The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Tactics and Training

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old April 16, 2011, 11:50 AM   #51
Capt Charlie
Staff
 
Join Date: March 24, 2005
Location: Steubenville, OH
Posts: 4,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catfishman
I just think it is wrong to assume he was making a silly mistake, when there is another plausible explanation.
That's an interesting statement, in that it echoes the beliefs of most LE instructors prior to Newhall. It was considered bad taste to criticize the actions of a fallen officer. Mistakes were never mentioned, which effectively eliminated a wealth of training material.

Newhall ushered in a new era and a wave of officer survival training swept the country. It gradually became OK to say, "Officer Smith was a great guy, but he screwed up, and it got him killed."

Quote:
Apparently, the "brass in the pocket" thing has been discussed before. That doesn't mean the conclusion that was arrived at was correct. It's impossible to know that an officer putting brass in his pocket was due to training and it's impossible to know that it got him killed.
Technically, that's correct, as the only one that could confirm that is dead.

In the mid 70's, I participated in an intense 40 hr. officer survival course in Arizona. One of my instructors was one of the original Newhall investigators. I'm sorry that I can't provide a link, but the conclusion about brass being pocketed came from him, face to face. That was 35 years ago, and while I've forgotten a lot about Newhall, for some reason that was one of the things that stuck in my mind.
__________________
TFL Members are ambassadors to the world for firearm owners. What kind of ambassador does your post make you?

I train in earnest, to do the things that I pray in earnest, I'll never have to do.

--Capt. Charlie
Capt Charlie is offline  
Old April 16, 2011, 06:42 PM   #52
Nnobby45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2004
Posts: 3,148
Quote:
On the Miami Shootout. The agents had body armor but not sufficient to stop 5.56 bullets only handgun ammo. Wouldn't have helped them. Mireles didn't really kill Platt, he was already dead from the shot Dove had delivered earlier in the fight. He just didn't know it yet. Matix fired one shot and was out of the fight from the beginning. As Mireles said in a statement he made later. He had heard a lot of BGs say they would never be taken alive but 99.9% of them were full of it and gave up when confronted. This time they didn't. Maybe that was part of the mindset. Best book on Miami Shoout is by a Dr. Anderson French. I have read it and it is very detailed.
Haven't read Dr. French's book. I might just get a copy. I did like Ayoobs' version of events, even though his critics picked him apart on certain points he may not of gotten perfect. Remember that the FBI's own accounts didn't get everything perfect, either.

LOL, Mattix had been shot be Dove and was dead---he just didn't know it yet? Well, he did after Mereles killed him again.
Nnobby45 is offline  
Old April 16, 2011, 09:57 PM   #53
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 18,286
Quote:
Mattix had been shot be Dove and was dead---he just didn't know it yet? Well, he did after Mereles killed him again.
Not Matix, Platt.

Yes, Platt's initial chest wound was unsurvivable. Medical experts have said that even had he immediately given up and received medical attention he was losing blood too quickly to have survived.

Platt was already in bad enough shape that he was having difficulty walking and when he walked over to Mireles, who was on the ground using a car for cover, and shot him at point blank range in the head with a revolver, he missed. And even though he missed he never realized it--he walked back to the car and got into it.

It's true that Mireles put an end to the fight by shooting Platt in the head while he sat in the car, but the eyewitness evidence suggests that when he did so, Platt was already unable to fight effectively and was just seconds from dying or losing consciousness.
__________________
Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old April 16, 2011, 11:00 PM   #54
Tennessee Gentleman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,611
Quote:
Haven't read Dr. French's book. I might just get a copy.
Paladin Press (of course). I think it is the most authoritative version I have seen. Mas did a good job and many ofthe things he missed didn't turn up until later but it was generally correct. Some of it will never be known.

John is right, it was Platt. It also was Platt who did all the damage. Matix was out very early on and it was Grogan or Hanlon who took him out wiht a shot thru the wrist and arm. Platt was a dead man walking but he walked long enough to kill two agents and wound several more. As Dr. Anderson said, the human body can do much if the will commands it to.
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted."
Anonymous Soldier.
Tennessee Gentleman is offline  
Old April 16, 2011, 11:51 PM   #55
Nnobby45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2004
Posts: 3,148
Quote:
It's true that Mireles put an end to the fight by shooting Platt in the head while he sat in the car, but the eyewitness evidence suggests that when he did so, Platt was already unable to fight effectively and was just seconds from dying or losing consciousness.
OK, I thought Maddux had been shot and incapacitated early on and that Mireles walked up to the car and put rds. in both of them. Thanks for the clarification.

There was also speculation that Maddux's ear drum was ruptured by Platt's Mini 14, but I understand that the autopsy showed otherwise.
Nnobby45 is offline  
Old April 17, 2011, 12:01 AM   #56
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 18,286
Quote:
OK, I thought Maddux had been shot and incapacitated early on and that Mireles walked up to the car and put rds. in both of them. Thanks for the clarification.
Mireles did walk up to the car and put rounds in both of them at the end of the fight, however, Matix was incapacitated early in the fight and was never a factor (he might have fired a single shot but it didn't hit anyone), and eyewitness evidence indicates that by the time Mireles shot Platt in the car, Platt was already having severe difficulty functioning due to massive blood loss.
__________________
Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old April 17, 2011, 11:55 AM   #57
Sleuth
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 27, 2002
Location: Arizona
Posts: 445
RE: Brass in the pocket - after the change in CHP (and other agency) training about dropping brass on the ground, there were no further reports of officers found with brass in their pockets after a shooting. This was not immediate, as it took some time to change ingrained patterns from training. This tends to prove that the officer(s) were conditioned to putting their brass in their pockets on the range.

RE: Body Armor - most commentators here are making a common mistake, imputing to the FBI agents information that was only known later. Once they identified the car, not one agent stopped to get his shotgun out of the trunk, nor did any one other than the one supervisor get his body armor and put it on. No one knew before the first shots were fired that they would be facing a rifle. And even then, if you wear your armor, a round that has hit an intermediate barrier (car door, window glass) may be stopped by pistol rated armor.

And during my years as a Fed, I did stop on several occasions on the side of the road to don body armor and obtain my shotgun, before rejoining a moving surveillance.
__________________
Sleuth
Sleuth is offline  
Old April 20, 2011, 04:07 PM   #58
Conn. Trooper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 12, 2007
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 531
Keep in mind also, if they are "undercover" then there will be times when you can't wear a vest, or have it on the seat for quick access. You are hardly undercover wearing the body armor of that era with a shotgun bolted to the dash.

I don't recall if that was the case in Miami, I read several write up's of the shooting itself, but don't recall if they were all "undercover" or not.
Conn. Trooper is offline  
Old April 20, 2011, 07:46 PM   #59
Sleuth
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 27, 2002
Location: Arizona
Posts: 445
There is a vast difference between working undercover (direct intentional contact with crooks) and plain clothes. On the assignment they had, the only reason for not wearing body armor is comfort, which reverts to mindset.

I was a plain clothes investigator at the time, I know.
__________________
Sleuth
Sleuth is offline  
Old April 21, 2011, 08:21 PM   #60
Conn. Trooper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 12, 2007
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 531
I grant that, I didn't know what their assignment was, I only read write ups of the shooting itself. If I was going out looking for armed bank robbers, I am wearing my vest and keeping a long gun handy. They assumed nothing would happen, and were not prepared for what did happen.
Conn. Trooper is offline  
Old April 22, 2011, 03:00 PM   #61
Sleuth
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 27, 2002
Location: Arizona
Posts: 445
Conn Trooper, as a friend of mine is prone to say, "perzackly".
I have pulled over to the side of a CA freeway, donned my body armor, got my shotgun from the trunk and moved it to the front seat, and then jumped back into a surveillance of bad guys taking guns to Mexico. I was "that guy" who took the job seriously - every day.

Why didn't I have my armor on? Because I was coming from court, just heading back to my office, and drove right into the surveillance.
__________________
Sleuth
Sleuth is offline  
Old April 22, 2011, 05:38 PM   #62
Archer 9505
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 10, 2010
Location: Maine
Posts: 213
10 Most

http://listverse.com/2009/10/14/top-...in-us-history/

When looking up the Newhall Shootout I found this.

FYI
__________________
NRA Life Member
"An Ye Harm None, Do What Ye Will"
It's a free country; in a free country, freedom is for more than just those that conform to the accepted.
Archer 9505 is offline  
Old April 22, 2011, 06:47 PM   #63
Sleuth
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 27, 2002
Location: Arizona
Posts: 445
An interesting list, but many of the facts are wrong in the Blair House Shooting (a class by the US Secret Service and a non-fiction book by Steven Hunter), the Norco Bank robbery (I talked at length to an involved officer), and the Miami shooting (see my post above - I have the official investigation report as well as talked to the investigating Metro-Dade Sgt.).
__________________
Sleuth

Last edited by Sleuth; April 22, 2011 at 06:57 PM.
Sleuth is offline  
Old April 22, 2011, 08:40 PM   #64
Conn. Trooper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 12, 2007
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 531
Me too, which is why I go shoot on my own time, paid out of my pocket to go to Blackwater and bought my own M-4. I would much rather the state pay for it, but if they don't, then I have to. Or go flip burgers, paint houses, sell cars, whatever.
Conn. Trooper is offline  
Old April 22, 2011, 10:06 PM   #65
ClydeFrog
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 1, 2010
Posts: 5,798
uniform VS "soft clothes" VS "undercover"....

I didn't read over all the last few posts but I do take issue with the remarks about LE not being able to prepare or use proper weapons/tactics in a "plainclothes" environment.
To my knowledge, LAPD standard policy for years was that "plainclothes" detectives(D-1 to D-3 & supervisors) have a "crusier ready"(fully loaded, empty chamber) 12ga shotgun upfront in LAPD motor vehicles.
Many sworn LE officers & federal/state agents also wear "soft clothes" or uniforms that are not full on duty uniforms but help clearly ID them.
Ballcaps, vests, 5.11 pants, polo shirts, etc
Highly trained or veteran agents/LE officers can use "undercover" type clothing or gear but they have strict SOPs and must be able to act under covert conditions. Like the LAPD's SIS(special investigations section) or the highly respected "Stake-Out" squad of the NYPD.
The LAPD SIS is made up of only senior detectives each with about 15 years or more of service(with excellent records/backgrounds). The SIS has 1 LT has a supervisor. The NYPD stake out squad under well known tactics expert Jim Cirello(who later became a federal instructor at FLETC, www.fletc.gov ) had many use of force incidents w/o any problems.
Use of special weapons or tactics can be done. It just takes skill & effort.

ClydeFrog
ClydeFrog is offline  
Old April 22, 2011, 10:59 PM   #66
therewolf
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2011
Posts: 133
Yanno, I keep seeing these exceptions to the rule being trotted out.

It's always "North Hollywood" this, and "Newhall" that.

By and large, day after day, week after week, month after month, year after

year, LEOs aquit themselves admirably using their time-tested SOP, and

equipment and firepower which is more than adequate to the job at hand.

At one point or another, some exceptional circumstance is going to arise

where .40 S&W, .44 Magnum, nor M-16s will prevail, then, YET AGAIN

EVERYBODY will be an instant expert, and want LE to change it's SOP

paradigm based on yet another highly irregular, exceptional, and singular

event.

Puh-leeze!
therewolf is offline  
Old April 22, 2011, 11:53 PM   #67
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 18,286
Quote:
By and large, day after day, week after week, month after month, year after year, LEOs aquit themselves admirably using their time-tested SOP, and equipment and firepower which is more than adequate to the job at hand.
It stands to reason that the training and equipment is adequate for the ordinary. It often takes exceptional situations to shake people out of complacency and reveal the flaws (or efficacy) in their training and tactics.

Just because a situation is out of the norm doesn't mean that it should be ignored or that there are no lessons that can be learned from it. In fact, just the reverse is true. In the interest of making those situations even LESS the norm, it is imperative that people study the outliers and learn the lessons they teach.
__________________
Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old April 23, 2011, 12:11 AM   #68
ltc444
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 3, 2011
Location: Vernon AZ
Posts: 1,195
A comment about Vest. Vest and Body armor were not in general use at the time of the Miami Shootout. My own department and the Arkansas State Police did not recieve Vest until almost two years after the incident.

Private Money had been raised for the SP but was diverted to other uses. We finally ran a money making drive and purchased Vest and donated them to individual officers. We did the same for the Deputies.

Ammo. Our Sheriff contacted his Liability Insurance carrier to determin what type of ammo to carry. They responded with the following. No 45, 38 110 Silvertip, 357 125 silvertip and 9mm 115 Silvertip.

Fortunately, he suffered a career ending (under suspecious circumstances) injury and the policy was reversed.

Training, mind set, a will to live and pure old fashioned cussedness is the key to survival.

The old Navy maximun, "Iron Men in wooden ships will defeat wooden men in Iron ships" applys in all survival situations.
ltc444 is offline  
Old April 23, 2011, 01:45 AM   #69
ClydeFrog
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 1, 2010
Posts: 5,798
Amen ltc...

Amen ltc...



In late 2004, I worked briefly with a retired LE officer from a small town PD.
He told our group of PSCs(contract security on a storm recovery detail) how the city's new manager set up the department's weapons/ammunition policy.

Sad but true.
ClydeFrog is offline  
Old April 23, 2011, 08:05 AM   #70
therewolf
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2011
Posts: 133
Another Navy practice is to train with what you'll have to use in battle.

The lowliest seaman recruit knows practicing with anything but what you'll

be using when the SHTF is a bad idea.

Last edited by therewolf; April 24, 2011 at 09:49 AM.
therewolf is offline  
Old April 23, 2011, 07:13 PM   #71
Sleuth
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 27, 2002
Location: Arizona
Posts: 445
Clyde, we (as Feds) almost always controlled the circumstances of when & where we would arrest someone, or serve a warrant. Since we did not respond to robberies, man with a gun calls, and the like, we did not need to wear armor all the time - unlike local PD's. We did have it handy, along with long guns.
Our policy was, when possible, call the locals to make an unknown risk car stop, as your local officer will make more such stops in a year than most 'Feds" make in a career. The local had their armor on, long guns up front, cage cars, PA systems, and a plan.
They liked doing it, because they got a percentage of any monies recovered. Plus, we still had to write all the reports.

And Undercover means you are 'impersonating' someone the bad guys think is also a bad guy. They do not wear armor all the time, and to do so would 'blow your cover'.
Plain clothes means you are conducting all kinds of investigations - interviewing people who may have information (but no connection to the outlaws), checking records, etc. No one knows you are an LEO unless you tell them.
__________________
Sleuth
Sleuth is offline  
Old April 24, 2011, 12:41 AM   #72
ClydeFrog
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 1, 2010
Posts: 5,798
Sleuth's post, real true stories from the Highway Patrol...

I understand Sleuth's remarks but in the real world things can sometimes go sideways very quickly.

I recall watching a ep of Spike TV's DEA series where a citizen in Detroit MI walked up to a DEA unmarked vehicle & started talking to the "undercover" special agents. Not good.
I also had a incident around 2000/2001 where a group of "undercover" US Secret Service & ICE/CBP agents did a raid on a apartment in the property where I was working security.
The federal agents were all in a GM Suburban SUV. They all wore polo shirts & had, I kid you not: "fanny packs". They all looked they were on a golf outing & got lost.
One of the special agents showed me his US Secret Service badge & federal creds. The raid was uneventful but it showed me not all LE or narcotics actions have high speed tactical uniforms or special weapons.
There was also a local sheriff's office unit that had a buy/bust op going in a crowded tourist area. A subject pulled a firearm & the narcotics deputies fired on him. That to me was poor plans & intel.
ClydeFrog
ClydeFrog is offline  
Old April 24, 2011, 11:40 AM   #73
Sleuth
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 27, 2002
Location: Arizona
Posts: 445
Clyde,
Our cars were set up so you could sit in the car with me, and not know it was an LEO car. And of course you 'know' the person who walked up to the agents was not a cooperating witness, or even another officer.

And if the USSS and ICE were doing a raid, they certainly were NOT undercover.

Could things go wrong in our day to day business? Yup, with only a slighter greater chance than them going wrong for you in your day to day business.

I'll say it again - please try to understand it:
Plain Clothes does NOT equal undercover.
__________________
Sleuth

Last edited by Sleuth; April 24, 2011 at 12:01 PM.
Sleuth is offline  
Old April 25, 2011, 02:58 AM   #74
ClydeFrog
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 1, 2010
Posts: 5,798
5x5...

I hear you S, 5x5....

My point is as any kind of sworn LE officer uniform or plainclothes you need to ready for ANYTHING!

ClydeFrog is offline  
Old April 25, 2011, 04:19 AM   #75
edw794
Member
 
Join Date: January 22, 2001
Location: subduction zone
Posts: 31
i have researched the newhall shootings extensively since the early 1970's and just became aware of this posting.

the often passed belief about newhall's "brass in the pocket(s)" is just what it is, a myth. there has never been one shred of evidence uncovered by anyone this happened at newhall for the simple reason that it did not, but bill jordan, did mention such an occurence in another shooting in his book, "no second place winner."

with the information available at this time, i cannot determine if the newhall chp officers were carrying magnum loads in their revolvers. the chp issued weapons during that time were either a smith & wesson or colt .38 revolver, though personal .357 revolvers were permitted to be carried. i know for a fact at least one of the officers was carrying a magnum revolver.

if one is interested in locating the site of this incident, it is located near where magic mountain is today in valencia, california, right off of southbound interstate 5, in southern california. the shootings occurred at a standard gas station in the area where the marie callendar restaurant stands. for more info, refer to my following submission at: http://www.odmp.org/officer/10509-of...es-e.-pence-jr

Last edited by edw794; April 26, 2011 at 02:34 AM.
edw794 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13600 seconds with 7 queries