Ten historic shoot outs on Discovery tonight.

[SG29736]

"Wasnt much of a gun fight them Indians had no bullets as it was against the law to sell ammo to them."

This is hilarious. I can't believe I'm reading this on a gun forum.. I guess that's why the criminals today have such a difficult time getting guns and ammo, it's illegal to sell to them.. Actually, the indians were the ones who had repeating rifles while the cavalrymen had their single shot rifles and some revolvers. Mark

[Powderman]

As far as influencing law enforcement doctrine and tactics, IMHO there are actually four major incidents.

1. Lots of people have never heard of the Norco shootout in California. This is a riveting account of a running gun battle with armed bad guys. The cops were armed with revolvers, two reloads and pump shotguns. The BG's (IIRC) were armed with an AR15, a HK91, and multiple handguns.

2. The infamous FBI shootout in Miami woke the LE community up to more modern equipment that gave officers more immediate firepower. After that shootout, the emphasis was on replacing revolvers with semiautomatic handguns. Research and testing done as a result of that incident gave birth to one of our most popular cartridges to date, the .40 Smith and Wesson.

3. The Onion Field incident also caused a major shift in law enforcement training and doctrine. This one was where two officers were abducted; one was executed in an onion field; I believe the other one escaped.

4. However, the second single most important incident concerning law enforcement officers--and another incident causing a major shift in training, doctrine and tactics--was the Newhall massacre. Police officers pulled over a car load of armed killers. When the shooting stopped, four officers laid dead. This incident gave us our current procedures for the felony (hot) stop and also placed a major emphasis on officer safety.

[Crioche]

IMO here's one shootout from the British Army in Northern Ireland that shows what a very highly trained professional can do to terrorists:

One evening in the Londonderry area of Northern Ireland an SAS man was working alone on a surveillance task; he was in an unmarked civilian car driving around some very dangerous areas of that city. He had his Browning Hi-Power 9mm Pistol on his belt and several other weapons stashed inside the car, including an MP5 & a G3K 7.62mm assault rifle.

Somehow the opposition (the IRA) became aware of his presence and hastily brought together a team of 4 shooters armed with AK47s & AR18s; they got a car and began to follow the SAS man. Given that he was an expert in both surveillance and counter-surveillance, it was fairly obvious to him he'd outstayed his welcome in the area and they were onto him. So he began to drive calmly away from the area, but this quickly descended into a pursuit and the other car forced its way infront, stopped and created a barrier. The first burst of fire from the AK47 effectively immobilised the SAS man's car.

Whatever the circumstances it appeared that a fast reverse and a J-turn to escape were now out of the question; so the SAS man engaged them. He drew his Browning and went on the offensive. Despite being massively 'out-gunned' he used his Browning so quickly, accurately and effectively that three out of four terrorists were killed or incapacitated.

The 4th terrorist dropped his AK47 and ran away. The 'rumour' is that the SAS man let him go, despite being quite capable of killing him, so the terrorist could tell the others what it was like to take on an SAS man and lose!

A nice piece of quick thinking psychological warfare on his part.

I'm sure there are numerous similar examples of very high skilled shooters, whether military, police or a civilian protecting himself that can be mentioned. I thought you might like this one. It's quite relevant for our US audience too, because the SAS were credited with bringing Jeff Cooper's Modern Technique, including the Weaver Stance, etc, to the UK in the 60s/70s. The influence of their training meant that the UK Police adopted it (where do you think they get their training then??)

[Mike Irwin]

The tide of the Norco shootout turned in favor of the police when one of the assistance response deputies brought out what might have been a personally owned AR-15.

IIRC he killed one of the robbers outright and made the others displace from the ambush that they set up. Apparently these guys not only wanted some money, they wanted to kill some police officers.


"The infamous FBI shootout in Miami woke the LE community up to more modern equipment that gave officers more immediate firepower."


Three of the agents in the Miami shootout were armed with 9mm Smith & Wesson semi-autos.

It was the failure of the Winchester 115-gr. Silvertip bullet to reach Platt's heart that resulted in the modern era of bullet and ammunition design.

This months' American Rifleman has an interesting article by Bill Vanderpool, who is former chief of FBI's ballistics dept. It is, unfortunately, a rather short article, and doesn't go into much detail, but he talks about the aftermath of Miami and the effect it had on ammunition design and testing.

Agent Mirelles ended the shootout with a Smith & Wesson Model 19 revolver loaded with 158-gr. LSWCHP .38 +Ps, which were standard issue to agents at that time.

[SPEMack618]

From the account I read in "Weapons and Tactics for Law Enforcement", the officer that ended the Norco shootout instead got his personal AR-15 up and running to aquire the iniative.

Didn't Agent Mirelles also have a Remington 870?

[JimPage]

"Interesting looking weapon. I would hate to be on the receiving end of that, but it looks far from easy to conceal. Why not a cut down rifle or shotgun? These guys were not overly worried about having illegal weapons.." This was in reference to Baby Face Nelson's fully auto 1911 .38 super.

They weren't illegal until 1934. I'm not sure what dates Nelson was in business.

[Mike Irwin]

'Didn't Agent Mirelles also have a Remington 870?'

He did. He shot it dry to no apparent effect.

[kraigwy]

3. The Onion Field incident also caused a major shift in law enforcement training and doctrine. This one was where two officers were abducted; one was executed in an onion field; I believe the other one escaped.

This, the Onion Field, affects more officers and I'll add civilian self defense then all the others combined.

Yes it involved the two officers you mentioned, both were captured, one was killed the other escaped.

BUT that's not the theme of the subject. The Officers gave up their guns, one escaped but because the gave up their guns the second was killed, the first was haunted the rest of his life.

LE changed their tactics, stressing NEVER EVER GIVE UP YOUR GUN, and just because someone has the drop on you doesn't mean you are at an disavantage. You can still respond and you can still win.

Most departments started training session where we drew on a subject who had his gun pointed at you, we found it doesn't take much to pull it off, (this was covered in a subject I started a few weeks ago, "drawing on a bandit who has the drop on you".

We also got into a heavy training program of "take a ways" or ripping the firearm from an individual who has the drop on you.

Anyway, the chances of the massive gun battles are quite un common in real life, the "one on one" situation of the Onion field are much more common.

In reality cops spend more time on traffic stops, disturbances, field interviews, etc, then in multi bandit gun fights at banks.

I'd say the same for Civilian SD, its home invasion, its convience store robberies, ATM rip off's, or car jacking situations not multi bandit gun fights.

[markj]

This is hilarious. I can't believe I'm reading this on a gun forum

Well all I can say is I was at the battlefield and listened to the park ranger describe the battle and went by the fact the soldiers were riddled with arrows and not to many were shot. But hey belive what you wish. I was very surprised to hear this from the ranger. There are numerous books on it if you wish to research it. My good friend Gary Spotter War Bonnets Grandpa made coup that day he was 14. I heard his tale on the res while visiting Gary.

While some warriors were armed with rifles (including antiquated muzzle-loaders and Army Sharps carbines which they had acquired years before in trades with settlers), the Indians also carried a large variety of traditional weapons. These included bows and arrows and several styles of heavy, stone-headed war clubs. According to the Indian accounts, at least half of the Indian warriors were armed only with bows and "many arrows," making this the primary weapon.[52] Many of the Indian participants, including the thirteen year-old Black Elk, claimed to have acquired their first gun from dead troopers at the battle.[53] The Sioux warrior White Bull described the Indians' systematically stripping slain troopers of guns and cartridge belts. As the losses mounted among Custer's men, the soldiers' fire steadily decreased, while the gunfire by the Indians with newly acquired weapons increased until reaching a crescendo.[54] Cheyenne participants gave similar testimony: the Indians' firepower was increased by the new carbines they took off the soldiers, and ammunition recovered from the saddlebags of the troopers' captured horses.

Tactics the Indians used then are common to gurilla warfare used to this day. Tied brush on the horses tails to make dust, burned brush to create smoke and separate the soldiers. But hey what do I know? It is history not TV made movies crap. Custer got his due after he killed countless women, children and old men.

[kraigwy]

Indians could fire 3 arrows per second

I want to see that.

I wont address the rest but if I was you I'd demand your money back from your history teacher.

[markj]

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/histor...n-Was-Won.html

Read up. Do research.

[SPEMack618]

Okay, I'm just gonna go out on a limb here and say that the 7th Cav Troopers killed far more than 8 Lakota, Arapaho, and/or Northern Cheyenne warriors.

Those eight markers are for the eight leaders of the various tribes that fell in battle.

Since the Native American warriors had no S-1 shop, I doubt anyone will ever know the exact figures of those killed at the Little Big Horn

And this isn't just chest bumping because I'm a 19D.

[ltc444]

When I toured the Little Big Horn it was just after I had finished the Air land Battle doctrine portion of the Army Command and General Staff College.

I was impressed with the effectiveness of the Indian attack. Even though air land battle doctrine had not been concieved, the principles on which it is based were evident in the Indian actions in destroying Custer's Command.

[SG29736]

"Wasnt much of a gun fight them Indians had no bullets as it was against the law to sell ammo to them."

This is the statement that I was referring to as hilarious. Are you saying they had rifles but no ammo, because it was illegal to sell ammo to them. 3 arrows per second, not bad. Mark

The 3 arrows per second comment might be a clue that someone had an agenda to make things look as favorable to the Indian side as possible. I'm no Custer fan, just trying to be as accurate as possible.

[SG29736]

A quick search found this:

"There were 2,361 cartridges, cases and bullets recovered from the entire battlefield, which reportedly came from 45 different firearms types (including the Army Springfields and Colts, of course) and represented at least 371 individual guns. The evidence indicated that the Indians used Sharps, Smith & Wessons, Evans, Henrys, Winchesters, Remingtons, Ballards, Maynards, Starrs, Spencers, Enfields and Forehand & Wadworths, as well as Colts and Springfields of other calibers. There was evidence of 69 individual Army Springfields on Custer's Field (the square-mile section where Custer's five companies died), but there was also evidence of 62 Indian .44-caliber Henry repeaters and 27 Sharps .50-caliber weapons. In all, on Custer's Field there was evidence of at least 134 Indian firearms versus 81 for the soldiers. It appears that the Army was outgunned as well as outnumbered."

The above was from the history.net website.

This from the National Park Service/ Midwest Archeological Center:

Indian arms included, 44 caliber Henry, 44 caliber Model 1866 Winchesters, 44/40 caliber 1873 Winchester, all repeating rifles. The army in 1876 did not issue repeating rifles.

They do also mention that the indians of course had bows and arrow, clubs, old muzzle loaders etc. Mark

[markj]

[QUOTEAre you saying they had rifles but no ammo, because it was illegal to sell ammo to them][/QUOTE]

Yes, if a person sold them ammo and was caught they were hanged. The guns used by the indians were picked up on the battlefield for the most part. The guns used by many of the soldiers had bad ammo and the shells would not eject due to expansion. Wounded indians were carried off the field there were 8 dead left not 8 chiefs. I was told this by the park ranger not any history teacher. Now if you wish to see the markmanship of a native I suggest coming to Nebraska and go on a guided hunt up north of Omaha in Black Elk park, it will cost you but you will have a pro indian guide. You may use a target to practise up on your arrow skills, then ask one of them. He will show you some tricks and they hit what they aim at.

Custer wasnt that nice of a fellow, he was almost kicked out of the acadamy for rebellious stuff. He led a attack in the civil war took out some guys and saved the day, but it sure could of gone the other way. Luck was his till Little Bighorn. Indians wdere upset over being kicked off the res in the black hills due to gold was found there. It is still in the courts to this day.

Indians actually saved our rear ends in ww2, korea and nam with their code talking, still unbroken today. Thank an indian next time you meet up.

My friend had a Sioux ceremony at his service, also fire dept honor guard and 3 round volley by the VFW as he served bravely.

The books were written by those that oppressed the indians so are you surprised at the slant?

[kraigwy]

Indians could fire 3 arrows per second

That part voids all the rest in regards to credibility.

Plus it hasn't much to do with the topic, but that's for moderators to decide.

[2damnold4this]

Custer wasnt that nice of a fellow,

I agree with you there. But I've seen spent cartridges and bullets dug up from the site and there are a large number that didn't come from Custer's men.

[SPEMack618]

A lot of people nearly kicked out of West Point.

Wasn't one of the deciding factors, aside from Custer's bumbling stupidity the fact that the Indians had Winchester repeaters compared to the 7th Cav's single-shot trapdoors?

Further more, eight dead left behind would probably equate to several more times KIA.

[Mike Irwin]

In theory it was illegal to sell firearms to the Indians.

In theory it was also illegal to sell alcohol to the Indians.

In practice, both were largely disregarded by hundreds of traders who did very brisk business with many indian tribes in both commodities.

The simple matter was that, once a trader cleared "civilization," and got into Indian country, there were few, if any, effective policing mechanisms to stop him from selling anything he wanted to the indians.

And the theory that an Indian could fire 3 arrows a second?

Balderdash.

Not even the best bowmen could do that.

[SG29736]

I guess you figure that criminals today don't have guns because they are prohibited from having them. How did the Indians pick up Winchesters, Henrys etc from the battlefield, when the soldiers did not have them? Part of the information that I put in my post came from the same park service that you are saying gave you the information. They have actually done forensic studies of the battle field and have been able to track by the expended ammunuition the movement of some of the shooters.

"There were 2,361 cartridges, cases and bullets recovered from the entire battlefield, which reportedly came from 45 different firearms types (including the Army Springfields and Colts, of course) and represented at least 371 individual guns. The evidence indicated that the Indians used Sharps, Smith & Wessons, Evans, Henrys, Winchesters, Remingtons, Ballards, Maynards, Starrs, Spencers, Enfields and Forehand & Wadworths, as well as Colts and Springfields of other calibers. There was evidence of 69 individual Army Springfields on Custer's Field (the square-mile section where Custer's five companies died), but there was also evidence of 62 Indian .44-caliber Henry repeaters and 27 Sharps .50-caliber weapons. In all, on Custer's Field there was evidence of at least 134 Indian firearms versus 81 for the soldiers. It appears that the Army was outgunned as well as outnumbered."

This is the kind of detailed information they got when they actually studied the battlefield. You think all of the above is just baloney?

I have no problems with Indians and their contributions. That doesn't however change the fact that they had repeating rifles and the soldiers didn't. I also didn't mention any books. I've seen a lot of information about the Little Big Horn through the years, from both sides, some contradictory, not just some story from a tour guide.

You don't think your credibility is questionable when you believe that someone can shoot 3 arrows per second with a regular bow and arrow? (one arrow at a time, I'm assuming). You seriously believe that. Mark

[markj]

You seriously believe that. Mark

I have watched and seen some amazing stuff done with bow and arrow.

[SG29736]

"I have watched and seen some amazing stuff done with bow and arrow.."

I'm sure you have. I saw a guy split an arrow the other night on a program. I've seen amazing demonstrations. 3 arrows in one second is not among them. That's all I'm saying on that part of the discussion. There are some claims that would be difficult to achieve that I would be willing to believe without actually seeing it. I'd have to see the 3 arrows shot that fast to believe it. Mark

[kraigwy]

When my granddaughter was about to become of age to hunt I took her to her Hunters Ed Class.

They had a session on Bow Hunting talking about how bows were the cats meow.

My Granddaughter pops up, "if bows and arrows are so great, how come the Indians lost".

I've seen some dern good bow hunters, (I'm not one, I couldn't hit the ground with a bow), but there is no way a guy, any guy, can shoot three arrows in 1 second.

[g.willikers]

Here - three arrows in 1.5 seconds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggDfJ...eature=related