DHS supplier sells targets of american gun owners

[Red Haired Girl]

I know I'm late to this party and I couldn't get on the website to see if they have other nationalities depicted in this target series, if they do not, then this is seriously messed up. No Koreans, no Japanese, Chinese, Inuit, American Indians, only white men, women and children. WTH?

[DaveS]

Some would call it messed up, some would call it prudent.  The goal is to get the officers to the point that they no longer see children, women, elderly etc. just threat vs non threat.  Personally i don't have any problem with it. 

I don't have a problem with it either. Heck, I will let them put a picture of me up there with my evil 1911!!!

 

Dave S

[DaveS]

I know I'm late to this party and I couldn't get on the website to see if they have other nationalities depicted in this target series, if they do not, then this is seriously messed up. No Koreans, no Japanese, Chinese, Inuit, American Indians, only white men, women and children. WTH?

No black folks either (which would lead to lawsuits)...lol

[RichardR]

I know I'm late to this party and I couldn't get on the website to see if they have other nationalities depicted in this target series, if they do not, then this is seriously messed up. No Koreans, no Japanese, Chinese, Inuit, American Indians, only white men, women and children. WTH?

Yup, welcome to Amerika 2.0

[LowBb]

Identify the enemy. That's it. Anything else is over analysis.

[mikegideon]

Thank God there are only white people on those targets. Anything else would have been offensive and racist.

 

You're not racist until you mag dump the black guy holding a teddy bear. :)

[Raoul]

You're not racist until you mag dump the black guy holding a teddy bear. :)

Sick. but funny

[mikegideon]

Sick. but funny

 

Sorry. Been arguing with Guntards on facebook :)

[Guest 6.8 AR]

If it's just "identify a threat", why all of a sudden did this happen? Have they been using these kinds of targets for a long time?

Have the threats changed? Just curious. I wonder if I'm a threat? Anyone who threatens me becomes a threat.

[leroy]

I think the fact that otherwise reasonable people are stirred up about this is a great thing.  We have always needed to watch the gubmt whether they are doin anything nefarious or not.  They know we're watchin now.  That's a good thing.

 

leroy

[diablo982]

Once I saw the source of this information was Infowars, it lost my interest. I have yet to see anything from Alex Jones which has even a semblance of unbiased reporting.

[mikegideon]

Alex is nuttier than a squirrel turd. He gets a big audience.

[LowBb]

Remember that Dirty Harry movie where he was in a simulation with the motorcycle cop? At the end, when he was using the bad guy's gun to get his slug, Fatso said "he shot a friendly". Great movie.

[Blitzen]

I don't know if I could shoot the little boy with gun. Might just move off the "X". Now if it was Carl on "Walking Dead"... maybe...

[Guest ThePunisher]

Maybe, the civilian 2nd Amendment lovers need to get some targets of the current commie politicians, and jackboot thugs that will be coming to disarm us!

[c.a.willard]

LE agencies from across the country have been using these types of targets for a long time.  It's nothing new. 

 

"No More Hesitation Targets were designed to give officers the experience of dealing with deadly force shooting scenarios with subjects that are not the norm during training.No More Hesitation faded background enhances the isolation and is meant to help the transition for officers who are faced with these highly unusal targets for the first time." from letargets.com

 

I will agree that their targets are disproportionally caucasion males, followed by caucasion females, but they do have a variety of targets in both genders and multiple ethnicities.  and a variety of decals to alter the targets from threat to non threat. 

 

Its hard to get your body to react a certain way when your mind is not cooperating, the no more hesitation targets are designed to assist you in realizing that a threat can come from anyone and to make it psycologically easier to pull the trigger if you have to.    For any that havent read it Dave Grossmans novel on killing goes into depth about the psycological training involved in making it easier to shoot a person.  I think i've read all of his novels but that one is definately worth reading if you haven't.

[RichardR]

IMHO the whole "no-hesitation" training policy is an extremely flawed concept, not every civilian with a gun in their hand is a threat that needs to be "shot on sight, without hesitation".

George Washington & Thomas Jefferson would be appalled, as should every other free-thinking American, if a pregnant woman has a gun in her hand she probably has a damn good reason for it & she's probably scared out of her mind, how about identifying yourself as a police officer & simply asking her what's going on instead of gunning her down "without hesitation" as if she was some sort of Jihadi on a battlefield.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

If a cop is trained to "not hesitate", what is his target, in the first place? If he or she is being trained to target

a certain class, not necessarily criminals, I have a problem with it, but that's nothing new. Cops are supposed to

go after bad guys, aren't they? If, and it is just an if, they are being trained to go after anyone, their role has

changed. It makes me wonder about their new role, more and more.

[ttocswob]

Tam at View From The Porch has a post that about sums it up:

 

About those Armed Macaulay Culkin targets

 

This looks like the kind of thing that makes liability lawyers need to wash their sheets in the morning.

"Have you, or have you not, actually been conditioning, programming even, your officers to shoot small children?"

[Worriedman]

Tam at View From The Porch has a post that about sums it up:

 

About those Armed Macaulay Culkin targets

 

This looks like the kind of thing that makes liability lawyers need to wash their sheets in the morning.

"Have you, or have you not, actually been conditioning, programming even, your officers to shoot small children?"

Some of the comments are really interesting.

[TripleDigitRide]

Looks like they just took the targets down and issued a statement.

[Hozzie]

I don't personally have an issue with these.  I think many are drawing conclusions and correlations that aren't there.  This is not about "training" to shoot children, or pregnant women, or grandma.  This is about being able to train and better identify on "instinct" a possible threat.  Just because you identify a possible threat doesn't mean that you automatically shoot.  I think most well trained LEO's will attempt to determine if a threat is real or not before firing their weapon.  Not all, but most.  At the end of the day, it comes down to a Human making a decision.  Sometimes they will be right and sometimes they will be wrong.  Welcome to the real world.  If these types of targets help them identify threats better, so be it.  

 

I personally get a little tired of some in the gun crowd complaining when they think something is offensive and then complain when others complain something is offensive, but the gun owners don't think it is.  You can't have your cake and eat it too.  Yes, if they were pictures of black people, someone would complain, even though that wouldn't be right either.  Let's not stoop to their level, everything is not a conspiracy.

Edited February 21, 2013 by Hozzie

[Chucktshoes]

I'm a pretty tin foil-y, but in this case I see the value in those targets in training officers to notice what is in hands and not be lulled into a false sense of security by the person's initial appearance.

[strickj]

You're not racist until you mag dump the black guy holding a teddy bear. :)

 

That will make you a homophobe too.

[TrickyNicky]

That will make you a homophobe too.

No, you'd only be a racist homophobe if it was a black dude wearing a teddy, not holding one.

  

I don't personally have an issue with these.  I think many are drawing conclusions and correlations that aren't there.  This is not about "training" to shoot children, or pregnant women, or grandma.  This is about being able to train and better identify on "instinct" a possible threat.  Just because you identify a possible threat doesn't mean that you automatically shoot.  I think most well trained LEO's will attempt to determine if a threat is real or not before firing their weapon.  Not all, but most.  At the end of the day, it comes down to a Human making a decision.  Sometimes they will be right and sometimes they will be wrong.  Welcome to the real world.  If these types of targets help them identify threats better, so be it.  
 
I personally get a little tired of some in the gun crowd complaining when they think something is offensive and then complain when others complain something is offensive, but the gun owners don't think it is.  You can't have your cake and eat it too.  Yes, if they were pictures of black people, someone would complain, even though that wouldn't be right either.  Let's not stoop to their level, everything is not a conspiracy.

Very well said, couldn't agree more. You'd think with all the reall issues going on these days we could just focus on the stuff actually happening, guess that's just not dramatic enough for some people.