The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post - Miami Shootout Analysis: What Went Wrong?

Spectre · January 24, 1999, 07:46 PM

(Quoted from a post by Michael Carlin)
...I am responding to the May 1986 Dade County shootout reference you made.

Kodiac, what I am about to say is not going to be too palatable, so I will say it as nicely as I can.

The problem appears to me to be a tactics/decision/training problem, not an equipment problem. The agency then bought a new gun (da 10 be da ONE!, which was probably not a bad move!) but did not address the root causes of the problem. Which are in my opinion poor training and/or poor tactics.

First, how do I come to this? These observations are made in recollection of the FBI training film that was made following this debacle. I had this film for an entire weekend and viewed it about 30 times about 1989 or 90.

The film was scripted by a professional team who interviewed every survivor, then trained forensics examiners compared the physical evidence with all the "eye witness" (particpants') reports.

The film was scripted and shot considering all of this analysis which is probably as close to being there as we will ever get.

The film ends with Agent Rivera talking about continuing to fight, to have the will to win.

The two bank robbers were "staked out" by analyzing their MO and predicting (accurately it turns out) where they were most likely to rob next. The FBI does this so well that it is uncanny. It is not rocket science, but it is nice to see behavior analysis worked so well as they do it!

But the planning of the subsequent operation in detail seems less than sterling.

What was known about these two was considerable, who they were. That both had apparently killed their own spouses. That they obtained firearms by killing people at uncontrolled ranges and taking their stuff.

That both said that they would NEVER go back to prison. That they were shooting about 1500 rounds of 5.56 a week in practice! These are two REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY BAD GUYS (RRRBGs)!

Let my questions lead you to your own conclusions:

1. Where would your vest and shotgun be if you were likely to have to attempt to arrest these two RRRRBGs?

2. When you pull out to tail these two how far back do you follow? (in the movie the following distance looks like about 1 car length, at legal speed. After the analysis of the forensics teams on this they ceertainly had to ask how far back were you?)

3. Would you, while driving a "plain brown wrapper" in broad daylight one car length behind the RRRBGs, be surprised to be "made"?

4. While in contact with the dispatcher and learning that the Dade County SWAT team had just returned to the station from firearms training (very near I think they said TWO minutes away), would you choose not to ask their assistance? (I will not here conjecture as to why, but I think we all know....)

5. When one RRRBG visibly loads a 5.56 mm rifle and they begin to flee who has chosen the stop location?

6. When you are engaging these two RRRBGs across the hood of your car, who do you shoot first and where?

7. Where were detailed stop plans for each stakeout location? Did they identify locations that the stops should be attempted at?

8. Did each stakeout location have a primary and alternate stop plan which would place the FBI in such a tactically superior position that the BGs would have no choice but to surrender or die immediately?

8. Did they think that they could utter the famous Zimbalist line "This is the FBI come out with you hands up" and these two were going to "give it up"?

My conclusions are:

The center of mass every time training is the primary culprit here IMO. Whenever you can see the assailant's pupils and he is bringing lethal force to bear you NEED a OSS, and we all know that takes a CNS hit. So I would recommend that training say clearly:

Shoot the most dangerous suspect first
(not the closest one, the most deadly one, but the one with the machingun, rifle, shotgun)

If you can see his pupils shoot him in the head, in the brain stem, and keep shooting until he stops

Leave your gun in your holster until your car has stopped

If you wear glasses ALWAYS wear a strap!

If staked out for RRRRBG have your long gun in the passenger compartment with you and wear your vests!

Request backup always when dealing with RRRRBGs and try to delay until it arrives

When beginning to effect a stop have plan as to where it will occur and force them to play it your way

Don't blame your equipment for the failures of your training to address the situation resolution

All this said, let me emphasize that I feel the agents were brave and true, but that their training in the conduct these stops is inadequate!

There appears to me to be a lack of analysis beyond the first few moments of these encounters.

Algorithms, a set of steps for successful resolution of situations need to be developed.

(The FBI seemingly has a history of failing to plan to fight fire in the buildings in which the suspects are, from the Barker and Floyd days thru Gordon Call, Randy Weaver, and the WACO tragedy.)

Once again:
All this said, let me emphasize that I feel the agents were brave and true, but that their training in the conduct these stops is inadequate!
------------------
Ni ellegimit carborundum esse!

Yours In Marksmanship
http://www.1bigred.com/distinguished

michael

January 24, 1999, 07:46 PM	#1
Spectre Staff Alumnus Join Date: October 23, 1998 Location: ATL Posts: 3,277	(Quoted from a post by Michael Carlin) ...I am responding to the May 1986 Dade County shootout reference you made. Kodiac, what I am about to say is not going to be too palatable, so I will say it as nicely as I can. The problem appears to me to be a tactics/decision/training problem, not an equipment problem. The agency then bought a new gun (da 10 be da ONE!, which was probably not a bad move!) but did not address the root causes of the problem. Which are in my opinion poor training and/or poor tactics. First, how do I come to this? These observations are made in recollection of the FBI training film that was made following this debacle. I had this film for an entire weekend and viewed it about 30 times about 1989 or 90. The film was scripted by a professional team who interviewed every survivor, then trained forensics examiners compared the physical evidence with all the "eye witness" (particpants') reports. The film was scripted and shot considering all of this analysis which is probably as close to being there as we will ever get. The film ends with Agent Rivera talking about continuing to fight, to have the will to win. The two bank robbers were "staked out" by analyzing their MO and predicting (accurately it turns out) where they were most likely to rob next. The FBI does this so well that it is uncanny. It is not rocket science, but it is nice to see behavior analysis worked so well as they do it! But the planning of the subsequent operation in detail seems less than sterling. What was known about these two was considerable, who they were. That both had apparently killed their own spouses. That they obtained firearms by killing people at uncontrolled ranges and taking their stuff. That both said that they would NEVER go back to prison. That they were shooting about 1500 rounds of 5.56 a week in practice! These are two REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY BAD GUYS (RRRBGs)! Let my questions lead you to your own conclusions: 1. Where would your vest and shotgun be if you were likely to have to attempt to arrest these two RRRRBGs? 2. When you pull out to tail these two how far back do you follow? (in the movie the following distance looks like about 1 car length, at legal speed. After the analysis of the forensics teams on this they ceertainly had to ask how far back were you?) 3. Would you, while driving a "plain brown wrapper" in broad daylight one car length behind the RRRBGs, be surprised to be "made"? 4. While in contact with the dispatcher and learning that the Dade County SWAT team had just returned to the station from firearms training (very near I think they said TWO minutes away), would you choose not to ask their assistance? (I will not here conjecture as to why, but I think we all know....) 5. When one RRRBG visibly loads a 5.56 mm rifle and they begin to flee who has chosen the stop location? 6. When you are engaging these two RRRBGs across the hood of your car, who do you shoot first and where? 7. Where were detailed stop plans for each stakeout location? Did they identify locations that the stops should be attempted at? 8. Did each stakeout location have a primary and alternate stop plan which would place the FBI in such a tactically superior position that the BGs would have no choice but to surrender or die immediately? 8. Did they think that they could utter the famous Zimbalist line "This is the FBI come out with you hands up" and these two were going to "give it up"? My conclusions are: The center of mass every time training is the primary culprit here IMO. Whenever you can see the assailant's pupils and he is bringing lethal force to bear you NEED a OSS, and we all know that takes a CNS hit. So I would recommend that training say clearly: Shoot the most dangerous suspect first (not the closest one, the most deadly one, but the one with the machingun, rifle, shotgun) If you can see his pupils shoot him in the head, in the brain stem, and keep shooting until he stops Leave your gun in your holster until your car has stopped If you wear glasses ALWAYS wear a strap! If staked out for RRRRBG have your long gun in the passenger compartment with you and wear your vests! Request backup always when dealing with RRRRBGs and try to delay until it arrives When beginning to effect a stop have plan as to where it will occur and force them to play it your way Don't blame your equipment for the failures of your training to address the situation resolution All this said, let me emphasize that I feel the agents were brave and true, but that their training in the conduct these stops is inadequate! There appears to me to be a lack of analysis beyond the first few moments of these encounters. Algorithms, a set of steps for successful resolution of situations need to be developed. (The FBI seemingly has a history of failing to plan to fight fire in the buildings in which the suspects are, from the Barker and Floyd days thru Gordon Call, Randy Weaver, and the WACO tragedy.) Once again: All this said, let me emphasize that I feel the agents were brave and true, but that their training in the conduct these stops is inadequate! ------------------ Ni ellegimit carborundum esse! Yours In Marksmanship http://www.1bigred.com/distinguished michael