Your point about "justifying 6 bullets" to stop an attacker reminded me of something I read a while ago and thought may be of interest to others.

Basically, I was shocked to learn that when soldiers "practice" shooting at targets on the firing range their accuracy is generally impressive… well into the 90%+ accuracy… BUT, when firing under duress in combat, that same impressive accuracy dropped into the single-digit accuracy range (<10%.)

Adrenaline, perspiration, increased heart rate, fear, shaking (hand tremors), etc… all interfered with firing accuracy. I imagine that a law enforcement officer in a perceived life or death situation would be hampered with the same inaccuracy problems as a soldier in combat. Therefore, my opinion is I wouldn't assign any negative intent on the police officer's part simply due to the number of rounds fired. My guess is he suffered from the same inaccuracy issue (4 of the 6 rounds hit Mr. Brown's arm - versus the standard chest shot aim point.)

a no risk, no involvement arm chair discussion of how many times to shoot to be effective contributes absolutely nothing more than intellectual hypothecizing.

Only when YOU are personally confronted, under durees with fear of losing your life are you qualified to say what should be done, when and how many times or not.

Hmmmmnnnn......I wonder why it is that swat/seal type training employs triple taps.
In the intellectual arm chair mode, it would seem one well placed shot should be sufficient.....of course I am being sarcastic!

If one bullet was justified, then 6 probably were. The media commentators focusing on 6 shots apparently have little knowledge of firearms and combat-shooting situations. If you are justified in firing that first bullet, you keep shooting until the threat is eliminated. Remember that with a semi-automatic pistol (now standard police-issue and bad-guy carried), six shots can be fired in a couple of seconds--in a stress situation and not having time to carefully aim. Given the number of shots in Ferguson's arm rather than his torso, the officer apparently did not have time to carefully aim. (By the way, frequently, one or two shots will not stop a determined attacker.)

I continue to find it both astounding and disturbing how many people and the media seem determined to convict the police officer of murder before all the facts are available. While we should withhold judgment on the matter for the time being, as more and more information becomes publicly available, it is looking more and more as though the police officer was justified in the shooting and that the national media has once again made a fool of itself.

I agree Advogado. I read an article recently on this subject which cited opinion polls and broke down various demographic groups and their views on what occurred/is occurring in Ferguson. I was surprised to read there was a stronger correlation to "how you view the world" (the word we are not supposed to reference or interject in our posts lest we be sanctioned) than your racial background. People with a certain "view of the world" overwhelmingly blamed the police while people with a different "view of the world" overwhelming supported the police. Racial demographics were secondary to your "world view" as far as correlation to blame was concerned. Interesting.

Advogado said...

"I continue to find it both astounding and disturbing how many people and the media seem determined to convict the police officer of murder before all the facts are available."


I am forcing myself to watch coverage on MSNBC, CNN and FOX.....forcing because some have said they are forcing themselves to watch the beheading tape (or did when it was available) to remind them of evil, and that is my reason for watching this coverage because it seems all vestige of innocence or even a chance of innocence has long departed.

First, the person killed was named Brown, not Ferguson.

Secondly, the fatal bullet was to Brown's head - the TOP of his head. He would have to be on the ground for that to happen. It was shown in the autopsy.

re bullet to the top of the head
 

...or Mr. Brown was charging with his head down or even attempting to head butt the officer. However, the facts will come out.

Add to the adrenaline, perspiration, increased heart rate, fear, and hand tremors that affect shooting accuracy: An eye-socket-cheek blow out fracture….accompanied with bleeding and swelling….affecting VISION.

See CT scan of such an injury:

BREAKING REPORT: Officer Darren Wilson Suffered “Orbital Blowout Fracture to Eye Socket” During Mike Brown Attack | The Gateway Pundit

Glad I'm not the only one that's notice it :BigApplause:

Racism definition = NOT solely 'white against black'.

C'mon - This WOULD NOT even make it outside local media coverage IF it was a black cop or a white suspect. period. I must say I simply HATE this stuff - individuals and media groups making this solely a case of civil rights. Again what if the cop was black and the victim white? This happens many times in this country, and zip. But - no - Sharpton & Co arrive on scene and ramp it all up. Imagine if all the $$ spent to calm matters (...) and looted goods went to positive things. Oh, BTW, does it matter that unemployment is over 50% for those youth in Ferguson and surrounding areas?

I'm 66 - and it seems as if we have gained NOTHING in racial matters the last 40 years.

IF the policeman is NOT indicted - watch out - esp after the MO Governor promised a vigorous prosecution. Glad I'm in The Bubble here.

And - imagine being a cop in a 'difficult' patrol area, and having to think twice pulling out your weapon and shoot if your life is in danger? Should I or shouldn't I??? Or worse imagine being the wife of an officer knowing this potential challenge? Glad none of my relatives are in law enf...

It is very unfortunate that knee jerk comments can be wildly cast about regarding the people of The Villages without basis in fact or reason.

I think it more unfortunate that the chief, unelected legal officer of this nation actually said that he was with Ferguson. Very comforting words from the supposedly neutral attorney general before all the facts are in, and of course, without polluting any trial in the future. Did he really have to say, at this time, and in that place, "I am a black man"?

There's a big and vital difference between truth and love of the law and "racism." If one respects our system, one doesn't wear tee shirts emblazoned with "No Justice, No peace!" And certainly those who respect our system do not loudly chant and protest outside court buildings for jurors in deliberation to hear a la Zimmerman.

This is a profitable media circus and a very activist agenda driven government's field day.

I'll read books.