[Crimson Dynamo]

Why shooting to wound doesn’t make sense scientifically, legally, or tactically

When I encounter civilian response to officer-involved shootings, it’s very
often ‘Why didn’t they just shoot him in the leg?’” Dr. Bill Lewinski, executive
director of the Force Science Institute, told Force Science News in a 2006
interview centered on Paterson’s proposed legislation. “When civilians judge
police shooting deaths–on juries, on review boards, in the media, in the
community–this same argument is often brought forward. Shooting to wound
is naively regarded as a reasonable means of stopping dangerous behavior.


“In reality, this thinking is a result of ‘training by Hollywood,’ in which movie
and TV cops are able to do anything to control the outcomes of events that
serve the director’s dramatic interests. It reflects a misconception of real-life
dynamics and ends up imposing unrealistic expectations of skill on real-life officers.”

“Hands and arms can be the fastest-moving body parts. For example, an average suspect can move his hand and forearm across his body to a 90-degree angle in 12/100 of a second. He can move his hand from his hip to shoulder height in 18/100 of a second.

“The average officer pulling the trigger as fast as he can on a Glock, one of the fastest- cycling semi-autos, requires 1/4 second to discharge each round.

“There is no way an officer can react, track, shoot and reliably hit a threatening suspect’s forearm or a weapon in a suspect’s hand in the time spans involved.

“Even if the suspect held his weapon arm steady for half a second or more, an accurate hit would be highly unlikely, and in police shootings the suspect and his weapon are seldom stationary. Plus, the officer himself may be moving as he shoots.


more details here: https://www.police1.com/patrol-issue...dYvNUEECtIWRI/