You are simply wrong and have zero idea what you are talking about. They wouldn't "be fired and prosecuted" for aiming at center mass, there is literally nothing that suggests this.
You also know what's more likely? That they were aiming at center mass and hit the leg BECAUSE HANDGUNS ARE NOT VERY ACCURATE especially while under duress.
You keep bringing up aim for legs primarily as if that is proof, it's just a handbook and it even says that you can aim for the body.
Oh and that Dutch police you hold in such high regard?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...-dead-by-dutch-police-six-years-after-father/
"Suicide by police bullet" is the suspected cause.
I'm not holding them in high regard at all. I'm saying if that they can consistently manage to hit people in the legs, so can any other force that's specifically trained for it. And yes, the death of Mitchel was an awful thing that could be avoided and there's a good chance the cop wouldn't have gone free if he shot a white guy. That wasn't the first time the dutch police went out of line and it isn't the last time, either.
It's not just in the 'handbook'. They are specifically trained to aim at the legs, it's right there. On the website, and it also says, right there, that officers get federally investigated just for firing their firearm. And no, while the site does say they can 'aim for the body', this is referred to as the last possible option that should be avoided at all cost, and should only be done if nothing else is possible. It doesn't even say that officers
should fire at center mass in this situation.
Do you seriously think Dutch police are
so inaccurate they almost always miss the torso but somehow still manage to somehow consistently hit the legs? Because they
consistently hit the legs.
The dutch police force has problems. Just like every other police force in the world. But they're the walking evidence that 'aiming for the legs' isn't an impossible or improbable tactic.
Here is an article about British police that have the same "shoot to incapacitate" statement that the Dutch does...
Most officers don't even
carry a gun in the UK. Also that's a completely different country so I don't see how it matters...?
And again, Sweden does it, too.
But none of this is really relevant to anything at all. Enough other countries show that there's ways for the police to deal with people armed with knives that are slowly approaching them.
That's the topic at hand. This officer wasn't trained for it and he did what he was trained for instead. I don't think he personally did anything wrong, but I do think it's a sign that he/the force wasn't trained enough to handle this.
