- Reaction score
- 20,458
- Points
- 1,260
Lone assailant with a knife. Learns he shouldn’t bring a knife to a gun fight.
Mod edit to add date to thread title
Mod edit to add date to thread title
Last edited by a moderator:
I am not surprised. When you let the foxes into the hen house...Lone assailant with a knife. Learns he shouldn’t bring a knife to a gun fight.
Link doesn't work
Shit show. LE appeared to try to break up the fight - two unarmed civilians had jumped on the attacker to try to subdue him, and two LE subdued them, while one officer covered the knife welding attacker, one of those was stabbed.Who was that cop apprehending/holding down when he was stabbed?
Tough to say that with confidence. Because of the camera angle we don’t know what he had for a backdrop, save that it was probably messy. The threat was moving, and sometimes superimposed over a friendly. Shit circumstance… I think the police officer did as best as he could with it.The cover officer waited a tad too long to shoot the attacker.
Agree. TBH, he shot pretty darn quickly after the actual assailant moved a few cm away from the cop/Good Samaritan misdirect.Tough to say that with confidence. Because of the camera angle we don’t know what he had for a backdrop, save that it was probably messy. The threat was moving, and sometimes superimposed over a friendly. Shit circumstance… I think the police officer did as best as he could with it.
He could have closed the distance and contact shot him…Tough to say that with confidence. Because of the camera angle we don’t know what he had for a backdrop, save that it was probably messy. The threat was moving, and sometimes superimposed over a friendly. Shit circumstance… I think the police officer did as best as he could with it.
And your experience as a police officer intervening in very sudden and violent situations is what, exactly?View attachment 85669
Germans are asleep at the wheel.
And they still arrested blue shirt guy after shooting the terrorist, mind you.
My experience as a military officer and just a situationally aware man says fights usually involve two parties and when you don't know what's going on, your priority is to worry about assessing, disarming and separating, not arresting.And your experience as a police officer intervening in very sudden and violent situations is what, exactly?
My experience as a military officer and just a situationally aware man says fights usually involve two parties and when you don't know what's going on, your priority is to worry about assessing, disarming and separating, not arresting.
This officer assumed the blue shirt guy was the only threat and paid no attention to the actual terrorist.
It also says that when someone has just heroically interrupted a terrorist attack and you've almost gotten yourself killed by misidentifying him as the attacker, you apologize and thank him, you don't arrest him.
I've seen many cases of American LEOs doing just that, there's no reason the Germans can't do the same other than ideological blinders (aversion to self-defense, excessive emphasis on imagined threats (white supremacy) versus actual threats (radical islam))
If the officer had been alone to do everything, understandable. But there were multiple officers on scene.
I think it's a bit too facile to say "hindsight 2020" and abandon all esprit critique.It took you far longer to write that reply than any of these officers had for the whole thing to take place. They had to make decisions instantly. He was not the only officer on scene; it’s typical that you get an apparent aggressor under control knowing that others have your back. Frankly when you’re in a one on one ground fight you don’t have much ability to do anything else.
“Disarming and separating” is exactly what that still photo shows- it’s the initial first few seconds physical intervention. The higher the threat, the lower the subject; if you see someone apparently attacking someone else, almost invariably you’re going to ground them.
Obviously in the few seconds immediately following this it became apparent that the situation was not as was initially perceived. That’s also understandable and normal.
I’m sure that once facts were ascertained the police showed due gratitude to the civilian(s) who intervened and will likely recognize them formally in the fullness of time.
I’ve handled more than a few scraps-in-progress, including stabbings, and it unfolds very quickly and without the luxury of much of a set of facts save for what you can immediately see and hear. The best way to reduce the threat in the greatest number of instances when you see one person on top of another is to secure and ground whoever appears to be the aggressor- usually the one on top. That’s not flawless, but as a heuristic for your initial actions it usually works.
It’s difficult to simultaneously pull someone off someone else and ground them, and simultaneously spare any focus for anything other than the immediate fight.I think it's a bit too facile to say "hindsight 2020" and abandon all esprit critique.
On the contrary, one can learn from others' mistakes. What that officer did almost got him killed.
You won't see me doing that (focus all attention on one party).
I had the same reaction earlier today when I saw a video of a Frenchman restraining a troublemaker in public transit. In that case, the Frenchman suffered no blowback, but he easily could've, had the troublemaker had accomplices.