Graeme William Burton in custody

[shafty]

I share the frustration of fellow KB'ers with the way the "Bad Guys" who don't give a shit, just rampage around NZ.

Other than write the odd letter to MP's and The Editor of the local paper, I believe that supporting the Sensible Sentencing Trust is really worth while. They at least provide support to families of murder victims and highlight in Parliament the extent and personal side of the offending.

Visit http://www.safe-nz.org.nz/ and read some of the Victims Stories - the 1st dozen or so murder cases should do it - and maybe consider flicking them $20 a year............

[Shadows]

So, any way, there has been an Iroquois hovering around in circles behind me all morning (the shit went down on the hill above where I work).
Does anybody know what they are looking for? More bodies??

[Crasherfromwayback]

So, any way, there has been an Iroquois hovering around in circles behind me all morning (the shit went down on the hill above where I work).
Does anybody know what they are looking for? More bodies??

Marijuana?

[Squeak the Rat]

A place to land?

[sAsLEX]

Equal and opposite reactions. For the Dummy to fly back, the marksman would have to as well.

Wrong. A shooter is normally expecting the shock and has positioned himself to absorb the recoil.... and larger calibre rifles have recoil damping systems. The barret has a muzzle brake thing and some of the larger 20mm sniper rifles have large recoil tubes, these dissipate the energy away from the shooter,

[Crasherfromwayback]

Both.....?

[James Deuce]

Wrong. A shooter is normally expecting the shock and has positioned himself to absorb the recoil.... and larger calibre rifles have recoil damping systems. The barret has a muzzle brake thing and some of the larger 20mm sniper rifles have large recoil tubes, these dissipate the energy away from the shooter,

Nope not wrong in the strictest sense of this particular argument. To knock a person back many feet even a weapon with recoil management would knock the shooter back some feet.

Those are specialist weapons designed for performance over range, and the energy involved is orders of magnitude greater than a hand gun, such as an M1911A firing .45ACP that is shown in the movies to pick the target up, fling him 3 metres across the room, and out a window.

I suggest you download the Myth Busters episode and have a look.

Muzzle brakes and recoil minimisation systems are cheating in the sense that they aren't actually part of the spirit of the argument.

[sAsLEX]

Muzzle brakes and recoil minimisation systems are cheating in the sense that they aren't actually part of the spirit of the argument.

:yes: But 20mm rifles are neat.

[Shadows]

Marijuana?

Everybody knows it all gets grown indoors these days!

[jrandom]

... an M1911A firing .45ACP that is shown in the movies to pick the target up, fling him 3 metres across the room, and out a window.

To be honest, I can't actually think of a movie that's shown this.

Can you name one? Did they show any film clips on that Mythbusters episode?

[James Deuce]

Poetic License?

[Squeak the Rat]

To be honest, I can't actually think of a movie that's shown this.

Can you name one?

Crocodile2: Death Swamp.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Everybody knows it all gets grown indoors these days!

lol...plenty of traditionalists still out there mate!

[riffer]

To be honest, I can't actually think of a movie that's shown this.

Can you name one? Did they show any film clips on that Mythbusters episode?

You're obviously too young to remember all the black and white Westerns on the telly on Sundays Dan.

[scumdog]

Wrong. A shooter is normally expecting the shock and has positioned himself to absorb the recoil.... ,


Bollocks, it's still the same energy only in the shooters case it has to move the gun first before it moves the shooter.

Try firing a 303 or 308 one handed like a pistol - sure it jumps but it aint going to break your arm - or push you back yet as far as physics are concerned the gun has fired 180 grains one way and 3.8kg the other.

If the 'other guy' was aiming at you and your bullet struck his rifle on the muzzle his rifle would only (approx) jump back the same amount as yours.

But yeah, we all brace ourselves against the recoil normally.

[jrandom]

You're obviously too young to remember all the black and white Westerns on the telly on Sundays Dan.

We didn't have a telly when I were a lad.

[Sniper]

Regardless of energy transfer, recoil ect, we all know what bullets can do though dont we.

[doc]

Bollocks, it's still the same energy only in the shooters case it has to move the gun first before it moves the shooter.

But yeah, we all brace ourselves against the recoil normally.
You mean by using the "Flinch" method

[doc]

We didn't have a telly when I were a lad.

Them were the days

[Ixion]

Can't have it both ways. Re-institute the death penalty and you have a very good chance that 1 in 3 people you execute are innocent of the crimes they have been convicted of. Not necessarily innocent people, but innocent of the crimes they are executed for. The moral framework that used to support the death penalty was as black and white as the judiciary that ran it.

That isn't the case anymore. Change is a constant. Adapt or die. Which is what Darwin really said.

There's been a lot of stuff posted on KB that could be regarded as seditious, and in a couple of cases downright treasonable. The both used to be punishable by death in the "Home" Isles.

So what is it folks? Execute all criminals for all crimes? Or none? There isn't any middle ground, despite what the liberal losers and kooky conservatives will claim. Some of you blokes flatting better stop stealing toilet paper from work, and I had better stop absently walking off with other people's pens.





Nonsense. Of course there is. Though connecting the death penalty with any particular crime is a mistake. The test should be whether society overall is (or was or will be) a better place because of the person in question remaining in it. If the answer is "yes", then it is illogical to remove them from it. If they have committed some crime, take such steps as are appropriate to recompense any victims, and then move on (and, yes, that does sort of imply that victimless crimes cease to be crimes).


Few are paragons. All of us do "bad stuff" occasionally. Most people, the contribution they make - driving those trucks, digging those ditches, writing those poems, raising those children, balancing those books - outweighs by far their minor pecadillos. Society is better off for their presence.

But if the assessment is that society is a worse place for having that person in it, then it is illogical to allow him to remain. If some other country will have him, then let him go in peace. If no one else will have him, then he must be removed. Not murder (which by definition requires malice). Not revenge. Just simple logic. If the only value that a person can contribute to society is to be a source of donor organs, then let it be so . (The old and sick are another matter, as of course are the young. We are talking about those who CAN but WILL not contribute)

[doc]

You're onto me.

However, I'm not completely thoughtless. I actually really appreciate little people like yourself working hard and paying tax so I don't have to.

Keep up the good work chum.
So you got the GST off that european thingy you got a while ago ?

[Finn]

So you got the GST off that european thingy you got a while ago ?

You mean the courier vehicle? Add depreciation and running costs too.

[Swoop]

And why did they only have their pistols and not the bushmasters they had in the car?
Strange. Some months ago I was saying that the pistol is the firearm that the average copper would have with them and need to use to it's fullest capability...
Here we have the evidence.

Report said the were general duties, how often do they get to "play" with weapons? Not often is my guess.
Once a year "recertification" shoots.

But Burton was 25 or so METRES away
Slightly further away than the standard 3-5 metres that is commonly used in police training.

WE use shotguns for close in work, pistol grip ones though....
Rem 870's with the top folding stocks. Perfect for boarding at sea.

Maybe they need shorter carbine weapons, (maybe wrong use of term there) like the tankies Styr's with the short barrel
You guys have some of those available to you. The forward grip is fixed in place and cannot be folded up alongside the barrel though.

And if you don't train or use guns a lot, a pump action shotgun would be a better choice than a handgun.
Shotguns are pretty indescriminate with their shot spread at the best of times. Having people with little training allowed to use these in potentially built-up areas will endanger bystanders.

Whereas I would argue that a "civilised" society deserves a justice system, rather than a revenge system,
That would be wonderful. There seems to be a lack of justice for the victims of crime in this country.

4. (Over)Expenditure on new prisons is a significant issue for this Government. Bumping a few more prisoners out on parole is unlikely to have any material effect on this whatsoever.
Not including heating, televisions, videos, etc, etc, might save some $$$'s.

Matt and Bruce Grant did this sort of experiment about 45+ years ago using a large box of gravel hanging like a pendulum.
The official medium for ballistics testing during the earlier phase of last century, was pig. (No sarcasm intended here to any of our officers). It replicated the human being and the effects almost exactly. Ballistic gelatin is a more consistant medium though, and luckily is bone free.

[doc]

The official medium for ballistics testing during the earlier phase of last century, was pig. (No sarcasm intended here to any of our officers). It replicated the human being and the effects almost exactly. Ballistic gelatin is a more consistant medium though, and luckily is bone free.

Its also good to learn how to suture. Doesn't stop the shakes when you first get to do it on someone first time tho. But that was in the days before "patients rights" if they only knew

[doc]

You mean the courier vehicle? Add depreciation and running costs too.

Go on rub it in

[Swoop]

Its also good to learn how to suture. Doesn't stop the shakes when you first get to do it on someone first time tho. But that was in the days before "patients rights" if they only knew

Fabulous training grounds... The only camoflage needed is a white coat.

[doc]

You mean the courier vehicle? Add depreciation and running costs too.

Second attempt. What about the speeding infringemnets ? beat that one!!!

[Ixion]

Well, if your pocket is deep enough , you can avoid the demerits by regoing the vehicle to a company and claiming that you cannot determine who was driving. (assumes of course that you didn't get stopped at the time) .

[Finn]

Second attempt. What about the speeding infringemnets ? beat that one!!!

Radar detector. Besides, I don't speed.

[doc]

Radar detector. Besides, I don't speed.How did you claim the radar detecter ? Anyway I still think your mother dresses you funny.

[Scouse]

Whereas I would argue that a "civilised" society deserves a justice system, rather than a revenge system, and that state-sanctioned murder has no place in restorative justice.How does that dead Quad biker get his restorative justice then..?

[doc]

How does that dead Quad biker get his restorative justice then..?
Wake up man haven't you seen that justice thingy wearing a blindfold ?

[Hitcher]

How does that dead Quad biker get his restorative justice then..?

He can't. He's dead. I can't speak for his family, but I think that their anger directed at the Parole Board is misguided and will not give them their son back. There is only one person to blame here, and he will soon have his day in Court.

[sAsLEX]

There is only one person to blame here, and he will soon have his day in Court.

And not long after he will be back on the street.

[Ixion]

Manifestly, the Parole Board were collectively incompetant. So do you consider that the family of the dead man (who suffer for the Board's dereliction) , and society (who also suffer) should simply say "Oh dear , what a pity, never mind , let's just carry on" ?

Why should the Board not be held accountable for its actions? If a mechanic is incompetant and assembles your car wrongly, so that you crash and kill someone, the mechanic can be found guilty of manslaughter (it has happened). Why should not the Board members be thus charged? Would you say that the family of the man killed as a result of that mechanics negligence had no right to be angry at him?

[riffer]

Manifestly, the Parole Board were collectively incompetant. So do you consider that the family of the dead man (who suffer for the Board's dereliction) , and society (who also suffer) should simply say "Oh dear , what a pity, never mind , let's just carry on" ?

Why should the Board not be held accountable for its actions? If a mechanic is incompetant and assembles your car wrongly, so that you crash and kill someone, the mechanic can be found guilty of manslaughter (it has happened). Why should not the Board members be thus charged? Would you say that the family of the man killed as a result of that mechanics negligence had no right to be angry at him?

Completely missing the point here.

You see, there's a set formula. If you say all the right things, you get through. Pure and simple.

It's not the Parole Board's fault. They simply follow the law as written.

A better example would be if a mechanic followed Toyota's guidelines for rebuilding of brakes, and the brakes failed. Then Toyota would be at fault.

[GSX-RJIM]

That arse hole is so lucky the cop was an armed defender who could shoot really well, a General Duty Cop would have more than likey killed him as it is easyer to shoot to kill than aim for a leg.

[Maha]

the cop was an armed defender

Armed Offender i think you will find..... :ar15:

[James Deuce]

Manifestly, the Parole Board were collectively incompetant. So do you consider that the family of the dead man (who suffer for the Board's dereliction) , and society (who also suffer) should simply say "Oh dear , what a pity, never mind , let's just carry on" ?

Why should the Board not be held accountable for its actions? If a mechanic is incompetant and assembles your car wrongly, so that you crash and kill someone, the mechanic can be found guilty of manslaughter (it has happened). Why should not the Board members be thus charged? Would you say that the family of the man killed as a result of that mechanics negligence had no right to be angry at him?

As I've said before the Parole board are as hamstrung by the sentence as the Judge is by the law in regard to dishing out the sentence. The parole board has to go by the original sentence which at the time did not include minimum non-parole periods.

Burton's lifestyle, attitude, and drug habit are not the parole board's fault. This is just moving the responsibility for the crime along the tree and away from the person who has committed them. Even that Sensible Sentencing, McVicar loony has tried to direct blame away from the parole board. If Burton's sentence has run, the parole board have no rights in law to keep him in. They can only release early.

Everyone has the right to be angry. No one has the right to demand the death of another human being as retribution for another death. We give that away in return for the mutual benefits of society and rule of law. If you want the law changed you have the right to petition a political party to make that policy party policy and implement it as law via the means available to any society governed by a rule of law and an election process.

[Steam]

a General Duty Cop would have more than likey killed him as it is easyer to shoot to kill than aim for a leg.

I think the bobbies on here have confirmed they would have been aiming at the COM, the Centre of Mass, and just hit him in the leg by mistake. They took multiple shots before hitting him, so it doesn't sound like it was intended to be a fancy wounding shot.
Maybe it's good they didn't kill him, because now he has to be in prison the rest of his life with only one leg, and the others will more likely mock him forever.

[James Deuce]

That arse hole is so lucky the cop was an armed defender who could shoot really well, a General Duty Cop would have more than likey killed him as it is easyer to shoot to kill than aim for a leg.

He was shot by a General Duties cop, with a Glock, at a range of 20-25m. Bloody good shooting. Contrary to popular opinion, no organisation trains its armed officers to shoot at limbs. It is impossible to do so reliably. The part of the body that moves least when in motion is the torso. That is what they will have been aiming for.

Steam - only 3 rounds were fired, shared between two officers. One of those officers is a stellar shot.

[Maha]

Contrary to popular opinion, no organisation trains its armed officers to shoot at limbs. It is impossible to do so reliably. The part of the body that moves least when in motion is the torso. That is what they will have been aiming for.


So it was piss poor shooting really wasn't it?....if they would have been aiming for the Torso and got the leg, dang even i could have done that....:dodge:

[Scouse]

That arse hole is so lucky the cop was an armed defender who could shoot really well, a General Duty Cop would have more than likey killed him as it is easyer to shoot to kill than aim for a leg.Do you live on a farm..?

[Ixion]

As I've said before the Parole board are as hamstrung by the sentence as the Judge is by the law in regard to dishing out the sentence. The parole board has to go by the original sentence which at the time did not include minimum non-parole periods.

Burton's lifestyle, attitude, and drug habit are not the parole board's fault. This is just moving the responsibility for the crime along the tree and away from the person who has committed them. Even that Sensible Sentencing, McVicar loony has tried to direct blame away from the parole board. If Burton's sentence has run, the parole board have no rights in law to keep him in. They can only release early.

Everyone has the right to be angry. No one has the right to demand the death of another human being as retribution for another death. We give that away in return for the mutual benefits of society and rule of law. If you want the law changed you have the right to petition a political party to make that policy party policy and implement it as law via the means available to any society governed by a rule of law and an election process.

Entirely incorrect.

From the website of the parole Board (http://www.paroleboard.govt.nz/nzpb/aboutus/paroleeligibility.html) (http://www.paroleboard.govt.nz/nzpb/aboutus/paroleeligibility.html)



Eligibility for parole is determined under the Parole Act 2002. Eligibility for parole is no guarantee of release – it simply means an offender is entitled to a hearing in front of the Board.

..

Under the Criminal Justice Act 1985:

Offenders serving short-term sentences (one year or less) had to be released after serving half of their sentence.
Offenders serving long-term sentences (more than one year) but not classified as Serious Violent Offenders become eligible for parole after serving one-third of their sentence.
Offenders classified as Serious Violent Offenders do not become eligible for parole, but must be released after serving two-thirds of their sentence (this is known as an offender’s Final Release Date), unless they are the subject of an order under Section 107 of the Parole Act to keep them in prison. ...
Offenders serving sentences of life or preventive detention become eligible for parole after serving 10 years, unless they have been given minimum a non-parole period by the Judge sentencing them. If they have been given a minimum non-parole period, they become eligible for parole once they have reached that point.

As a life prisioner Burton's release on parole was discretionary to the board. They were not "hamstrung" in any way. They could have said "No way , you are a menace". Instead they said (quote from the Parole Board's decison)


...
As will be seen the Board has come to the view over the past nine months that Mr Burton’s potential risk to the safety of the community is not considered to be undue taking into account the efforts made to address his offending and his proposed release plan.
..


Obviously, Mr Burton's risk to the community was very undue indeed. The absence of a non-parole period is completely irrelevant.

The Board cocked up. Badly

Members of the board are required (Under the Parole Act 2002) to have


...
the ability to make a balanced and reasonable assessment of the risk an offender may present to the community when released from detention; and
..


Manifestly, the Board failed that requirement. They should be held accountable for their negligence , or incompetance.

And I consider that I do indeed have the right to demand that a worthless parasite be removed from my community. I don't care what happens to him, if he can find somewhere else to go to , good for him. But I see no reason why I should work to support him, or accept his presence in our society. Whether Burton qualifies as a human being is debateable. I do not consider him worthy of treatment as human.

[jimbo600]

So it was piss poor shooting really wasn't it?....if they would have been aiming for the Torso and got the leg, dang even i could have done that....:dodge:

I doubt it mate. G17s are not particularly accurate over 25m. Quite hard to get a good shot over that distance, even in a nice controlled range environment. Add to that the stress of confronting a rampaging twat with a shotty, and possibly two bushmasters, plus the stress of having to actually shoot a person. Jeez I'm surprised there wasn't more rounds discharged. Personally I thought the guys did pretty bloody good.

[James Deuce]

So it was piss poor shooting really wasn't it?....if they would have been aiming for the Torso and got the leg, dang even i could have done that....:dodge:

A handgun is not an accurate weapon. If you aren't familiar with a handgun you'd be lucky to hit atmosphere let alone the target.

There are a variety of grades for accuracy and competency is gained at metre ranges in single figures. 20-25m is a dream shot for a practiced pistol shooter with a Glock.

[James Deuce]

Entirely incorrect.



Only if you consider that you have made a decision without knowing the original sentence, the terms of the sentence, the caveats applied to the sentence, and changes made to the terms of Burton's sentence over the course of his incarceration.

[Scouse]

And I consider that I do indeed have the right to demand that a worthless parasite be removed from my community.Ah but it's not in your's and my community, it's in Jim's community so all good keep the scum away from Auckland but unfortunatly we will prolly have to be host to it in Parimurimu.

[Ixion]

Only if you consider that you have made a decision without knowing the original sentence, the terms of the sentence, the caveats applied to the sentence, and changes made to the terms of Burton's sentence over the course of his incarceration.

I have made no descision , except the obvious one that his release was disastrous.

You stated that the Parole Board were "hamstrung" because his original sentence had no minimum non parole period.

I have shown that to be entirely incorrect. The board were not "hamstrung" in any way, and the absence of a non parole period was completley irrelevant.

[imdying]

So it was piss poor shooting really wasn't it?....if they would have been aiming for the Torso and got the leg, dang even i could have done that....:dodge:

Bahahhaha, you could hit a man, in the torso, who is waving a shotgun at you, from 25 metres with a Glock 17? Pass us a Tui mate...

[98tls]

Seems weird that this guy got parole........its my understanding many people get turned down at there first board hearing.......for far lesser crimes than he comitted.Not sure if he was released at his first hearing or not but if he was it just makes this whole business worse...........what the hell were they thinking......

[spudchucka]

That arse hole is so lucky the cop was an armed defender who could shoot really well, a General Duty Cop would have more than likey killed him as it is easyer to shoot to kill than aim for a leg.

Get your facts right.

It was two general duties cops involved.

The reason he was shot in the leg is because at 20 - 25 metres its hard to hit anything with a glock, let alone an armed offender who is very unlikely to be standing still waiting to be shot.

It had nothing to do with the armed offenders squad having superior marksmanship skills.

[spudchucka]

Manifestly, the Parole Board were collectively incompetant.

Most probably are but in their defence they have to work within the current act.

In reality it is central govt that is to blame for arseholes like Burton being out in society.

[spudchucka]

The mythbusters said that research gathered from scene of crime officers shows that being "blown backwards" just does not happen.

I had a chat with a former south african cop recently who has considerable experience in which way a person falls when shot. Seems that almost always they will fall forward if shot in their front side. The blown backwards thing is just for hollywood.

[spudchucka]

Team Defence force, Tri-Service, we aint that far separated no longer



Maybe we discuss this somewhere else over a nice laphroaig.....



There where other options like AOS and STG that could of been utilised, people more trained to deal with the situation rather than beat cops.

It takes time to assemble and deploy those squads.

The beat cops would try and contain the subject until the specialist squad can get there.

However, if the offender forces the issue the beat cops have to deal with it. They can't just pull the STG or AOS out of a pouch on their duty belt and hide in the nearest bush while others take over.

[NighthawkNZ]

Seems weird that this guy got parole........its my understanding many people get turned down at there first board hearing.......for far lesser crimes than he comitted.Not sure if he was released at his first hearing or not but if he was it just makes this whole business worse...........what the hell were they thinking......

now those with less petty crimes probably won't get parole because of this...

[Swoop]

He can't. He's dead. I can't speak for his family, but I think that their anger directed at the Parole Board is misguided and will not give them their son back. There is only one person to blame here, and he will soon have his day in Court.
Gaaaah!

He was shot by a General Duties cop, with a Glock, at a range of 20-25m. Bloody good shooting. Contrary to popular opinion, no organisation trains its armed officers to shoot at limbs. It is impossible to do so reliably. The part of the body that moves least when in motion is the torso. That is what they will have been aiming for.
Steam - only 3 rounds were fired, shared between two officers. One of those officers is a stellar shot.
Too bloody right!

I doubt it mate. G17s are not particularly accurate over 25m.Tui moment here.

Personally I thought the guys did pretty bloody good.
Damn right, there!
I forsee medals being bestowed...

A handgun is not an accurate weapon.
Absolute fucking bullshit.

If you aren't familiar with a handgun you'd be lucky to hit atmosphere let alone the target.
There are a variety of grades for accuracy and competency is gained at metre ranges in single figures. 20-25m is a dream shot for a practiced pistol shooter with a Glock.
Gaaaaahh!

we will prolly have to be host to it in Parimurimu.
Where?

Bahahhaha, you could hit a man, in the torso, who is waving a shotgun at you, from 25 metres with a Glock 17? Pass us a Tui mate...
Gaaaaaahh! Who has come up with this un-obtainable 25 metre rule??? 25 metres is the COMMON distance that pistol shooters use! Some go out to 200 metres FFS.

In reality it is central govt that is to blame for arseholes like Burton being out in society.
:niceone: :niceone: :niceone:

The beat cops would try and contain the subject until the specialist squad can get there.
Using the skills and equipment they have available at the time.

[spudchucka]

Gaaaaaahh! Who has come up with this un-obtainable 25 metre rule??? 25 metres is the COMMON distance that pistol shooters use! Some go out to 200 metres FFS.

The majority of police shootings occur within 3 metres distance, thats the norm worldwide.

200 metres is a ridiculas scenario when discussing law enforcement.

[Swoop]

The majority of police shootings occur within 3 metres distance, thats the norm worldwide. 200 metres is a ridiculas scenario when discussing law enforcement.

We realise this, that is why you train at 3-5 metres. This example shows the inherrent accuracy of the tools that you use and the "innaccurate" area is the operator.
Luckily the officers concerned didn't listen to your comments that "anything over 3-5 metres = crap accuracy" when they used their handguns and fired at 25 metres... accurately.

[RT527]

So it was piss poor shooting really wasn't it?....if they would have been aiming for the Torso and got the leg, dang even i could have done that....:dodge:

Bs it was....I said before and Ill say it again, when he fired if it was . 01 mm`s off flight path..ie crooked coming out of the barrel then it could be 1 to 2 feet off target at the other end...he was shooting at coa which is why he hit low and to either side of where he was shooting origanally.

then add in windage , terrain, obstacles, other targets...then you get some one who has been extremely efficient and extremely accurate to get a shot on a moving target, shit i`ve seen guys with rifles and scopes miss a deer at 80-90 metres.

[RT527]

As I said they shot it with everything from hand guns to sniper weapons. The Barrett caused the biggest movement.

At .223 round from a generic small bore hunting rifle barely marked the dummy's clothing.

Cant remember if they Tried it with a crossbow, but if you shot a target dummy with a crossbow bolt then there would be a better chance for the target to get flung back!....more energy in something thats long.

[Maha]

I doubt it mate. G17s are not particularly accurate over 25m. Quite hard to get a good shot over that distance, even in a nice controlled range environment. Add to that the stress of confronting a rampaging twat with a shotty, and possibly two bushmasters, plus the stress of having to actually shoot a person. Jeez I'm surprised there wasn't more rounds discharged. Personally I thought the guys did pretty bloody good.


A handgun is not an accurate weapon. If you aren't familiar with a handgun you'd be lucky to hit atmosphere let alone the target.

There are a variety of grades for accuracy and competency is gained at metre ranges in single figures. 20-25m is a dream shot for a practiced pistol shooter with a Glock.


Bahahhaha, you could hit a man, in the torso, who is waving a shotgun at you, from 25 metres with a Glock 17? Pass us a Tui mate...


Bs it was....I said before and Ill say it again, when he fired if it was . 01 mm`s off flight path..ie crooked coming out of the barrel then it could be 1 to 2 feet off target at the other end...he was shooting at coa which is why he hit low and to either side of where he was shooting origanally.

then add in windage , terrain, obstacles, other targets...then you get some one who has been extremely efficient and extremely accurate to get a shot on a moving target, shit i`ve seen guys with rifles and scopes miss a deer at 80-90 metres.


You gun/shootie type people are real easy targets. And so serious. But i guess you have to be serious. Cant have a non-serious person with a gun thats just rediculous. Lighten up chaps im unarmed.....:shutup:

Ps: im done playing in the sandpit.....you guys are bully's....:killingme

[James Deuce]

We realise this, that is why you train at 3-5 metres. This example shows the inherrent accuracy of the tools that you use and the "innaccurate" area is the operator.
Luckily the officers concerned didn't listen to your comments that "anything over 3-5 metres = crap accuracy" when they used their handguns and fired at 25 metres... accurately.

Mate I want some of what your smoking. The guys at the pistol club get about 400 times the practice of a general duties cop. I work with a "collector" and he can do the 100m thing too, on a range without someone armed charging him down. A standard issue Glock is not a target shooter's cherished personal weapon.

We were discussing this today and he was praising the restraint of the GD folks today. I probably would have loosed off a mag and missed with every shot. I'm way more accurate with a bow. Ask RT527 about the seagull sometime. (I still feel bad about losing that aluminium shaft arrow with the nice target pile and nylon fletching that belonged to RT).

[imdying]

Gaaaaaahh! Who has come up with this un-obtainable 25 metre rule??? 25 metres is the COMMON distance that pistol shooters use! Some go out to 200 metres FFS.I really do wonder what you've been smoking? You think the police train with pistols to shoot for limbs (or even at all) at 200 metres? You think that pistol shooters would bother using a Glock 17 for target shooting at 200 metres? Are you even aware that you're a total fucking retard with seemingly no ability to follow the thread, much less comment on the things that are relevant to it? They were shooting from 25 metres away, with weapons they (apparently according to info in this thread) train with once a year, in a high stress situation, while a man with a shotgun, was stealing an assault rifle (allegedly). Do you not think that under those conditions, with that equipment, and with that training, that 25 metres would be a reasonably difficult shot? They weren't on a range, most likely had their hearts racing, and therefore weren't in anything like conditions suitable for pulling off 200 metres shots.

ahem.

[Swoop]

The guys at the pistol club get about 400 times the practice of a general duties cop. I work with a "collector" and he can do the 100m thing too, on a range without someone armed charging him down. A standard issue Glock is not a target shooter's cherished personal weapon.
Nothing is being smoked here.
The glock is sufficient for the task. The trigger pull is rather on the robust side since it is a tupperware gun and requires the US "liability" strength trigger pull. However, it is the "nut behind the trigger" that needs to realise its capabilities. When the officer realises it is the only firearms option he/she is left with in an emergency situation, they had better be prepared for that day. Shooting at 25 metres is the norm. Shooting at 2-5 metres is rather close range and can be done unaimed if necessary.
The 200 metre comment is used to illustrate what a short barrelled firearm is actually capable of (NOT the glock, mind you...).

[Swoop]

Here we go again...

I really do wonder what you've been smoking?
You really need to be a bit more imaginitive in your opening remarks. Jim2 has preceeded you, or are you one-in-the-same?

You think the police train with pistols to shoot for limbs (or even at all) at 200 metres?
Please point out where I stated this. My comment refers to 25metres being the internationally recognised distance for competitive events and that SOME disciplines can shoot hanguns accurately at that distance. The distance that police officers train at are considerably shorter than this, so they get the mindset that this is the only distance that can be used.
Any officer attempting to shoot at "200m" would be "silly", but an officer that realises what the capabilities of a firearm are at ANY distance is better empowered, ESPECIALLY one who only has his/her glock with them at the time - which is more than likely the case in any normal day-to-day situation.

You think that pistol shooters would bother using a Glock 17 for target shooting at 200 metres?
No.
Personally I wouldn't bother with a glock at anything over 50 metres, but that's just me.
Once again, please point out where I suggested using a glock for that distance.

Are you even aware that you're a total fucking retard with seemingly no ability to follow the thread, much less comment on the things that are relevant to it?
Apparently the same amount of retardation that you have used in your post.
Are you aware that the thread has picked up recently and that as I read through it, there was the opportunity to press the "multi-quote" button and respond? Probably not.

They were shooting from 25 metres away, with weapons they (apparently according to info in this thread) train with once a year, in a high stress situation, while a man with a shotgun, was stealing an assault rifle (allegedly)
Your knowledge or re-training qualification requirements is astounding... How many officers do you talk to about their firearms capabilities?

Do you not think that under those conditions, with that equipment, and with that training, that 25 metres would be a reasonably difficult shot? They weren't on a range, most likely had their hearts racing, and therefore weren't in anything like conditions suitable for pulling off 200 metres shots.
25 metre shot? No, completely reasonable with 3 officers and the result was that a leg shot was achieved whilst probably aiming at CoM. Bloody good on them for achieving the desired result of bringing the offender to heel before he got to their own firearms.

[sAsLEX]

However, if the offender forces the issue the beat cops have to deal with it. They can't just pull the STG or AOS out of a pouch on their duty belt and hide in the nearest bush while others take over.
Understood.

How long had they been actively hunting him and when where the last reports of him in the vicinity?

They had time, and in fact AOS was in the vicinity , just bad luck these two GD guys got involved in the way they did but they got the job done, no harm no foul.

[doc]

Understood.

How long had they been actively hunting him and when where the last reports of him in the vicinity?

They had time, and in fact AOS was in the vicinity , just bad luck these two GD guys got involved in the way they did but they got the job done, no harm no foul.

Hey you should join the police and show them how. They want new cops

[sAsLEX]

Hey you should join the police and show them how. They want new cops

What and go through a basic training again?

9 months of that is enough, and into my 6th straight year of training I dont really want to take up a new profession.

I am serving my country. Are you?

[Paul in NZ]

Wadda you guys think?

Close this off?

I mean to say a mad man obsessed with guns and violence kills a bloke and shoots a couple of others less effectively and the best we can do is discuss the technical aspects of blowing bigger holes in people more efficiently. I think there are a few scary parallels here.

[The_Dover]

I am serving my country. Are you?

yes, I was sent by her vagesty the queen to keep an eye on the colonies.

[doc]

What and go through a basic training again?

9 months of that is enough, and into my 6th straight year of training I dont really want to take up a new profession.

I am serving my country. Are you?

Your just on the payrol if your still training when are you going to take some risks.

Y

[SixPackBack]

yes, I was sent by her vagesty the queen to keep an eye on the colonies.

Your from Scotland?......lucky if she talks to you norfen rabble!!....hell man thats nearly as bad as being, well um Welsh or summat

[Lou Girardin]

It's not the Parole Board's fault. They simply follow the law as written.



The trouble is that they didn't. They seemed to have tried to find reasons to release him rather than reasons to keep him inside.

[Lou Girardin]

I think Mr Swoop has no idea of the reality of law enforcement scenario shootings. As Spudly said, they are nearly all impulsive and at extremely close range. And I don't think any Police force is going to issue their cops with accurized, scope equipped handguns to shoot at 200 metres. They have rifles for that job.

[jrandom]

Here we go again...

Just out of curiosity, when was the last time you shot any flavour of Glock?

I was next to a cop who had brought his service G17 to the range last month, and he kindly let me put a couple of magazines worth through it.

AFAIK, there are actually three different trigger pull weights available from Glock - the 'target', the 'standard', and the 'three million kilo NYPD liability lawsuit avoidance' settings. I expect that all NZ Police pistols have the standard trigger.

I didn't particularly like the G17's trigger or, in fact, the angle of its grip. The trigger pull weight was fine, but the three-stage safety mechanism that releases at various points throughout the pull means that it's impossible to get the same crisp letoff that a single-action pistol affords. And if you can't get a crisp, light trigger break, it's hard to set off the gun at precisely the right moment for an accurate shot.

Shooting slowly, I kept most of my rounds within the 6-ring at 25 meters.

As stated before, I have nothing but admiration for the cops who used their pistols with restraint and skill to stop Burton, as I'm sure does everyone else in this discussion.

[spudchucka]

We realise this, that is why you train at 3-5 metres. This example shows the inherrent accuracy of the tools that you use and the "innaccurate" area is the operator.
Luckily the officers concerned didn't listen to your comments that "anything over 3-5 metres = crap accuracy" when they used their handguns and fired at 25 metres... accurately.

Target shooting from your preferred comfortable stanch as vastly diffent than being suddenly placed in a position full of variables that you have no control over and where there is an offender wanting to shoot back at you.

I've seen a few olympic pistol shooting competions from time to time and I'm pretty damn sure there has never been one held over a distance of 200 metres.

At 25 metres its almost a "fill the air with lead and let god sort it out" situation.

[Squeak the Rat]

At 25 metres its almost a "fill the air with lead and let god sort it out" situation.

Which makes 3 shots, one hit a very admirable piece of work.

[spudchucka]

Understood.

How long had they been actively hunting him and when where the last reports of him in the vicinity?

They had time, and in fact AOS was in the vicinity , just bad luck these two GD guys got involved in the way they did but they got the job done, no harm no foul.

I don't know where the AOS was, obviously not where Burton was at the time.

The problem with armed incidents in large public spaces is that the offender can pop up anywhere. In this case he popped up in front of the two generalist cops. They didn't really have a choice in what their actions would be and time certainly wasn't on their side.

They did however, according to reports, initially back off and then considering the high risk to the public that Burton posed they approached him, called on him to surrender, (not sure how they would be expected to do that from 200 metres) and the rest is known.

I have no doubt that these cops will receive bravery awards for their actions that day.

[terbang]

Why should the Board not be held accountable for its actions? If a mechanic is incompetant and assembles your car wrongly, so that you crash and kill someone, the mechanic can be found guilty of manslaughter (it has happened). Why should not the Board members be thus charged? Would you say that the family of the man killed as a result of that mechanics negligence had no right to be angry at him?

I agree but unfortunatly the difference is the mechanic doesn't work for the state. Therefore he is accountable for his actions. The parole board works for the state.

"Oh the working class can kiss my arse, Ive got a job with the government at last" (and I'm not accountable for my actions).

[jrandom]

I've seen a few olympic pistol shooting competions from time to time and I'm pretty damn sure there has ever been one held over a distance of 200 metres.

50 meters is the longest distance (http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/disciplines_uk.asp?DiscCode=SH) for Olympic target pistol competition.

[Swoop]

I think Mr Swoop has no idea of the reality of law enforcement scenario shootings.
Unfortunately The Swoop has a reasonable concept of the goings on...

As Spudly said, they are nearly all impulsive and at extremely close range. And I don't think any Police force is going to issue their cops with accurized, scope equipped handguns to shoot at 200 metres.
Correct on these 3 points. The training distance and the common incident distance is very close range, as you have stated; however the capability of a standard issue handgun is very decent out to 25m and can be pushed by good folks out to 50m (not that anyone would WANT to do this, BUT if it is the only option...). Preferably the Bushmaster would have been readily available for anything greater than "close".
Our sages have suggested the shotgun for those "intermediate ranges", but these have their limitations if there is more than just the target in their line of fire and shot pattern area.

Now, the 200m issue. SOME handguns are capable of great range. I state this to emphasise that the handgun is not limited to just a short-range. I do not endorse people trying to do this, especially police officers. However there still is the ingrained, institutionalised belief that something is only good for one thing, and this is what I am trying to convey here, that people need to think outside of the square and learn more about their "tools".
It's a bit like bikers who ride differing types of bike and slag other types off even though they do not appreciate the others capabilities.

Just out of curiosity, when was the last time you shot any flavour of Glock?
At least a couple of months back now.
We did have one blow up some time back. That was the good thing with the polymer frame, it protected the shooters hand from the blast. Wooden grips wouldn't have fared as well.

Target shooting from your preferred comfortable stanch as vastly diffent than being suddenly placed in a position full of variables that you have no control over and where there is an offender wanting to shoot back at you.
Go and do some IPSC shooting then. Good practice. Have you heard of the "Service match"? It is an official NRA match competition based on police distances and stances. You start on the 25 yard line and move closer through different courses of fire. Find out about it, you will learn quite a lot.

At 25 metres its almost a "fill the air with lead and let god sort it out" situation.
A good reason for you to stay with your mindset that you can only shoot from 3-5metres then... Go and practice and stay away from the general public please! Ask your supervisor for more training time or join a pistol club and train more.

[spudchucka]

A good reason for you to stay with your mindset that you can only shoot from 3-5metres then... Go and practice and stay away from the general public please! Ask your supervisor for more training time or join a pistol club and train more.

I can shoot fine from many distances, not juust 3 - 5. You sound like such a blow hard that this really isn't worth pusuing.

However, please explain to me how at 200 metres or even at 50 metres a police officer in a hostile situation can effectively use his or her most effective tool, their ability to speak and reason with an offender.

If it was just about turning up to jobs and popping people off we'd be armed with very differen't weapons.

We are still required to attempt to resolve incidents before we just start shooting, you seem to be completely overlooking all practical everyday factors involved in policing. None of the shit you have spouted has any relevance to policing. I'm sure it has relevance to something but I tend to believe that it is just you own ego.

Bait away Mr Trolly but I've finished with you I'm afraid.

[jrandom]

We did have one blow up some time back.

Any idea how old it was, in terms of rounds fired?


IPSC shooting then. Good practice.

Groovy. You shoot IPSC? What division(s) do you shoot in, with what weapon(s) of choice?

[Swoop]

I can shoot fine from many distances.
Bait away Mr Trolly but I've finished with you I'm afraid.
Whatever. [/education]

Any idea how old it was, in terms of rounds fired?
I will ask the owner next time I see him. I am led to believe there were several, very similar, occurrences around the country. Same vintage glocks.

[scumdog]

Well, if your pocket is deep enough , you can avoid the demerits by regoing the vehicle to a company and claiming that you cannot determine who was driving. (assumes of course that you didn't get stopped at the time) .

They have that situation in Aussie - and if the 'company' can't (read won't?) identify who is driving then they pay the double the amount of the fine.

[scumdog]

That arse hole is so lucky the cop was an armed defender who could shoot really well, a General Duty Cop would have more than likey killed him as it is easyer to shoot to kill than aim for a leg.

CRAP!
The shot would have been more luck than planned!!

[Ixion]

They have that situation in Aussie - and if the 'company' can't (read won't?) identify who is driving then they pay the double the amount of the fine.

Yes. Prolly not worth the bother here, cos "non - stopped" tickets are rareish. But if they ever introduce demerits with speed cameras here, then everyone will do it (thaz why is more common in Oz) . Lot of folk would be happy to trade of no demerits for a double fine (or even more)

[spudchucka]

Whatever. [/education]

Last comment in this thread:

At 50 metres the sight picture is virtually non-existant with a glock, (the sights cover the entire target), which makes it just slightly more difficult to aim for centre of mass.

At 200 metres you would have no sight picture at all, you would just be shooting in the general direction.

Your arguement is pointless.

[scumdog]

Go and do some IPSC shooting then. Good practice. Have you heard of the "Service match"? It is an official NRA match competition based on police distances and stances. You start on the 25 yard line and move closer through different courses of fire. Find out about it, you will learn quite a lot.

A good reason for you to stay with your mindset that you can only shoot from 3-5metres then... Go and practice and stay away from the general public please! Ask your supervisor for more training time or join a pistol club and train more.

IPSC?
"Tell 'im 'es dreamin'" (form The Castle)

In IPSC you are going against yourself (ok and those more accurate and faster) but NOBODY is a threat, you don't have to wear body-armour, you have better sights than the 'issue' Glock AND you very likely won't be cranking on the "New York" trigger.

A dropped mag , jam or empty pistol won't get you killed, niether will not clearing the holster cleanly, your mates laughter will make you feel like you wish you were dead though.

And it's not ONLY 3-5metres but some of the training is for that distance.

See Spudchuckas comments on what view of the target you have at 50 metres, at 200 you would have to hold the Glock at howitzer anges to get the bullets on target, with the factory sight the target would be below the sights completely.

But keep the comments coming - others might learn from them:yes:

[jrandom]

In IPSC you are going against yourself (ok and those more accurate and faster) but NOBODY is a threat...

Yeah.

I reckon IPSC should be more like 'The Running Man'.

I'd quite like to see Eric Grauffel having to headshot his way through the ROs to finish a stage, while they return fire.

[sAsLEX]

See Spudchuckas comments on what view of the target you have at 50 metres, at 200 you would have to hold the Glock at howitzer anges to get the bullets on target, with the factory sight the target would be below the sights completely.

But keep the comments coming - others might learn from them:yes:

Simple every second round a tracer and walk the round on to target..........




pt

[Swoop]

IPSC?
Yes. Performance pressure. Time, distance, reloads, movement, stance, etc, etc. Go NRA if you like...:yes:
If you really want to, you can wear body armour, I doubt the RO will penalise you for it...

[scumdog]

Yes. Performance pressure. Time, distance, reloads, movement, stance, etc, etc. Go NRA if you like...:yes:
If you really want to, you can wear body armour, I doubt the RO will penalise you for it...

Yep, the thought that somebody might start shooting at you could be called 'performance pressure' I guess...

[jrandom]

If you really want to, you can wear body armour...

It would be funny, wouldn't it.

Turning up to an IPSC shoot in Level 5 modular body armour and a Fritz helmet.

I think the point our esteemed copper friends here are trying to make, though, is that virtually no general-duties police shooting situations have anything in common with such Rainbox Six antics. Neither do they have much in common with the timer-beeping and mandatory reloads of a Service Pistol match.

Whatever mandatory qualification was necessary for the chaps who took out Burton with three shots seems to have been quite sufficient when the chips were down...

[Patrick]

Interesting read, liked the comments about shooting at a range up to 200 metres... farken funny...

Targets dont shoot back, your breathing is calm and relaxed (and if it isn't, take more time), no worries about where your shots might go if you miss, patch out, all done... nice day out.

The reality is quite different... the pucker factor alone is something you can't train for, and believe me, someone wanting to take you out, even with or without any weapon, and with training, the pucker factor ticks in, big time.

Training is once every 6 months, that's all folks. But that is an improvement instead of the once yearly. We have asked the bosses for more time out at the range, but instead, we get less. In the two 6 monthly trainings, we get to shoot less bullets than before when it was once a year...

Kudos to the two fellas, gold merit awards should be arriving soon,

[Patrick]

Just so you guys know, this guy is the shit that burgled us twice in the early 90s and whom I had to defend myself from with a very hefty cymbal stand, and couldn't get the 5-0 to turn up at the house despite being cornered by someone twice my size. I'm fairly certain I broke his arm.

And there we were blaming the Parole Board... its your fault... you should have finished him off back then!!!

[avgas]

I have a lovely .222 with a 6 inch silencer on it.....chuck a subsonic round in it and GB wouldnt hear it comming....so please people the glock/police shooting thing to rest - cos whats done is done and the world isnt perfect.
The upside of the story was they atleast shot him in the leg.

[Patrick]

He also said he wanted to know what it felt like to shoot someone... guess he got to see what it is like from both sides...

Laughed my tits off when I heard he lost his leg... just a shame, as someone else pointed out, that they didn't throw out the useless part but kept the shot leg...

[jrandom]

... a shame, as someone else pointed out, that they didn't throw out the useless part but kept the shot leg.

"Fred, I think we've got an eater..."

[Patrick]

Not a bad shot from a glock at 40 metres..

Not a bad shot from 25 metres as he has a shotgun and was trying to get his hands on the Bushmaster in the patrol car...

[Skyryder]

Not a bad shot from 25 metres as he has a shotgun and was trying to get his hands on the Bushmaster in the patrol car...

What are the Police armed with?? Just curious etc.

http://www.bushmaster.com/

Skyryder

[scumdog]

What are the Police armed with?? Just curious etc.

http://www.bushmaster.com/

Skyryder

The M4 - no full-auto facility and Glock 17s.
AOS have their own assortment of more specialise weapons.

[Patrick]

What are the Police armed with?? Just curious etc.

http://www.bushmaster.com/

Skyryder

Pepper spray and baton... and a wet bus ticket... (dry ones cause paper cuts and we can't have that! Imagine the P.C.A.s...)