The one thing a good guy has going for them in this situation is that the bad guy has tons of targets, where the good guys only have a couple.
So if the bad guy is shooting in another direction, this gives you a chance to sight and aim and get off a shot or two. If the bad guy is shooting on full auto rock and roll, he might not even hear your shot.
I do agree that hitting something much beyond 50 yards will be tough and when you add in nerves, it might be damn well impossible. However nerves will affect the bad guy also. Look at the North Hollywood bank robbers, they really had a very low hit rate for the amount of ammo they burned off. According to the Wiki article they fired off 1300 rounds and hit 17 people. They must have trained by watching the A-Team.
So would the fact that your targets are stationary.
Ok but the thing is it is these cops jobs to stop things like this. Even though they may not have the upper hand. Thats why they are armed. Sure they might die and there is a good chance they woudlnt win the fight but you might save a few lives by giving your own. These cops should be punished in some way. This is no different then a firefighter running away from a burning building or not helping because he/she was scared.
This is also true.
I think what he meant is that if you happen to hit a grenade on the terrorists body, you’re not going to explode it and kill yourself. I don’t think he meant you could pick them out of the air like you were playing Time Crisis.
Friend Tuckerfan,
I would think this to be quite a challenge. I have seen my wife hit a softball that I tossed for her, but it was a pretty gentle toss and wasn’t moving very fast. A terrorist throwing a grenade would probably put a little more effort in the throw. I don’t know many hand gunners that could hit a fast moving object like this.
My point in mentioning the grenades was to point out that the terrorists were lobbing them about, and as everyone knows, you don’t have to be all that accurate with them.
Say you found yourself a bit of concealment and were taking shots at the terrorists, I doubt they’d spend a lot of time trying to ferret you out, but would instead lob a grenade in your general direction.
Wait, are you being serious, or tongue-in-cheek? I’m confused (or supremely whooshed). 
Tripler
I was being serious.
The marksmanship requirement for getting a carry permit in my state of Minnesota is I believe typical: You have to get a certain numerical score on a standard target at distances of 10, 20 and 50 feet. At fifty feet you’re supposed to get most of your shots at least somewhere in the torso = ± 12 inches from dead center. So no one expects you to hit someone farther than fifty feet away.
Oh. I thought you meant launching grenades, as in those old-time rifle grenades that had a stick you put down your barrel and then fired with a blank cartridge. I was going to say “I never knew they made those for pistols”. :o
I wasn’t talking about a grenade getting shot, I was pointing that they were lobbing them about. All somebody has to do is chuck a live one in your direction, and your day gets a whole lot worse.
In such a terrorist attack, cover and concealment are one’s best friends. I’d still just as soon have the pistol, too. It may give me the opportunity to disuade an attacker, through fire, long enough to unass the area. There’s lots of ways to get killed in a firefight, I’d prefer it not be from lack of shooting back.
Nope, I meant “shooting to defuse or render them safe for handling,” not “shooting to launch.” There’s a handful of nations out there that still use rifle grenades, but apparently, not many. IIRC, the US got out of that business in the 70s or so. We then went to the 40mm grenades for either the M19 or M203.
Now it makes sense. I too was picturing a video game-like scenario where someone with a handgun ‘John Waynes’ it, and shoots an incoming grenade down. But I see you’re serious, and yes, a live grenade nearby is going to ruin your day.
Tripler
“. . . but Sir, don’t all sucking chest wounds, well. . . suck?!?”
A sucking chest wound is just nature’s way of telling you to slow down.
I’m not going to armchair quarterback the police/soldiers on the scene that day, but perhaps we need some context here.
When your have a bunch of guys with guns on your side here, and there’s a bunch of guys with guns over there, what you are trying to do is not sit where you are and fire fusillades at the other side until they are all dead, what you are trying to do is start advancing towards the other guys, This is done by coordinating amongst yourselves so that a bunch of you are shooting at the other guy, forcing the other guys to keep their heads down, while the remainder run forward to the next closest bit of cover , until you can get on top of them. Most of the shots fired are going to be for the “keep their heads down” part, so even if you’re not hitting them square in the forehead, it would still be effective.
Ideally, there are more of you than them, and you’re at least as equally well armed, and if there’s a tank in play the tank is on your side not theirs, but you can’t have everything I suppose. On the plus side, this is in an urban environment and not the Fulda Gap, where the distances are smaller and more cover is available, so the pistol’s lack of range and power would be less of a hinderance, and probably sufficient to keep the other guy’s heads down. The terrorists also don’t have a tank or (presumably) a heavy machine gun, so it’s not all doom and gloom. However, the major problem facing the policemen I think would be the ammunition situation. I don’t think most policemen on ordinary duty carry more than 3 or 4 pistol magazines. Assuming 15 round magazines, that’s really not enough to keep up the firefight for more than a few minutes, especially when the other side would have at a minimum 5-10 rifle magazines of 30 rounds each and probably more. So based on that, it probably would have been prudent to wait until a tank or at least more ammo comes down the line.
This was a failure of LAPS training, not handguns or police. the LAPD was extensive trained to empty their handguns at the center of mass of the target, so much so that few line police officers even thought of shooting at the perp’s legs, arms or faces.
carnivorousplant Unless you’re hopped up on something, even one .22 isenough to make you collapse in pain and shock.
And in this case in Mumbai the terrorists were numerous and well armed (Which is quite rare). If there were just two of them with pistols or machetes, then I’d love to have my .45.
My first thought was that my preferred target would be the duffel bag of grenades.
Which wouldn’t do anything but make the terrorist drop his duffel bag. Meanwhile, his buddy with the AK starts spraying bullets in your direction.
I will spare you a pit thread this once. Cops and firefighters are not superhuman and or immune from fear. Nor are they generally willing to trade their lives for someone else. They do have the training and equipment to shift the odds to where it is more likely that they can survive situations that would kill otherwise unprepared people. Rule #1 in any emergency service is go home alive to your family at the end of your shift.
I have seen an EMT freeze up in a critical situation, everyone has their limits and not every EMS/fire/police type is equally emotionally prepared for the challenges they face.
The one video I saw, there were just some guys in an SUV driving by and shooting. The vehicle was pretty far away and there were other people in the way, and it was moving, and it’s not like you have advance notice, so I think the chance of getting a shot off is pretty darn low.
Right! And if I’ve learned anything about the world, the chainsaw is there to fight your way to the pistol.
(And of course the longarm is mostly just to fight your way to the BFG).