No More Hesitation -> Non-traditional targets

Discussion in 'What's On Your Mind?' started by Elizabeth Conley, Feb 20, 2013.

  1. Elizabeth Conley

    Elizabeth Conley Original Member

    I don't like these reports, but I can't ignore them either. Does anyone know if the bold, underlined statement is true?

    Proof?

    http://www.themoralliberal.com/2013/02/20/standing-armies-and-targets-t-f-stern/

    These alternative news articles are the equivalent of shouting fire in a crowded theater with locked exit doors. This is the sort of accusation that demands investigation.

    Police already seem to be adequately desensitized to firing at citizens. We must note that police shot an elderly newspaper delivery lady in the back during the Dorner fiasco. It begs the question, did the officer "train" with these targets?

    What troubles me is that the elderly, women and children depicted are all carrying guns which are pointed at the target shooter. I think the psychological impact of this juxtaposition of citizens and guns is designed to alter the officers' view about women, pregnant mothers and the elderly. I think they're designed to condition the officer to see these populations as a threat, fire on them and receive an intangible but significant psychological reward for the act of firing on them.

    If they aren't deliberately so designed, I think they are poorly designed by someone ignorant of the potential for target shooters to become conditioned to fire on children, women, pregnant mothers and the elderly, regardless of whether the victims are holding a gun or not.
     
    phoebepontiac and KrazyKat like this.
  2. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    More likely they are used in shoot/no-shoot scenarious -- training the trainees to acquire the right target as quickly as possible. If you shoot the pregnant woman, you go to jail temporarily without passing GO. Fortunately for the trainees these pregnant woman are paper thin and never shoot back.
     
  3. What about "older man in home with shotgun" and "older man with gun"? Are these shoot or no shoot?
     
  4. Elizabeth Conley

    Elizabeth Conley Original Member

    These targets are really telling. Look at the backgrounds. If anyone is actually using these targets, then they are planning violent home invasions in middle America.
     
    phoebepontiac likes this.
  5. Caradoc

    Caradoc Original Member

    No, they're marketed very clearly as training materials to desensitize "officers" who find themselves on the wrong end of a child or pregnant woman pointing a gun at them.
     
    Elizabeth Conley likes this.
  6. Elizabeth Conley

    Elizabeth Conley Original Member

    I'd be really upset if it were proved that some law enforcement or DHS agency was actually buying and using these targets. That has been implied, but not proved. As it is I'm moderately concerned. Perhaps a congressional investigation is in order.
     
    phoebepontiac likes this.
  7. RB

    RB Founding Member

    Wonder if there would be any push back if we had cop images on targets?
     
    phoebepontiac likes this.
  8. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    exactly. or if gun ranges gave out pictures of Janet Napolitano to use as targets. would generate media interest, would it not?
     
  9. Caradoc

    Caradoc Original Member

    The primary range I frequent has a standing rule against "novelty" targets. NRA standard targets are pretty much all you see out there.

    And the classic "center of mass" humanoid silhouette is the closest I've seen to "realistic" on that range. The guy at the lane next to mine got the boot for taping up some "zombie" targets a few months ago - like these:

    [​IMG]
     
  10. TravelnMedic

    TravelnMedic Original Member

    Not suprising considering the volume of ammo they have purchased already and keep adding to it. I do find it a bit disconcerting as when you put 2 & 2 together it smacks of them preparing to take on the citizens of the US.

    Ranges I frequent have rules mandate silohette/B27 only and no human like targets, even the zombie ones were not allowed. The indoor ranges also have stopped letting police departments do there qualifying due to the damage to guide wires, lights, walls and backstops (using steelcore or bi metal), where they don't have those problems with the public/members. Its sad that the public shoots better then the police, but in the wake of the court decsion were on our own to defened yourself.
     
  11. I saw a zombie target at our shooting range last year. Just one, but it looked like you could bring whatever you wanted. Don't know if they would frown on cop or political targets though. On the other hand, most of my shooting range experiences have been at unattended backwoodsy ranges where there are all sorts of things lying around to shoot and nobody to tell you not to. They would be a good place to take renegade targets.
     
  12. RB

    RB Founding Member

    I meant push back from government.
     
  13. TravelnMedic

    TravelnMedic Original Member

    In the current climate anything is possible.
     
  14. Rugape

    Rugape Original Member

    Completely different scenario, but pregnant women have been used in shoot/no shoot scenario training at least all the way back to the late 80s when I was working a Nuke site in the Army. One of the questions on our bi-annual inspections was about a pregnant woman approaching a storage bunker, the correct textbook answer was warn verbally, fire a warning shot, warn verbally again, fire center mass to neutralize the possible threat. It was used to make the (at least the way it was explained to me by the shrinks we had to see every year) soldiers consider that not every threat is going to be a Spetsnaz uniform wearing Russian, and to make peace with yourself based on the SOP (not that it ever made the thought of possibly having to kill a pregnant woman any easier). We also had the same types of targets in CID for the shoot/no shoot scenarios where it had a kid with a toy gun, a woman with a bag of groceries and a set of keys in her hand that looked like the shape of a gun, and a whole series of images like that. The point of a lot of this training with "non-standard" targets is to force the person participating think about target aquisition and the actions that follow. Children have been the toughest targets to train for (traditionally) because Americans tend to view children as completely innocent almost as a rule, which makes addressing a scenario with a gun toting child extremely difficult to handle. The same with the elderly and pregnant women, they are viewed as less of a threat almost across the board, which makes dealing with one of them holding a gun more difficult at the root. I think that upping the training on how to deal with scenarios like this properly is actually a noble goal. This proper type of training can have the opposite effect than indicated here, fostering the ability to use critical thinking in a stressful situation. Although if they are using the training to desensitize, it should be fairly easy to ascertain, just examine the targets after the training scenarios to see how many times each of them is shot. An investigation would be welcome in my eyes as well, if only to make certain that we are training our LEOs on how to handle stressful situations that (statistically speaking) are less likely to occur.
     
  15. Caradoc

    Caradoc Original Member

    It has become fairly obvious in the wake of the TSA, DHS, LAPD, and other major issues that our governments, federal and local, no longer value critical thinkers when it comes to carrying out orders to violate their constituencies.
     
    Elizabeth Conley likes this.
  16. Rugape

    Rugape Original Member

    Which is why more of the proper types of training need to be conducted, to combat that type of degeneration, or in the absence of degeneration, the appearance or perception of it. Most folks that put on a badge/uniform are there to do the right things, every day with a regularity that is pretty telling. The culling of those that don't is the goal, and this type of training done right, can accelerate the removal of those that don't need to be there. As a nation, we do not do nearly enough training for our LEOs. Way too many departments are shorthanded to start with, and losing people left and right for the wrong reasons. Those that are still on the job are not getting the continual training necessary to foster a thinking core of people to protect and serve (which is the stated goal of almost every department I have ever heard of).

    The same is true across a broad spectrum of the different levels of governmental service (military, local governments, municipalities, etc) because of budget cuts, and the lack of awareness on the part of the governmental structures. Too many people that could make a meaningful difference in government, are leaving for the greener pastures of private industry, or are being furloughed or even simply fired. Instead of making smart moves to insure continuity in governance, we tend to let go the ones that make the most money go first - they are (in many cases) the ones we should make the most effort to keep because of their knowledge base and capabilities. I understand the realities of budgets and budget cuts, but it seems we are tending to throw the baby out with the bathwater, leaving us with no process to make certain that things run as they are supposed to - for the people of that governmental structure, not for the little fiefdoms that seem to be created by this type of thinking. I am a big fan of term limits for elected officials at all levels and balanced budgets, neither of which seem to be en vogue currently. I also believe that the political appointee system in place is detrimental to the country in many ways, it upsets the "do well at a job and advance" paradigm (that brought us much of the good in this country) in favor of a "what have you done for me lately" system that rewards the wrong people for the wrong reasons.
     
  17. RB

    RB Founding Member

    I haven't seen much budget cutting going on. I have seen budget monies spent on the wrong things though.
     
    Elizabeth Conley likes this.
  18. Caradoc

    Caradoc Original Member

    On this we can agree. The "right people" leave the departments (TSA, DHS, PD, etc) because they can't tolerate the crap going on.

    So we're left with a staff completely composed of people who either *enjoy* the work, or simply don't care, but will lie to us about how they're "working for change."
     
  19. nachtnebel

    nachtnebel Original Member

    If you are a soldier occupying a foreign land, there might be a rationale for those things. The question is, why does DHS need them? Why would they need them?

    It is interesting that the manufacturer of these took them off their public web site because of the PR hits they absorbed. Undoubtedly, they are still available on request...
     
    Elizabeth Conley likes this.
  20. KrazyKat

    KrazyKat Original Member

    Unfortunately, as Caradoc notes: "This product line was originally requested and designed by the law enforcement community to train police officers..."

    I didn't look at the site when these were up, but they seem like another subgroup of their Situational Targets, like their mass transit series, but for scenarios encountering a resident hostile after LE has entered a home or yard (which makes them definately not non-shoot):
    http://www.letargets.com/estylez_ps...gory&searchcatcontext=~010000~010100~010104.5
    Still, no targets of chained dogs.
     
    Elizabeth Conley likes this.

Share This Page