Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to join our community
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site, connect with other members through your own private inbox and will receive smaller adverts!

What is Leadership

You're comparing apples and oranges. The question was do you believe seniority entitles commanders to ignore the Standing Orders they themselves set?

Your answer to my second question is at least honest. But it's essentially the situation Mackey found himself in. By your own admission the ideal situation would have been for him to do something, anything. He did nothing. He failed.

Do generals have to do APWTs? Gen question btw.
 
Fair dos..point taken. Have you seen my earlier comment wrt a bright red permanent marker?
Theres also some study into an armed person v a knifeman and needing at least 20 feet to defend himself...cannot remember the details...someone (other than I) will have to google if they require clarification.

It is FBI research into how long an officer would take to draw a firearm and successfully shoot and stop a charging assailant with a knife*.

I have read interesting research that at close quarters US police are actually more vulnerable to edged weapon attack because the default is to attempt to draw a firearm.

This is why fighting systems working on a "flinch defence" are argued to be more effective, they built on the body's natural "Oh Shit" reaction. So when the conscious brain can actually kick in and build on the natural reflex, the immediate attack has been blocked and can then be built on.

Action will always beat reaction, and when you body's natural response is built upon you have some efficiency in upping your chance of survival.

When I first went through my Officer Safety Training, I was taught I was going to get cut. Just accept it. The trick is to make sure you survive the cut and shock and can survive the confrontation.

I'm certainly not Jason Bourne, and my whole career was unarmed.

However, I never went higher than DC and I acquitted myself with more presence of mind (and have taken on people armed with knives) than this alleged leader of men.

Who, if he were a more junior officer, I'd expect to have been stuck on by a Department of Professional Standards who equally have probably never seen an angry man in all their life.

*Same research said the average US Law Enforcement shooting takes place at seven feet distance.
 
'Schwarzenegger does stores' is an avenue I've always felt Hollywood missed the boat on!

Storeman Schwarzenegger: I need your clothes, your boots and your motorcycle.

Indignant Squaddy: I wasn't issued with any.

Storeman Schwarzenegger: Well you f**king signed for them, so they'll be coming out of your pay.
 
We are not in a MOB (or a FOB). We are in the UK, hes a fat pen pushing ******. Its like seeing a army camp in the UK on high alert and the Infantry have doubled the guard, wearing body armour and given more ammo, then you see the AGC stroll into their office with a tray of doughnuts.

As to your second question, does the Pte owe me money?
Unlike the hardmen on here, I wont lie and say I'll do a flying kick at the attackers, bravely risking my life and winning the day. I have no idea what I would do. I know what the ideal situation would be, but Im not one for telling porkies.

It's probably because it's the only way you can prolong the debate, but why can you only conceive of intervention in the terms of taking on the attacker mano a mano?

Also, why is it of particularly great moment, other than to rule out the legitimate experiences of many posters, that the threat is specifically a man with a knife taking on a fat chap as opposed to something eminently more lethal that will be fatal regardless of how fit you are and whatever PPE you're wearing. Personally I fail to see much difference between being in the sights of a knife-wielding nutter and being in the sights of someone with an assault rifle who knows how to use it.

If there's a hierarchy of threat, you owe it to us internet hardmen to share...
 
It is FBI research into how long an officer would take to draw a firearm and successfully shoot and stop a charging assailant with a knife*.

I have read interesting research that at close quarters US police are actually more vulnerable to edged weapon attack because the default is to attempt to draw a firearm.

This is why fighting systems working on a "flinch defence" are argued to be more effective, they built on the body's natural "Oh Shit" reaction. So when the conscious brain can actually kick in and build on the natural reflex, the immediate attack has been blocked and can then be built on.

Action will always beat reaction, and when you body's natural response is built upon you have some efficiency in upping your chance of survival.

When I first went through my Officer Safety Training, I was taught I was going to get cut. Just accept it. The trick is to make sure you survive the cut and shock and can survive the confrontation.

I'm certainly not Jason Bourne, and my whole career was unarmed.

However, I never went higher than DC and I acquitted myself with more presence of mind (and have taken on people armed with knives) than this alleged leader of men.

Who, if he were a more junior officer, I'd expect to have been stuck on by a Department of Professional Standards who equally have probably never seen an angry man in all their life.

*Same research said the average US Law Enforcement shooting takes place at seven feet distance.
Cheers Boumer..informative
 
Storeman Schwarzenegger: I need your clothes, your boots and your motorcycle.

Indignant Squaddy: I wasn't issued with any.

Storeman Schwarzenegger: Well you ******* signed for them, so they'll be coming out of your pay.

Well, that's just Hollywood fantasy, a real storeman would have flogged the clothes, boots and motorcycle back to the indignant Squaddy.
 
Another question @Boumer

Is it coincidence or is there a reason why the majority of senior police officers involved in high profile ops are cited as "acting"?
I'm interpreting that as fulfilling the position until a properly qualified person takes the roll. Standing in for someone etc... Have I got it wrong or is it some legal curiosity?
 
It's probably because it's the only way you can prolong the debate, but why can you only conceive of intervention in the terms of taking on the attacker mano a mano?

Also, why is it of particularly great moment, other than to rule out the legitimate experiences of many posters, that the threat is specifically a man with a knife taking on a fat chap as opposed to something eminently more lethal that will be fatal regardless of how fit you are and whatever PPE you're wearing. Personally I fail to see much difference between being in the sights of a knife-wielding nutter and being in the sights of someone with an assault rifle who knows how to use it.

If there's a hierarchy of threat, you owe it to us internet hardmen to share...

I havent seen any say they have took on a knifeman, while being unarmed, just after he murdered someone.

Most soldiers are tooled up when they are fighting for their lives.

Jonnyboy suggested throwing the car mats at the attacker earlier, other people said drive the car at him, shout at him and a few other ideas, its almost like people are sat in the comfort of the home coming up with these great ideas and dont realise that when something shit happens you dont always get the time to react like an internet hardman.
 
By the way, if anyone thinks that this was utterly unavoidable....

The problem is it is precisely the sort of attack called for on 22 SEP 2014 by Abu Mohammed Al Adnani, in his speach "Indeed Your Lord is Ever Watchful".

He [al-Adnani] then calls on these Muslims to “strike the soldiers, patrons, and troops of the tawāghīt [those who cross the limits of Allah]. Strike their police, security, and intelligence members, as well as their treacherous agents. Destroy their beds. Embitter their lives for them and busy them with themselves. If you can kill a disbelieving American or European – especially the spiteful and filthy French – or an Australian, or a Canadian, or any other disbeliever from the disbelievers waging war, including the citizens of the countries that entered into a coalition against the Islamic State, then rely upon Allah, and kill him in any manner or way however it may be.”

This was then build upon over several years, with propaganda enthusing people to improvised attacks and stressing "The Knife Intifadah" (which was very violent in Israel and that part of the world).

Tactically, it may have been a surprise. Strategically, I'd argue it should have been expected.

But what would I know.
 
Top