Officer Down, 2009--vehicles kill more than guns

[OttavaKarhu]

http://www.odmp.org/year.php

Total Line of Duty Deaths for 2009 (US, as of 12/10): 115

Accidental: 1
Aircraft accident: 4
Assault: 2
Automobile accident: 32
Duty related illness: 2
Gunfire: 45
Gunfire (Accidental): 2
Heart attack: 7
Motorcycle accident: 4
Struck by vehicle: 5
Vehicle pursuit: 2
Vehicular assault: 9

Anyone else find it interesting that vehicular (car and motorcycle) causes of police duty deaths (52) outnumber gunfire?

I don't mean to cherry pick data in support of my views. Just am always fascinated by how people seize on the dangers of guns, when automobiles kill so many more people (and smoking even more). I was looking up a particular duty death and noted the above numbers.

[Zoeisright]

1. Cars have other purposes, guns don't.

I can't believe I have to point that out. What a stupid post.

[armueller2001]

2. Cars sure do have other purposes...

but guns do as well.

Can a car stop a violent attack or a rape?

[mikelgb]

4. Can a gun stop violence?

at all?

[dmallind]

5. Ermmm...yes

Would be Mugger/Rapist: "Do what I say or I stab you/beat you up!"

Armed officer or intended victim: "Stop or I shoot".


Who wins? Even without, as is the norm, actually shooting?

[Merchant Marine]

6. A gun can stop individual acts of violence

directed at your person. This should be transparently obvious.

[TPaine7]

13. None are so blind as those who WILL NOT see. N/T

[rd_kent]

12. yes, it can.

[GreenStormCloud]

19. YES. My wife used her gun to prevent herself from being murdered.

She didn't have to shoot the guy eithe; he ran away. I submit that in that instance she used a gun to prevent a violent act.

[proteus_lives]

20. That's not actually a serious question, is it?

Come on, 'fess up.

[spin]

22. Of course. Numerous posts on this forum document this fact...

many are from newspapers.

[Jackson1999]

3. Then why do cops carry them? nt

[taurus145]

8. I put more meat on my table with a gun than a car. n/t

[virginia mountainman]

10. Are you really that dull?

Guns have plenty of uses. You completely expose your very limited knowledge on the subject at hand with that statement.

[rd_kent]

11. Sure they do, they have MANY purposes...

I can't believe I have to point that out. What a stupid post.

[OttavaKarhu]

14. And what a gracious reply

[oneshooter]

15. Just another cowardly drive by posting N/T

[eqfan592]

16. WTF?

Firearms aid in the defense of people far more than they are used in the commission of a crime. So to suggest that guns don't serve another purpose other than to shoot police officers is an amazingly ignorant statement to make.

[aikoaiko]

17. There is competitive and recreational shooting, too.

but you are correct that most people have guns for self-defense from people and other animals.

[spin]

21. Firearms have many legitimate purposes...

for example, target shooting, hunting, collecting and self defense.

Show me why your post is not merely a "stupid" reply. A coherent and intelligent argument will suffice.

If you seriously believe in your viewpoint, you should be able to support it. Otherwise, your position is based on emotion and not logic.

[Howzit]

26. You have a point

How is one supposed to do a drive-by-shooting without a car?

[dmallind]

7. In fairness, there are two competing forces

Few officers (and I know bunches having trained with guns at the same place) need to fire guns very frequently, or be all that close to other people firing at them. It's a rarity. Many officers go careers without shooting or being shot at.

None of them go careers - or even weeks at the beginning of their careers - without being in dangerous traffic situations such as crashes, traffic jams, chases and so on. Heck even having to get out of their cars to ticket speeders is dangerous. They don't get to stay home in foul weather. In fact they get more roadside danger. As such cops are much more likely to be in many many more dangerous situations with cars than with guns.

That said cops are pretty much the only people who DO have to deqal with armed conflict. Not all cops, and not that often, but cops as a group are the ones who have to walk into situations where bullets are flying. Frankly I am surprised so few DO die by gunfire. Much of that is a testament not to any great ninja-like abilities on their part individually, but by the very overwhelming force and disproportionate response cops as a collective often run afoul of DU critics for using. People who would shoot another drug dealer without a passing thought think twice if not thrice about shooting cops. Only the truly deranged are willing to accept the likely outcome.

[RaleighNCDUer]

9. Let's see - app. 80 million gun owners, w/ app. 200 million guns;

app. 230 million drivers, w/ app. 280 million vehicles.

Nope, doesn't surprise me at all.

[paulsby]

18. i've studied officer deaths for over a decade

even wrote a paper on it.

a huge factor in this is the advent of bullet resistant vests.

while vests can in some cases, prevent or decrease injuries in auto crashes, they SIGNIFICANTLY have lowered officer deaths due to shooting. iirc, less than 1/10 of officers who get shot die from their wounds.

cops riding motorcycles are at pretty high risk.

DUI drivers are also a significant danger to us. i've had one friend killed by a DUI driver, and a few who were injured.

[GreenStormCloud]

24. In your studies, what percentage of officers murdered were killed by LEGAL gun owners?

Or is that information difficult to obtain? I seem to remember you once saying that almost all murderers had prior convictions at the time of the murder. I would think that would be doubly true for LEO killings.

[paulsby]

25. i didn't specifically address that issue

but just anecdotally, i've either been to, been IN, or know intimate details about (neighboring agencies) at least 3 dozen shootings involving myself or fellow officers. in none of them was the person legally armed.

just the other day, i was backing up my partner when i heard him go off on a traffic stop. as i pulled up he said "i'm code 4. guy has a permit"

i swear to god. iow, the fact that the guy told him he had a permit, showed the permit, and was carrying meant my partner KNEW the guy was almost certainly not a threat to him. probably about as much of a threat as a 70 yr old mormon grandmother, statistically speaking.

i never said almost all murderers had prior convictions at the time of the murder . or at least i don't think they did/ considering that at least a fair %age of murders are "crimes of passion", there are going to be a fair %age of murders (domestic violence, etc.) that don't have prior convictions.

what i have said many times, is that people who are involved in unlawful felonious shootings (which is a much broader group of incidents) almost always have prior felony convictions.

it's very rare for anybody to shoot a cop who doesn't have a long rap sheet.

it happens, but it's very rare.

in a fair %age of the exceptions, you are dealing with EDP's.

[eqfan592]

27. Thanks for the info.

"just the other day, i was backing up my partner when i heard him go off on a traffic stop. as i pulled up he said "i'm code 4. guy has a permit""

I think that part of your post right there is very telling. The fact that the officers who have to deal with law enforcement of a daily basis are of such a high opinion of permit holders speaks well to the generally law abiding nature of permit holders.

Is it exactly scientific? No. But it's reassuring to be certain. :)

[GreenStormCloud]

29. About three years ago my wife was stopped.

It was about 5:30 AM, dark, in a bad part of town that she had to go through to get to work. She was on her way to work and had done an almost-but-not-quite stop at a stop sign. An officer pulled her over. Because of the time and place he was suspicious and approached her with a mixture of apprehension and aggressiveness. As soon as he saw her CHL and she informed him (As required by our state law) that she was armed, he relaxed, adked a couple of questions, talked to her a minute about the need to fully stop, and let her go.

[paulsby]

31. that's pretty typical

ime. also, fwiw, i think troopers are also generally kewl towards CCW'ers. think about it, you are on a lonely highway wrestling for your life w/some scumbag. you would love to see some guy (or gal) with a CCW stop and help you out. heck, in my agency, a female officer was wrestling with a robber. he and she were wrestling over her gun which they were both holding on to and trying to get control of. a store owner with a CCW came up and center punched that robber in the head, quite possibly saving her life.

i realize that's an anecdote but i can't think of ONE anecdote where a person with a CCW used a gun to harm a cop that i have ever personally been aware of in my "neighborhood". i can think of a few where a person with a CCW helped a cop in need and many where a person with a CCW either stopped and detained a criminal, or defended himself against one, while waiting for the police.

CCW'ers are also (ime) pretty circumspect and cautious. some could even argue TOO cautious. we had one incident where a local cop was literally being EXECUTED. a nekkid EDP had overpowered him, high on crack fwiw, gotten his gun, chased the cop down, and was plugging rounds into the cops head as the cop lay on the ground. the guy kept firing until the gun was empty.

there were two (that i know of ) people nearby with CCW's and guns. one pulled out her gun and had it out by the time the guy had already fired a few rounds at the cop. she said she didn't fire because she was uncomfortable with her "backstop", which was an apartment building about 1/4 mile behind her line of fire.

another got his gun out, but as he took aim, the suspect had emptied his (actually the cop's gun), and he could see the slide locked back as the suspect walked away

he would have been TOTALLY justified in yelling a command to stop, and if the guy refused, shooting the fleeing murderer in the back. not even a close call. but he didn't feel comfortable shooting the guy who was walking away, with an unloaded gun, so didn't.

[GreenStormCloud]

32. I asked my wife what she would have done.

Wife Response:

Scenario one. You didn't state a range so I assumed a long handgun range of 25 yards.
Her gun has laser sights so she is very confident of her shot. She shoots.

Scenario two: Slide locked back.
She doesn't shoot. Instead tries to remember all the descreption that she can and calls 911. Her reasoning: The guy is no threat to her. If he turns and come at her, she shoots.

Scenario two - modified. The slide doesn't lock back. She has every reason to believe that the gun is still loaded.
She shoots. Her reasoning: Even though he is walking away, he is a danger to her because he may turn and try to kill her because she is a witness.

My Response:
Scenario One: I take the shot. Laser doesn't matter to me, although I like having it.

Scenario two (both): I take the shot. Prior to reading your post I already knew that it would be a good shot. Secondary reasoning: I live in
Texas. If I dropped a cop-killer who was trying to flee, no DA would attempt to prosecute, and no grand jury would bring charges. If the dead guy is a civilian, I will be a bit more hesitant. I must have seen enough to know for sure that I haven't just seen a good guy win out over a bad guy.

BTW - I would not give a command to halt. Too dangerous. That gives the initiative to him. Since I have just seen him murder an LEO I must conclude that he will not surrender to a civilian, but will instead try to shoot me.

I think the difficulty lies in the way CCW classes are taught. Since the classes are fairly short, only one day, the instructors attempt to impress upon students that the gun is for IMMEDIATE self-defense only. So the classes instill greater caution in the students. Although it is too much caution in those cases, in the long run, I think it helps CCW holders keep the record that they have.

In fact, I would be fearful of attempting to help an officer as I would be afraid the officer would think I was an additional threat.

Since we don't have any kind of badge we can hold up to quickly ID us to an endangered officer, what would you suggest? How can we rapidly establish that we are friendly?

BTW - What's and "EDP"?

[paulsby]

33. EDP is

"emotionally disturbed person". it's the politically correct term.

the FBI mentioned in their LE Journal, that of all the calls cops go to, nekkid EDP calls are statistically among the most dangerous. and of course in these calls, the guy is almost never armed (where would he conceal it?). i'm not referring to your "streaker" cases. those are not nekkid EDP's. usually when an EDP goes nekkid, it's a sign that their "illness"/drug use is at a critical extreme and/or their body temperature. you have a nekkid EDP in cold weather, and it's almost proof positive that he will feel NO pain in any sort of wristlock, control hold, etc. it's also VERY difficult to wrestle a naked sweaty person into handcuffs. even in MMA, the submissions are much more successful if done before the fighter gets all sweaty.

it's good that in the classes for civilians that they emphasize danger to self, only as reason to shoot. realistically though, at leat in my state (WA) citizens have BROADER legal discretion with deadly force than cops do. it's actually written into the RCW. arguably, off-duty cops defending their home, etc. fall under the civilian standard.

the law about shooting a fleeing felon (federal case was tennessee vs. garner iirc) basically says that if the guy
1) committed a crime involving deadly force or threatened deadly force
and
2) there is a reasonable belief that if not apprehended , he poses a danger to others

you are ok to shoot.

the law says that verbal warning SHOULD (note: SHOULD not must be) given if reasonably possible, so the person has a chance to comply.

in the case mentioned, the guy HAS a gun, you assume it's unloaded (cause the slide is locked back), but it might not be. might just be a jam. you know he just executed a person right in front of you, and is clearly mentally deranged (the latter adds to your belief that he presents a future danger to others), and there are numerous apartment building etc. in the area (iow, even with an unloaded gun, he can take somebody hostage in their apartment, get their guns, etc.)

iow, i can't believe there is a prosecutor in the land (maybe nifong) who would have a problem with it.

we don't have grand juries in WA state, but the same basic rules apply.

also, WA state is nice because the burden is on the state to DISPROVE self-defense (not sure if this applies to defense of others) NOT on the individual to prove self defense.

many states require the defendant to prove (at least by a preponderance of evidence), that he was acting in self-defense. our state doesn't. it must DISPROVE self-defense by (iirc) a preponderance.

there is no easy way to identify yerself as a friendly in the incidences given. basically, you take your chances.

if we are responding to a call where the citizen calls 911 and says he is armed and is holding a suspect at gunpoint, etc. then we know how to perceive the situation. if not, it's a crapshoot. generally speaking (in other circs), as soon as the officer pulled up, i'd probably drop it and put my hands high in the air. i'd rather scuff my gun than get shot.

in the case where an officer is fighting for his life, i don't think it's much of an issue as far as him perceiving you as a threat, especially if you are yelling out "can i help" or something like that, and/or yelling at the suspect in words that are clearly directed to him.

like all incidents where your gun is out, there's no perfect answer.

[GreenStormCloud]

28. Thanks for the response. I appreciate it. N/T

[paulsby]

30. yw nt

[GreenStormCloud]

23. How many of the gun-murdered officers were killed by LEGAL gun owners?

It bet the number is close to zero, if not zero.