Dead Checks

[TardWrangler]

Would be cool to see a realistic way to check to see if an enemy is actually dead (B key to muzzle thump body and see if it provokes a vocal groan or physical response to pain) or The improper way to dead check (one extra to the head). Just seems kind of odd to have to flexicuff a corpse in case it gets up
And yeah I thought one extra to the head was a thing in this game until a guy got up with a cavity in his skull and shot me

[TardWrangler]

Messaggio originale di JtDarth:

Messaggio originale di Project153:

The US police shoot to neutralize, not to kill. Basically, if they have to shoot on reaction (IE, in response to a sudden threat or an escalating situation), they keep shooting until target is on the ground and not moving. Often that means dead, other times that means person laying on ground moaning in pain. The goal ISN'T to kill, it's to render unable to continue violence. The difference from 'shooting to wound' there, is that 'shooting to wound' is both A: Utter bs, often what the media views as a 'less lethal' location is actually MORE likely to lead to a death (the common example of 'shoot them in the arm or leg' comes to mind. You have MAJOR blood vessels there that take up a significant chunk of target area, and if hit, will likely cause a bleed-out before sufficient medical aid can be gotten on-site, meaning it's just as sane to aim center mass where short of shock or a heart hit, on-scene responders actually do have some methods of reducing odds of death, that's ignoring the whole 'you shouldn't be shooting unless there is a lethal threat involved' in the first place, as well as the factor of target profile being smaller and thus more liable to miss) and B: Seen as cruel/an indicator that the situation wasn't severe enough to justify lethal options in the first place.

That said, approach differs when dealing with something like arriving to a known hostage situation or active shooter. In those scenarios, police are very much expected to shoot to kill, but also to be more reserved with their fire due to potential for collateral on bystanders. Mind you, the difference in 'shoot to kill' vs 'shoot to neutralize' here, is more urgency of situation and determined immediate threat to life of bystanders.

All that said, basic training indicates to 'mag dump' because most cops in the US do NOT actually train with their weapons outside of the bare minimums needed to pass qualification. Given the amount of times cops over here have dumped multiple mags only for it to turn out they only landed 1 or 2 shots out of 40+, it seems most departments advocate accuracy by volume. Of course, you also get the occasional more competent cops who only need one or two shots, then will pause to let target hit the floor before either continuing fire or covering downed suspect, as the situation indicates.

I have talked to numerous LEOs from multiple departments and types of department, about how well-trained Law Enforcement ACTUALLY are, and have consistently heard the same claim that most officers do the bare minimum on practice when it comes to firearms (frequently in a mildly disgusted tone). I've also heard that most officers once leaving the academy do not continue to further study things like how to interact with the mentally ill or how to de-escalate things instead of escalating them.



Of course, all this is also kind of moot when it comes to persecution for breach of procedure, because 'qualified immunity' shields from stuff it REALLY shouldn't, acting as a blanket forgiveness of 'accidents' and 'mistaken actions', so long as the officer in question makes a half-plausible excuse.

I'm personally of the opinion Law Enforcement should be held to a higher standard than the average citizen, not a looser one.

Yeah here in the Military we train to the exact same standard of "shoot to neutralize". But we all know what that actually means.

As for the brit talking about Police training to "save life", yeah US military is held to the exact same standard. If a guy shoots and kills your best friend right next to you and then drops his weapon, you are expected by international law to detain him and apply aid if needed.

That being said, at the lower enlisted level we don't actually train that way or plan to do it because ♥♥♥♥ them

[Porkwhitemeat]

you shoot them in the head

[SGTsimo]

Another reason you don't 'mag dump' them is because you are then out of ammo and may not have chance to reload if another threat appears.
If 2 bullets will stop them, then why put 15 into them?
In the UK every bullet is a use of force.

[TardWrangler]

Messaggio originale di SGTsimo:

Another reason you don't 'mag dump' them is because you are then out of ammo and may not have chance to reload if another threat appears.
If 2 bullets will stop them, then why put 15 into them?
In the UK every bullet is a use of force.

3 rounds isnt a magdump? lol

[SGTsimo]

Messaggio originale di TardWrangler:

Messaggio originale di SGTsimo:

Another reason you don't 'mag dump' them is because you are then out of ammo and may not have chance to reload if another threat appears.
If 2 bullets will stop them, then why put 15 into them?
In the UK every bullet is a use of force.

3 rounds isnt a magdump? lol

Er, unless your mag only holds 3 rounds then of course it isn't lol.

[BulbmanX]

Not needed, if you're close enough to "muzzle thump" them, then just cuff them, you should be cuffing everyone anyway. If you don't want to get close because it's an unsecured area, then shout compliance at the downed person and if they are still alive they will get up and go into surrender state automatically 100% of the time, this also works for hiding enemies (ie in a closet or under a bed) they will come out and surrender 100% of the time.

[daftpunk67]

Messaggio originale di TardWrangler:

Messaggio originale di SGTsimo:

Is that from personal experience (like mine), or just your opinion?
I have just googled this and everything i read says that they can use lethal force (like the UK can), but doesn't say that they shoot to kill. Like the UK it says that they shoot to stop, aiming for the centre mass.

Yes they can use lethal force if they feel that their life (or anothers) is in danger, but not just to dead check them.

US military. Even in military however, standard handgun qualification training is done in a context of security, not necessarily war and we basically follow the same laws. The only difference is in military, we are authorized warning shots which I dont think police are. Most police departments train mozambique drill (2 to the chest 1 to the head).

Lethal force is synonymous with "shoot to kill" just based on the definition of lethal force "Use of force likely to cause serious bodily injury or death", If you are legally within your rights to use a firearm on someone because you are in danger, you are also legally just as much within your means to make sure the person is dead before they hit the floor.

What you are describing about shooting a person who is weapon removed and in pain, is an execution, not a dead check.
What im talking about is shooting a seemingly unconcious person in the head after dropping them to make sure they arent pretending, which like I said is illegal, But should still be in the game nonetheless.

dafuq since when has the US military authorized warning shots? Because they don't as you don't know where that round will go

[TardWrangler]

Messaggio originale di daftpunk67:

Messaggio originale di TardWrangler:

US military. Even in military however, standard handgun qualification training is done in a context of security, not necessarily war and we basically follow the same laws. The only difference is in military, we are authorized warning shots which I dont think police are. Most police departments train mozambique drill (2 to the chest 1 to the head).

Lethal force is synonymous with "shoot to kill" just based on the definition of lethal force "Use of force likely to cause serious bodily injury or death", If you are legally within your rights to use a firearm on someone because you are in danger, you are also legally just as much within your means to make sure the person is dead before they hit the floor.

What you are describing about shooting a person who is weapon removed and in pain, is an execution, not a dead check.
What im talking about is shooting a seemingly unconcious person in the head after dropping them to make sure they arent pretending, which like I said is illegal, But should still be in the game nonetheless.

dafuq since when has the US military authorized warning shots? Because they don't as you don't know where that round will go

If on post and being approached by a suspicious vehicle that wont stop, sentries in some commands were authorized warning shots. Pretty sure that applied to other scenarios aswell

[TardWrangler]

Messaggio originale di BulbmanX:

Not needed, if you're close enough to "muzzle thump" them, then just cuff them, you should be cuffing everyone anyway. If you don't want to get close because it's an unsecured area, then shout compliance at the downed person and if they are still alive they will get up and go into surrender state automatically 100% of the time, this also works for hiding enemies (ie in a closet or under a bed) they will come out
and surrender 100% of the time.

Yeah this is the route ive been taking recently

[daftpunk67]

Messaggio originale di TardWrangler:

Messaggio originale di daftpunk67:

dafuq since when has the US military authorized warning shots? Because they don't as you don't know where that round will go

If on post and being approached by a suspicious vehicle that wont stop, sentries in some commands were authorized warning shots. Pretty sure that applied to other scenarios aswell

maybe decades ago but not know

[JtDarth]

Messaggio originale di daftpunk67:

Messaggio originale di TardWrangler:

If on post and being approached by a suspicious vehicle that wont stop, sentries in some commands were authorized warning shots. Pretty sure that applied to other scenarios aswell

maybe decades ago but not know

Still applies for base guards, iirc. Very limited use cases, all of which contingent on person they are 'warning' having already passed certain barriers and the shooters being on land that is part of the base.

The US treats military bases as something akin to a separate state. with different rules for what is and is not legal, as well as jurisdictional issues aplenty.

[TardWrangler]

Messaggio originale di daftpunk67:

Messaggio originale di TardWrangler:

If on post and being approached by a suspicious vehicle that wont stop, sentries in some commands were authorized warning shots. Pretty sure that applied to other scenarios aswell

maybe decades ago but not know

I was referring to OEF OIF and syria recently. But what the other guy said is news to me aswell

[daftpunk67]

Messaggio originale di JtDarth:

Messaggio originale di daftpunk67:

maybe decades ago but not know

Still applies for base guards, iirc. Very limited use cases, all of which contingent on person they are 'warning' having already passed certain barriers and the shooters being on land that is part of the base.

The US treats military bases as something akin to a separate state. with different rules for what is and is not legal, as well as jurisdictional issues aplenty.

I know as I've done those duties and not once did they ever say warning shots were authorized, in fact a lot agencies even outside of the military frown upon warning shots as you don't know for certain where that round is going to go.

[I Am The Law †]

Messaggio originale di Getherer:

Messaggio originale di shadowsc133:

Do they also enter a 50,000sq ft hotel with only 5 officers?

mate if you dont like the game then why are you even here constantly ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ on it?
its obviously better to have all kinds and sizes of maps?

use mods if you want more operatives? it would obviously be game breaking and boring having full unit

game can focus on being realistic but doesnt need to implement 100% realism, this is the vision of the devs, you either like it or not, if you dont then you shouldve done better research before buying, simple as that

allow me to object. the strongest thing I don't like about this game is a small group of special forces. I sometimes feel like a part of a sabotage group deep behind enemy lines with limited human resources, and not of police special forces. In any case, this is not a critical drawback, I love this game, it's just that a small number of people on large maps does not allow you to fully implement tactics. Thank you for writing about the mod to increase the number of operators, I didn't know about this.

I just would like the developers to slightly adjust the number of people depending on the size of the mission, as it is in Door Kickers, for example. This is not a claim, just a suggestion.