nyk4ever wrote:fishmike wrote:nixluva wrote:WaltLongmire wrote:BRIGGS wrote:LivingLegend wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:Nalod wrote:LInk to story? Looks interesting.
you didn't hear about this? it's a big story and cops are arguing it's because of the negative rhetoric surrounding police these days, a la de Blasio
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/09/02/manhunt-continues-in-northern-illinois-after-police-officer-shot-and-killed/
I guess I don't understand what is so strange about this situation.
Cop chases 3 guys into woods/lake area without any back-up --- somehow they kill him and flee.
What am I missing that makes this story very strange?
The story and the subsequent events dont add up kosher. How did they get away--3 guys in a matter of moments? They found the police officer in the swamp. That means wet feet and tracks to a car???? if there was one. Why would a 52 year old cop who was going to retire in one month after 30 years on the job NOT wait for back up against 3 guys? This guy was like a marine as well--he wouldnt draw his gun in a pursuit or fire and hit them if they came back at them? This wasnt a fat old man--this cop was in extraordinary condition. Something is foul here.
Give an example of what might be "foul." Not sure I understand what you are getting at. Are you saying that he was set up by the 3 guys?
Perhaps he just underestimated who he was going after?
I would not chase 3 guys into an area where I might be taken down, especially if I had no idea of what they might have in terms of weapons.
Just need more reasons to understand why it seems "foul" to you.
We don't know what happened but it does seem odd to chase after 3 men by yourself without being careful not to get so close that you put yourself in danger. That's not part of any training I can imagine. It's a real mystery at this point. Where these guys more savvy than your typical thugs might be? How'd they get the drop on him and why'd they take his stuff?
They sound like Movie bad guys more than your typical street guys.
no triangle diagrams?
lol, i swear to god i was thinking the same exact thing
Sadly enough, they might have spread out into a triangle shaped ambush.
They might have used the hammer and anvil method, which is actually shaped like a triangle.
HAMMER AND ANVIL METHOD
The hammer and anvil technique is employed after some degree of reduction. It involves employing a blocking force on one or more sides of the perimeter. This is performed while part of the encirclement forces the insurgents against the blocking force by offensive action. Either element can accomplish the actual destruction, but it is usually accomplished by the attacking element. This technique is most effective when the blocking force is located on, or to the rear of, a natural terrain obstacle. In this method, one or more units in the encirclement remain stationary while the others drive the insurgent unit against it (Figure C-2. ). This technique can be employed during the reduction of an encirclement or whenever the tactical situation permits. Airborne or air assault forces can be employed on favorable terrain deep in the enemy rear. This technique is useful in destroying insurgents, because they prefer to fight only when conditions are favorable to them.
EnySpree: Can we agree to agree not to mention Phil Jackson and triangle for the rest of our lives?
9/2/2015 9:54 AM