before firing the first shot. A SA has a much lighter pull than the DAO.

A DA/SA is a combination of the two, allowing the shooter either to fire without a hammer cock or to cock the hammer, enabling the lighter pull.

As a side note: You'd think agencies would save weapons training as the last place to skimp, given the bad PR and inevitable lawsuits that arise from accidental or indiscriminate fire.

-Siege

Posted by: Phaeton Jun 5 2004, 01:48 AM

@ Capt. Dave/Siege: Ahhhh, right...Thanks!

Back to the drifted topic...*sigh* I guess they get more target practice on-duty than in training.

Posted by: Siege Jun 5 2004, 01:53 AM

Poor standards in training require more initiative from officers to keep their weapons skills sharp.

Unforunately, expecting officers to pursue such training outside of department mandate is more of an ideal than any real basis in fact.

As I understand it, most departments handle weapons training like a college course -- you take it and then move on to your next course. Given how mission-critical this happens to be, I would expect a heavier emphasis on such duties.

-Siege

Posted by: Capt. Dave Jun 5 2004, 02:00 AM

Maybe it's because I live in a small Ga. town, but 90% of the officers here train
with weapons a lot. Our S.W.A.T. team is made up of beat officers, and I
know they keep up their training.

Oddly enough, they've only had to shoot one person. Most of them feel that if they have to use their weapons, they should be able to use them effectively.

Hell, they'll get a few of them together at the range
off duty to practice for fun.

Posted by: Siege Jun 5 2004, 02:03 AM

Another Georgia geek -- glad to meet you.

-Siege

Posted by: Capt. Dave Jun 5 2004, 02:06 AM

Same here

Posted by: Arethusa Jun 5 2004, 02:09 AM

A few quotations off of http://www.thehighroad.org.

QUOTE (The High Road)

I can tell that the UAPD officers carry a glock, just by the shape of the grip. They seem taken aback when I ask which one.

QUOTE (The High Road)

I met a police officer eating at a chinese restaurant as I wait for my order. I asked the PO about his carry, if they get to choose their sidearm... he said, "I don't even know what I carry" ...and then, he pulled it out, showed me the pistol (loaded I assume). I told him that it was a GLOCK, and he said, "Is that what this is?"

QUOTE (The High Road)

I got pulled over 3 weeks ago (for unsafe lane changed), stupid me with all my gun periodicals everywhere, gave it away that I was armed. The PO asked me if I have a gun, and I said yes. He asked me to pull it out with my weak hand. As I took it out of the bag, he noticed that the magazine wasn't there. He said, "How the heck are you gonna be ready if anything were to happen?" So I said, huh? But he kept talkin' about where to keep my gun and mags. And finally he said, "that's a pretty gun, is that a Beretta?" I said, no sir its a Taurus. We ended up talking more and not once he asked me for my CCL.

I don't know what towns or even what states these posters were from, but I can say that that is exactly what I'd expect from the police in my town, and I don't think it's an uncommon phenomenon. Certainly, there is more to being a cop than shooting straight, but that's really no excuse.

Posted by: Siege Jun 5 2004, 02:16 AM

It's not especially surprising given how little firearms training is given in some areas.

However, I choose to console myself with the idea that these are the exception and not the rule.

Yes, I have a first class ticket to denial.

-Siege

Posted by: Phaeton Jun 5 2004, 02:21 AM

QUOTE (Siege)

When all else fails, that's rarely if ever a bad thing, though.

Posted by: Frag-o Delux Jun 5 2004, 07:33 PM

I had 2 pistols once when I got pulled over. The arresting officer tried to put the wrong clip in the wrong pistol and would wind up jamming the clips in the wrong guns. It was a bitch getting them repaired. In my state your weapons are not allowed to be loaded while in transferre. When the cops saw them they retreaved all the weapons and components. When they saw two were clip fed they tried to put the clips in the pistols. Which like I said jammed them up. Luckly no rounds were int he clips. I am amazed the cops couldn't tell the difference between the different caliber pistols. I was further amazed they didn't try sticking a click in the cyclinder gun after I found they jammed the clips in the guns.