Let's discuss the North Hollywood shootout

[Socrates]

B.R.I. was originally formed in Santa Cruz, CA, in about 1980-85.
The owner used a classic sabot design, around 450-500 grains, cast superhard.

The sabot I shot out of a scoped Remington shotgun looked like the one on the left.

Box looks like this:


Few folks in Alaska on this forum still have em, and hoard them for bears.

Vern also made some others:


Here are some of the sabots he offered for sale:

http://www.thedealershowroom.com/page/page/1275214.htm

I think the patent was sold to Winchester, but, they are now focusing on offering their new slug, similar to
the Barnes X.

Here's a link to some of em, and, they even give credit to the original company, BRI, in the name:
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgu...3Doff%26sa%3DG


This review is about the accuracy most get with the slugs:

Good Slugs for the Money, January 8, 2008
By Steve21009 from Maryland

"I have used 12 gauge BRI sabot slugs for several years, and see no reason to try any others. At 50 yards, I can shoot a 2" group all day long and could probably do better if I concentrated a little more. On a very windy day, I have seen people shoot 3-4" groups at 100 yards with these, so on a calm day I suspect that tighter groups could be achieved.
I have shot about a half dozen deer with this slug, and they have always done the job very well. I've never been able to recover a slug, so cannot comment on mushrooming or expansion. My guess is, with a slug this heavy, and with a diameter of .50", expansion is not really needed to do the job.
Another reason I have liked them is that for years they have been among the more reasonably-priced of all the sabot slugs out there.
The recoil is stout, but not unbearable. There are plenty of loads available with higher velocity, but those hot loads will punish your shoulder, with a likely negative effect on accuracy.
If you want a slug that you can almost afford, that doesn't kill your shoulder on the range, and is very accurate, I don't think you can do much better than this."

We tested the rounds at higher velocities the testing was intended to find out at what velocity the Sabot was most accurate. Benching full house shotgun sabots is NOT the most fun I've had shooting...

The full house loads were supposed to be in the 1800-1900 fps range. That would put a 440 grain, .50" caliber sabot, cast very hard, at Energy of 3,166 foot-pounds for a 440 grain bullet at 1800 fps. At 1900 fps Energy of 3,528 foot-pounds for a 440 grain bullet at 1900 fps.

It's VERY hard to slow down a slug weighing that much, and, I suspect that even if it didn't go through, you'd know you got hit with it.
Plus, the sabots were VERY accurate, suitable as a Politically Correct alternative to a high powered rifle. The Sabot could easily be tuned to penetrate armour, with no one being the wiser. Us a monometal, super hard material, turned on a lathe, and, you would have armour piercing and politically correct...

[easyG]

What could the police have done differently to end the situation much quicker?

They should have quickly established a single leader who could have coordinated their fire-power on a specific target at a specific time.

For example.....
"All shooters, target on the right only, head shots only, on my command....one...two....FIRE!!!"

Every single officer simultaneously unloading on one target's head would have probably put the target down.
Then they could have concentrated on the second target.

[Double Naught Spy]

Every single officer simultaneously unloading on one target's head would have probably put the target down.

Then they could have concentrated on the second target.

First, given the ability to aim and hit, everyone shooting at the same time, even at the suspect's head (which they were doing, BTW), would just mean that everyone missed at the same time and then managed to all unload their guns together such that you have a bunch of cops doing mag changes at the same time and nobody providing cover fire or having the ability to do so.

What do you do for the cops who are exposed and trying to shoot the suspect's head, but the suspects are raking them with full auto fire?

Also, what com system was in place that would make it possible for all officers to hear all commands sufficiently well to make such a coordinated effort? Yes, most undoubtedly had their walkie talkies, but not all of them. So you have several dozen officers spread out over a very large area and firing at suspects from 270 degree around the suspects. So are these commands going to be shouted over the roar of the fire?

[easyG]

First, given the ability to aim and hit, everyone shooting at the same time, even at the suspect's head (which they were doing, BTW), would just mean that everyone missed at the same time and then managed to all unload their guns together such that you have a bunch of cops doing mag changes at the same time and nobody providing cover fire or having the ability to do so.

It's all about playing the odds....
Concentrated fire definitely increases the odds of at least one good hit....much more so than non-concentrated fire, which had already proven ineffective.
And even if everyone did somehow missed and had to change magazines all at the same time, it would have only meant about five seconds of interruption, which would not have made their plight any worse off than it already was.

What do you do for the cops who are exposed and trying to shoot the suspect's head, but the suspects are raking them with full auto fire?

What alternative did they have....curl up in the fetal position and wait to die?
They were already exposed and getting shot at with full auto fire....concentrating their firepower at one target's head certainly would not have made their situation any worse.
Yes, it is scarey to return fire when you're being shot at (I know firsthand), but sometimes there's really no other viable alternative.

Also, what com system was in place that would make it possible for all officers to hear all commands sufficiently well to make such a coordinated effort? Yes, most undoubtedly had their walkie talkies, but not all of them. So you have several dozen officers spread out over a very large area and firing at suspects from 270 degree around the suspects. So are these commands going to be shouted over the roar of the fire?

Yeah, the military does it all the time....and we didn't even have "bullhorns".
You shout out to all who can hear and they pass it along.
It's certainly not a perfect system, but it's a better than what they were doing.

[Double Naught Spy]

The odds don't change just because the officers are shooting at the same time. Sorry, but statistically that does not matter. They can all miss at the same time or all miss separately.

What choice to the cops have how are being shot at? You are kidding right? They seek cover. It is a rather obvious choice.

As for the military and their good coms, they don't do so well when orders are shouted over long distances for the type of precision timed volley that you are describing.

[easyG]

Gee, Double Naught Spy, I'm glad I didn't have such pessimists in my platoon when I was in Iraq.

[Slopemeno]

I think you guys need to think about how worse it could have gone down.

What if: The cops had returned heavy fire and the two clowns went back into the bank and now they have a boatload of hostages?

All thinkgs considered, it wasn't pretty, but the good guys won.

[Double Naught Spy]

Gee, Double Naught Spy, I'm glad I didn't have such pessimists in my platoon when I was in Iraq.

It isn't an issue of optimism or pessimism. It is an issue of reality.

[easyG]

It isn't an issue of optimism or pessimism. It is an issue of reality.

Have ever ordered a large group of shooters to concentrate their fire on a single specific target?

I have, and it does get results.
I've never seen an incident where every shooter missed.
The law of averages prevails....the more lead directed at a single target, the greater the odds that the target will get hit.

[JohnKSa]

Have ever ordered a large group of shooters to concentrate their fire on a single specific target?

Interesting question but not exactly applicable...

Here's the correct question.

Have you ever ordered a large group of pistol shooters (dispersed over a fairly large area and mostly employing concealment, not cover) to concentrate their fire on a moving target the size of a human head at 75+ yards while the group was taking automatic weapons fire?

[Double Naught Spy]

easyG, it doesn't matter if they were going to shoot one at a time or en masse because they were unable to hit what they were needing to hit. They can all miss together or all miss separately. It doesn't matter when the shooters are all have aim points that are wrong. That seems to have been the crux of the problem. The POA did not equal the POI.

The law of averages prevails....the more lead directed at a single target, the greater the odds that the target will get hit.

Good. Now the problem. If you have 50 shooters shoot individually 10 rounds each or 50 shooters shoot 10 rounds each en masse, note that the amount of lead TOWARD the target is the same amount. So the averages DO NOT CHANGE. Of course, if you can explain to me how the math behind your law of averages and so that there is a statistical difference, I would like to see it. Of course, the "law of averages" isn't an actual mathematical law in the first place. It is a layman's assumption about how things function in the world.

So, the are all going to still miss because of the numerous reasons noted above in the thread about the fact that they needed to make head shots, they had moving targets, most were shooting at distances several times what they qualified at, were firing from unfamiliar body positions, had no idea of how much drop was involved, had no idea how much to lead their targets, etc.

[Brit]

The chance of a lucky (unlucky for the criminal) bullet from the boat anchor pistols the Police had, dropping on to the roadway in front of them, and skipping in to an unprotected ankle, was a more realistic scenario.

The result of a frontal hit in an ankle you rely on to keep you upright would have been very traumatic, and most probably would have stopped the moving and shooting right there. A head shot would have been more of chance now, ricochets being easier to predict.

[Double Naught Spy]

If you can't aim well enough to hit a head on a person, then how the heck are you going to be able to aim well enough to get a ricochet to go where you want in order to be able to hit a much much smaller object at the same fairly extreme distances we are talking about?

In the Miami-FBI shootout, Platt was hit with a shotgun blast to his feet including hitting his left ankle, but he certainly didn't go down from the impacts.

[.22lr]

People have talked about communication systems ("comms"). what they have not addressed is the fact that in this case, and I would expect many others, the responding officers had little to no real idea of what was going on as they responded.

I remember an interview with the dispatcher. She said that she was receiving many officers reporting the same officer down. It wasn't until time had passed that she realized that many officers were reporting many DIFFERENT officers down. The situation was confused. Confusion cost time. Confusion probably delayed the proper response (SWAT with rifles).

Ideally, there would be a UAV overhead giving a video feed to officers in some sort of command area. All officers would be equipped with a version of Blue Force Tracker. The communication system would be improved. Oh, and the bad guys would be nice enough to notify the police that they are going to commit a crime so all this stuff can be set up, and taxpayers don't mind footing the massive bill.

Heroic officers raced into an unknown situation mainly with the knowledge that fellow officers were hurt. WOW.

As for the weapon side, different hardware may or may not have helped. I disagree with heavy calibers for urban patrol. Too much going on for the officer to have the additional worry of "how many brick walls/homes will this thing penetrate", not to mention recoil. It is my OPINION, that a carbine type platform (for ease of deployment from a vehicle) would increase the effective range of the officers. As to caliber, something akin to .223 rem / 5.56x45mm would seem to be a good choice. But all this costs money.

I view the post-shooting switch to .40S&W as a "feel good" measure at best, but the increase of rifles in patrol cars will probably be beneficial in the long run.

Very Respectfully,

Matt

[Th0r]

One thing I do remember is some police using a car as cover, when, to a 7.62 x 39, it's concealment, not cover

The LAPD Officers that used cars for cover in the shootout hid behind the wheels as it was evident that the first officers on scene had been shot at through a car.

Source: A credible documentary on YouTube about the shootout.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Ideally, there would be a UAV overhead giving a video feed to officers in some sort of command area.

Ideally, there would have been a A-10 or a B-2. Having a rifle in the car is reasonable. Suggesting that cars start carrying those portablle UAVs is getting a little extreme.

Too much second guessing of obscure strategies beyond having rifles, IMHO.

[pfch1977]

The officers could , but it is sometimes the best solution at avoiding the loss of life. after allowing them to escape.

[Tommy Vercetti]

LAPD was armed with Berettas in any video you can find on the shootout

not Glocks

[FRANK1669]

The original post asked what LAPD had learned- they now have ar-15s enough said on that.

the police did the best they could with what they had. And my hats off to all of them. All of the marksmen in favor of head shots at 50+ yards with standard service sidearms should have no problem getting sponsorship as factory shooters.

Try this drill sprint 100 yards neal down behind you cover and try to hit a silhouette target at 50 yard in under 10 seconds – then try it with one of your friends cracking of rounds out of his AR while you are trying to fire. It’s a real eye opener..

Trying to place a precise shot when your heart is pounding, your adrenaline is flowing, breathing heavily. Is hard at best.

[Socrates]

Well that explains it.
If they would have had Glocks, the guys would have been down with the first shots....

[guntotin_fool]

well thats a helpful comment,


What it all shows is that had someone had a .22 rifle, they might have been able to stop it much faster. Not that a .22 is a man stopper, but a rifle of any caliber increases your hit probability 10 fold over a hand gun in a fighting situation. instead of giving every cop a M4, give seargants a 3030 carbine or a .243 bolt and the situation is over. M4s are marginal man stoppers now, and no where the in the house stopper that a 12 gauge is.

Even if they had used slugs, or had them available, the impact from a 12 gauge slug even thru body armor, is going to HURT, and its going to slow you down fast.

But a model 94, with a peep sight, is going to make that 50 yard head shot all day long, and that will end the fight.

[Socrates]

It's VERY hard to slow down a slug weighing that much, and, I suspect that even if it didn't go through, you'd know you got hit with it.
Plus, the sabots were VERY accurate, suitable as a Politically Correct alternative to a high powered rifle. The Sabot could easily be tuned to penetrate armour, with no one being the wiser. Us a monometal, super hard material, turned on a lathe, and, you would have armour piercing and politically correct...

I'm glad you agree with me, Fool...It probably wouldn't hurt to actually read a post in the thread, before you post your stuff in it...

[pfch1977]

Anyone whom I have knows they are not so accurate. If have been quickly put to an end on tactics.

[BillCA]

Originally Posted by pfch1977

The officers could have retreated from the situation, allowed the attackers to escape and then follow them in the helicopter.

The solution of the officers was to escalate the situation by bringing more officers on to the scene. However, this only increased the amount of casualties.

How come I do not hear or see the solution of retreat to be the answer in these situations? I know it may not seem American to retreat in the face of danger, but it is sometimes the best solution at avoiding the loss of life.

The goal of LE is to contain the situation to reduce the risk of civilian casualties. You'll see this in most incidents involving firearms. A domestic violence where the spouse says the other has a firearm, results in police containing the offender in the house and evacuating surrounding homes whilst they surround and contain the person.

Letting perps armed with FA weapons flee and pursuing with helicopters is problematic. One does not know their motivation or psychological bent. They could easily drive to a local school and open fire along the fence-line at kids outdoors. Or they could stay far enough ahead of ground units to enter a parking structure, switch cars and escape altogether (now you have FA-armed crazies loose). Once they spot the heilo, they could start shooting random cars they pass to create massive traffic jams to block trailing ground units. That'll look swell with "film at eleven".

In normal situations, police have found that the more officers present, the less likely suspects are to shoot it out with police. That's because they know they are likely to die by gunfire. Unfortunately, that dynamic changes if your perps are heavily body-armored and don't fear being shot at.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Again, we have a lot of after the fact 'expert and wise' advice. UAVs, retreat, heliocopters, homemade slugs, 22LRs, firing like a line of 18th Red Coats, if only Chuck Conners - the Rifleman was there with his lever action - blah, blah.

The officers acted bravely in a situation that they haven't faced before. It didn't go as well as if the Internet League of Heroes was there. It was a teachable moment, so to speak, and the lesson is not to have the LAPD equipped with a space station but for officers to have rifles in cars. Many departments have done this. Some, because of political correctness, haven't done this yet.

That's about all there is to the incident.