Cop takes cover behind a woman. I applaud shooting the robber, but any man (especially a cop) who takes cover behind women and children is a pussy.
This isn’t the first time I’ve had to say this. Remember the time cops in South Florida hid behind cars filled with soccer moms?
EDIT: Comments here have crossed the line and are generating more heat than light. With that, comments on this post are now closed.
20 Comments
Michael · August 14, 2025 at 7:57 pm
Looks like to me that he used the woman as distraction cover as to draw his weapon and get a accurate salvo of bullets on target.
At least it seems that only the gunman got directly shot to hell. As opposed to some of our police shooting wildly into a crowd and still missing the perp. Over penetration is always a problem even with quality hollow points so we’ll never know if others caught one.
A gunfight isn’t John Wayne square up at the Black Hat and draw on him. Distraction is a tool.
Divemedic · August 15, 2025 at 5:16 am
I dont care. I will NEVER take cover behind women and children.
Michael · August 15, 2025 at 9:18 am
I’ve been at a bad breath range shooting. My Afghan Interpreter kept me alive. Happened really quick.
I doubt that the cop had time enough to make such an elegant thought cycle of “Oh that’s a woman, let me pick a big strong man to hide my draw from a CLEARLY ARMED WEAPON OUT Thug”.
So Divemedic, you’ve been robbed with a pistol armed thug at the ATM, he still has that weapon out (Pretty clear in the vid BTW). You’re REALLY going to square up in front of him and draw your concealed weapon?
Or are you going to drop your cash, hope he’s content with that and walk quickly away to stay alive? BTW The Off Duty Police was a POLICEMAN in a public place.
If you walked away from a Medical Emergency and were caught on camera doing so what’s your medical-legal options? A POLICE MAN in a South American country would never work as a policeman again once that cowardice is revealed.
I hope and pray you never find yourself in that Cops situation medically nor as a concealed carry civilian.
Divemedic · August 15, 2025 at 9:57 am
1. Your being near a gunfight when you were in the military has no bearing on all of this. For all I know, you hid behind your interpreter while letting him fight for you. Who knows? It still isn’t relevant to this discussion.
2. As evidenced in the video, the DID make a conscious decision to use her as a shield. Watch what he did. He clearly put the woman between himself and the gunman in order to shield himself and do disguise his draw. He sought cover, and a woman was who he chose to use as a meat shield.
3. He is a POLICEMAN, meaning that he is paid to make such decisions in a rapid way. That’s why cops have more leeway under the law.
4. One rule of medicine is “do no harm” and a rule we followed when in the fire and EMS arena was “we don’t make the situation worse than it already is.” Every single situation is a risk versus reward decision.
5. Square up? Probably not. Sometimes the better part of valor is not to push a bad position and make it into a worse position.
6. It isn’t cowardice, it’s a risk versus benefit calculation. Why risk a gunfight in a crowded room while hiding behind a defenseless innocent? Does it make you braver to still be standing there while 5 innocent bystanders catch stray bullets after a gunfight that only happened because you wanted to save your ego and not look silly to a south American police department? You are saying that it’s braver to hide behind a female bystander and start a gunfight that may cause dozens of people to get shot, perhaps even killing your meat shield than it is to walk away and catch the guy later?
7. I have walked away from medical situations and other emergencies when it wasn’t safe to jump in like a steroid and ego fueled moron. In fact, that’s what is currently taught.
8. I have, in decades of experience, been in situations that required decisions just like that be made. I was forced to make decisions to back off and allow things to play out, rather than do something stupid that resulted in more injuries and death. There are plenty of situations that call for a more circumspect approach than just “Me see bad guy. Me shoot at bad guy.”
This was a cop that said, “I’m going to shoot this guy, because I don’t get an opportunity to do this ever, but I don’t want to get shot myself, so let me just hide behind this woman here, and use her for a shield.” At no time did he even give a thought to the 20 or more other people who were there, or what would happen if his target managed to get off a few rounds, turning this armed robbery into a mass shooting.
If that had happened, there could have been multiple victims and even deaths, but hey, everyone would think he was cool.
Poor decision making on his part.
Michael · August 15, 2025 at 11:34 am
Poor decision making on my part to discuss rationally such a hot button subject with you.
Your mind is clearly made up; your many assumptions listed above from a 36 second vid is solid in your heart.
Didn’t get a chance to “HIDE BEHIND MY Interpreter” He was Macho-Devoted enough to block the Blue on Green Assailant on his own.
Divemedic · August 15, 2025 at 12:38 pm
Read my reply again- I said I don’t know if you did, but it wasn’t germane to the discussion.
There are facts in the video:
– The robber wasn’t shooting anyone
– The robber wasn’t focused on anything but the money
– The cop made a clear move to place the female bystander in the line of fire between himself and the robber
There are known facts outside of the video:
– Engaging in a gunfight in an area where you are surrounded by innocent bystanders creates a large risk of said bystanders catching a stray bullet
– It behooves the prudent defender to minimize the risks of anyone except the goblin from being shot
Assumptions:
– The cop’s intent when he made that move was to shield himself from fire, and
– to hide his draw from the view of the robber
Conclusions:
– Engaging in a gunfight in an area where you are surrounded by innocent targets shows a careless or perhaps even reckless disregard for the safety of those innocents
– Purposely doing so shows indifference to the plight of those innocent bystanders
Your own statement, that he did so because other cops would see him as a coward if he didn’t engage in a gun battle, and that it would be foolish to do so without using that woman as a meat shield is evidence that you are indifferent to the effects this would have on a “person who happens to have a vagina” – your words.
Me? I would hope that in a similar situation, I wouldn’t initiate an unnecessary gun battle by using a defenseless woman as a bullet shield. That is no different than when Iraq put military installations in the basement of a hospital, or when terrorists send children into crowds while they are wearing a bomb. Anyone who does so is a poltroon. I won’t back down from the opinion that hiding behind an innocent woman is an act of cowardice, so I guess my mind is made up.
Go ahead and lick cop boots if you wish, but part of being a cop, a firefighter, or any sort of first responder is the voluntary assumption of at least SOME risk. Abdicating that voluntary assumption of risk and placing it upon some unwilling and unknowing innocent bystander doesn’t make a cop a hero- it makes him a pussy.
Why not just pick up a kindergarten aged child and use him as a shield or as a club to beat the guy over the head?
Michael · August 15, 2025 at 4:43 pm
Sorry Divemedic you’re conflating two different posters here.
I said nothing about a “person with a vagina”.
Why you continue with insults like “hiding behind my interpreter and licking boots is beyond my understanding.
Your opinions are your own friend.
Divemedic · August 15, 2025 at 7:13 pm
You are correct about the “person with a vagina” comment.
You are not correct when you claim that I said you hid behind your interpreter. Go back and read again what I said.
Honk Honk · August 14, 2025 at 8:59 pm
Gun oil, extra magazines, pistol as aggressive weapon.
No flea market junk or Sig 320.
Rick · August 15, 2025 at 1:50 am
Cop didn’t hide behind woman. Cop walked away, aka surrender, circled back from behind temporary concealment (the woman) and engaged the perp.
Why her? She was closest.
Joe Blow · August 15, 2025 at 5:34 am
Really… Excuse me ma’am, could you please swap positions with this penis-holder, I would like to grease the perp that just tried to rob me, but don’t want him to see my gun until it is drawn and ready to fire. If you would please miss, I just need you to take 5 steps to your right please.
I could hear him asking her in the video, but apparently there just wasn’t enough time.
Wow dude… Wow. Even for you.
The entire exchange took less than 3 seconds, and you’re armchair quarterbacking the turn-n-draw maneuver? I mean, what would YOU have done in that scenario? NOT drawn on the guy? Turned to the right so he can see you pulling out your glock? There was no other choice, and in-fact, it was the best possible solution, as the perp was distracted by the cash he dropped, so using the ‘person’ (who happened to have a vagina) behind him was literally the only decision to make?
Divemedic · August 15, 2025 at 5:45 am
You are advocating hiding behind WOMEN for your own safety and convenience. There are tons of options, including just letting the guy go. Better that than using a woman as a meat shield. Anyone who would do that would have taken one of the seats on the lifeboat from a woman on the Titanic. The words to describe this act:
Poltroon
Milksop
Hamas
You said it yourself- you would like to grease the guy who just tried to rob you. Nowhere in your statement did you say a word about defending yourself from a lethal threat. In fact, he was more concerned with “counting his loot” than being a deadly threat. If the choice is letting him go or taking cover behind innocents- especially women and children, let the guy get away. Yes, sometimes the best course of action is to protect the innocent and NOT draw in a crowded room while taking cover behind women.
The fact that it took 3 seconds reveals his character. When faced with a decision like that, he reverted to his true self- the man who is willing to hide behind a woman for safety.
Note that you yourself called her a “person who happens to have a vagina” instead of a woman. (You even placed “person” in quotes, as if she isn’t a person, but a mere thing whose only purpose is to serve as a backstop) Perhaps a little introspection on your part is in order. Character matters. Do you place so little value on women and children, that in your world they serve only as meat shields to enable you to engage in shootouts while being safe from incoming fire? If so, how can you count yourself as a protector, a sheepdog, and not a hyena?
Joe Blow · August 16, 2025 at 6:36 am
LOL! Dude, you are so far out in left field, you don’t even get it. That’s what’s funny here.
20 bucks says the guy didn’t even discern whether the person he moved behind was male or female, and frankly, in todays age of feminist equality, I say fuck ’em! They’re every bit as useful for concealment AND cover as a male is. They want equality. That’s equality. You and your attitude and behavior is what’s keeping women down in this world! LOL!
Your supposition that the 2nd guy was able to make that determination I think is what we are disagreeing over. I’m not advocating people intentionally use women and children as shields (as you seem to be suggesting that’s what I’m saying)…. though the little buggers are easier to hold in front of you with one hand, kids just don’t have enough meat to stop FMJ rounds.
Gawd, you’re such a tool… Your poor wife, LOL!
Divemedic · August 16, 2025 at 8:48 am
I’m a tool? That’s a violation of Rule 1- don’t attack the blog owner. This is your one and only warning. Do it again and catch a permanent ban.
Attack ideas all you want, don’t attack others, and especially don’t personally attack the person who pays the bills here.
Advocate for hiding behind women all you want, but don’t play like you are doing it for anyone’s benefit but yourself, and don’t attack me for having principles. You also don’t get to pretend like you are doing it for equality. This was you just a week ago:
So save me the cover story about how much of a badass you are, that you have to hide behind women for the sake of equality, or on how brave the police are when they hide behind women and children- for the safety of the police, of course.
Plague Monk · August 15, 2025 at 3:22 am
The only thing that matters to 99% of cops is going home at the end of their shift, regardless of how many bystanders die or are injured. That Stovetop stuffing and Hotpockets dinners are waiting.
As David Codrea keeps pointing out, cops think that they are the only ones who should be allowed to possess firearms.
anonymous · August 15, 2025 at 1:23 pm
He could have turned his back in the perp, having abandoned his goods, and concealed his draw.
The bigger picture is that we are all pawns for the state. If a threat to a knight can be stopped by sacrificing a pawn, it will be done.
Dan · August 15, 2025 at 1:32 pm
Monday morning quarterbacking these types of situations is easy….until you are personally in such a situation. There are no easy answers for this type of event.
Divemedic · August 15, 2025 at 2:22 pm
Why not just go prepared?
Anonymous · August 15, 2025 at 3:30 pm
First, I in no way make excuses for cops. I probably despise the little tyrants as much or more than most but it appeared to me as concealment of his draw vs cover from potential fire.
If he were the one in line behind the woman and a guy in front of her was being robbed would it be “hiding” behind her if he drew from that position? or would he need to step out from behind her before drawing? Also just walking away didn’t seem to be an option either as there was an armed assailant in the vicinity of multiple potential victims. Should he have just left the situation as it were? He maneuvered around her in a pretty fluid motion. He didn’t look around her and duck back as if she were cover. He didn’t seek her out for use as cover. He used what concealment was available in that split second to draw, acquire and fire, in a fairly fluid motion in my opinion.
Divemedic · August 15, 2025 at 7:16 pm
If she were already there, no it isn’t cowardice. That isn’t what happened. He took positive action to place her between himself and the robber. Yes, there was an armed assailant, but he wasn’t actively shooting anyone. The chances of a bystander getting hit are too great to risk having a gunfight in a crowded room.
Not faulting his shooting skills, not saying the robber wasn’t begging to be shot- I am saying that the cop’s tactics SUCK. There is a time and a place to engage, and a robber surrounded by non threats who isn’t shooting anyone is not it, especially when you take positive action to use one of those non threats as cover.
Comments are closed.