And another one...

[RCummings]

Resectfully B.O.

Why does a LE Department need to call the FBi? Are they not capable of determining if a crime has been committed?

Bob

[RCummings]

Thanks, B.O.

I wonder why the population does not trust this department or others to take care of business, they need another entity to actually take care of business. The departments that I have read about in the news day in and day out seem to be lacking, severely in the honor and integrity department. As far as the growth that initiated this situation I have no problem using him/it as a moving target in any state in the union.

Bob

[Bleed Green]

Originally Posted by RCummings

Resectfully B.O.

Why does a LE Department need to call the FBi? Are they not capable of determining if a crime has been committed?

Bob

An independent investigation removes all hints of impropriety in theory. The FBI responds to and investigates all of our shootings currently however our internal affairs division is angling to take this over. IMHO not the best situations despite what people may feel about the FBI, in my experience they do have some damn fine agents that want to get it right and having assisted them with some of our shootings they don't tend to miss that much. Contrary to popular opinion they do find from time to time that shoots were bad and charges get filed. One of the reasons that officers are acquitted at a high rate at trial though is the prevailing legal standards in play in that a jury must look at the use of force from the perspective of the officer and determine if their actions were reasonable given the totality of the circumstances.

In response to your previous comment about paid time off, there are several reasons for that. As TS pointed out, the police aren't trained killers, and one of the things that is done after a shooting is to put officers on paid administrative leave. This is done so that the officer can have time to decompress from a deadly force use and also to allow them time to meet with psychologists, attend critical incident debriefs and seek legal counsel because even if the shoot is ruled good there will be lawsuits that will follow. It is not like the old days where you throw them back to the streets before affording them every opportunity to better understand how to cope with their new normal.

[RCummings]

Thank you B.O. and B.G.

Sometimes I lament the days and place where I grew up. Now the same town is releasing officers one right after another for all manner of criminal activity. The last 4, selling drugs that were confiscated from stops and impound, 1 went to jail, this is just within the last few months. I do not trust any LE in the area and it breaks my heart but, thats the way it is. The first thing that I think of is, threat, when I or my family are anywhere near them. I do not carry any type of weapon, I stopped many years ago so that I wouldn't be perceived as a threat because of the proliferation of LE shootings. Now it seems that you can be a female in a nighty or a gamer in his house or a guy crawling/groveling on the ground, and be killed by LE. Corrections officers are much worse with the scams they run in the prisons and jails. Bad guy gets killed, no sweat, go have a beer on me. Innocent citizen gets killed and I want to see the perpetrator punished the same, LE or bad guy. I'm not interested in hearing what a stellar career he/she had so they don't deserve the same punishment.

Bob

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by TacOfficer

If that’s what we call the totality of the circumstances, I would agree with you.

I take exception when someone generalizes and arrives at conclusions first and looks to support the narrative second. “They close ranks”....... Frankly, every officer I have workd with will tell you “throw the bums out that besmirch our name”. I don’t want the liability of working with some yahoo that nepotism/politics/gender/ fill in the blank, got him/her a uniform.

Apples and oranges. American LEO’s are taught to shoot “defensively” we are taught to shoot “offensively”. Two completely different mindsets. Both are taught to identify threats.

That individual was not a threat. Same thing happened at Ruby Ridge, FBI “sniper” killed an unarmed woman…….and an ATF agent shot a 14-year-old boy in the back. And it took Waco for Special Forces to say, “no more”. We will no longer teach “civilian” law enforcement the use of deadly force.

Unlike LEO’s military “snipers” go through evaluations by trained psychiatrist/psychologist. And so far, not one has climbed a tower and shot innocent people.

If you want to be in the big leagues you need to learn not to shat your pants and pull the trigger when you’re scared.

I’m betting the shoot will be ruled “justified”.

[Old Dog New Trick]

It’s a damn shame that unions protect shit bags but they do. It’s hard to fire an officer even when there is clear evidence of wrongdoing.

As TS said the Army will castrate a soldier at the drop of a hat if it protects the leadership. Doesn’t matter what his rank is or time in service. Body slam a POS foreign counterpart for raping a little boy see how many congress types it takes to keep your job and retire in a couple years...

Too many times the public perception is that police officers get a free pass for killing someone whether justified or not.

We are hard on anyone who diminishes the uniform - soldier or police - we demand the highest standards of professionalism at all times. No bias, just the way things are supposed to be.

[TacOfficer]

Originally Posted by Old Dog New Trick

It’s a damn shame that unions protect shit bags but they do. It’s hard to fire an officer even when there is clear evidence of wrongdoing.

As TS said the Army will castrate a soldier at the drop of a hat if it protects the leadership. Doesn’t matter what his rank is or time in service. Body slam a POS foreign counterpart for raping a little boy see how many congress types it takes to keep your job and retire in a couple years...

Too many times the public perception is that police officers get a free pass for killing someone whether justified or not.

We are hard on anyone who diminishes the uniform - soldier or police - we demand the highest standards of professionalism at all times. No bias, just the way things are supposed to be.

I would suggest your opinion of how officers are held accountable are out dated and I dear say cliche'. Again, the soldier you refer to was punished administratively. I don't think the soldier had to worry about the liabilty of that "POS" suing him for excessive force, or jail time for federal civil rights violations.

Many departments, including those with unions (far fewer by the day), immediately strip an officer of police powers pending out come of the investigation of a deadly force incident. Firing/separation occurres after due process, unions ensure the contractually agreed upon process was adhered to. It's a unions duty to protect its members from the "I can't breath" and "Hands Up" BLM BS.

And that is only the administrative action. The department and officer are again held accountable in a civil trial where the standard is a preponderance of evidence, which is a much lower standard than reasonable doubt.

I can't think of a single department that will hitch their wagon to protect an individual in the face of today's juries.

Baltimore comes to mind. They threw six sworn officers under the bus to satisfy the mob and not one conviction. Truth be told you may read many more incidents where the police are painted as the aggressor or in the wrong. What doesn't make the news is all the bogus lawsuits from those looking to win the ghetto lottery.

TO

[Old Dog New Trick]

It’s getting better but has a way to go in the public perspective.

PM inbound

[Basenshukai]

Originally Posted by TacOfficer

“Fries him”?
Sounds administrative to me.

That's one heck of an assumption. I'm not going to waste my time to explain all of what I meant by that; it's not going to change your mind anyways. But, I'll tell you this, there are guys serving time in Leavenworth for far less things than a "bad shoot" - and many that are in there for a "bad shoot". We don't have "unions" protecting us and a dishonorable discharge for lesser infractions than needlessly wasting someone essentially wrecks your potential for ANY employment outside the military. I had an NCO in my SF company who was facing a court martial over slapping a detainee who spit in his face. He was facing jail time in Leavenworth. Sounds administrative to you? Just because you didn't read it on CNN or Fox doesn't mean it does not happen.

But, this is my perspective of the whole thing:

From my own experience, and based on what many of my police friends tell me, for the exception of some well-funded "special reaction teams", most police lack training beyond the academy. Army Special Forces initial entry training (Q Course) is not nearly enough for a Quiet Professional to perform at the levels we are needed to perform during our careers. Training is ongoing throughout the years; hard, realistic training. It doesn't matter how many times a guy has been in combat, training is always necessary; otherwise, guys can get complacent. Even with all our training, we always think we need more. As a force, we are very much driven by excellence and internal criticism and adjustments are constant (just peruse our own discussions here regarding the issues at the JFKSWCS). And, it is not just SF, but all Army combat units. I find that most police departments (NYPD comes to mind) don't have the time, don't make the time, or don't have the budget to continue to put most of the force through updated, tough, and realistic training.

Getting home safe: If getting home alive becomes a person's primary driving force in the performance of their service (whether public service, or military), beyond the actual mission, then that person's default will be to do whatever he/she can to accomplish not getting hurt in spite of the true mission. That mission could be "Protect and Serve" for you guys, or "Make contact with Village Elder and build his trust in our presence" for our guys. I acknowledge that it is truly a tough balance for police officers to accomplish considering the growing antagonism to LEO today because of these very incidents. It has become a vicious cycle.

Special Operations soldiers want to go home too. But, if we allowed this to become our primary driving force, or to become an integral part of our professional culture, overriding our "mission first" mentality, we would not kick-in doors into dusty Afghan compounds, nor would we expose ourselves to the populace during a civil action project in the hopes that we could build a positive relationship. In fact, a guy who "shoots first" is not who we want; any fool can do that and we don't want fools.

So, in the end, I don't think this is an issue of who is better. Rather, I think you guys (LEO) - in general - lack proper selection and proper training for the difficult task you have at hand. Is the problem funding? Work force levels? Too much bureaucracy? I don't know. Maybe you know.

The odds are not stacking well in the favor of LEOs these days. Our population is far more tech savvy and social media wise than they ever were. "Journalism" has been democratized via information technology. Every "bad shoot" by a LEO found lacking has the potential of further breaking public trust. It's a tough problem set, no doubt about it.

[miclo18d]

Originally Posted by TacOfficer

I would suggest your opinion of how officers are held accountable are out dated and I dear say cliche'. Again, the soldier you refer to was punished administratively. I don't think the soldier had to worry about the liabilty of that "POS" suing him for excessive force, or jail time for federal civil rights violations.

Many departments, including those with unions (far fewer by the day), immediately strip an officer of police powers pending out come of the investigation of a deadly force incident. Firing/separation occurres after due process, unions ensure the contractually agreed upon process was adhered to. It's a unions duty to protect its members from the "I can't breath" and "Hands Up" BLM BS.

And that is only the administrative action. The department and officer are again held accountable in a civil trial where the standard is a preponderance of evidence, which is a much lower standard than reasonable doubt.

I can't think of a single department that will hitch their wagon to protect an individual in the face of today's juries.

Baltimore comes to mind. They threw six sworn officers under the bus to satisfy the mob and not one conviction. Truth be told you may read many more incidents where the police are painted as the aggressor or in the wrong. What doesn't make the news is all the bogus lawsuits from those looking to win the ghetto lottery.

TO

Sorry, the video doesn’t lie. Tac Officer, I’d love to know, who trained you in CQB and Hostage Rescue? How much do you train in those tasks weekly, monthly, annually? Your answer will give you the reason for bad shoots in my opinion. (All rhetorical and I’m not insinuating you personally, but your profession). If the training is flawed and you practice it flawed it is almost as bad as excellent training that is never practiced. There is a reason Hostage Rescue/professional level CQB is only done by a few units in the military. Last question, how many departments, US wide, have “tactical” units? (Again rhetorical)

On another note (and these are not personal attacks but general observations). MOO. If you’re a cop and you say the words, “but I intend doing my very best to go home at the end of each and every watch.” you’re in the wrong job field, perhaps work in one of these Fieldss is a better fit (according to Forbes Magazine’s safest jobs of 2016).

Medical Records Technician
Interpreter/Translator
Paralegal Assistant
Dietician
Web Developer
Accountant/Auditor
Statistician
Computer Systems Analyst
Actuary
Mathematician

Some soldiers were taught a meme since they were privates. THE MISSION, THE MEN, AND ME. If you notice they are in a specific order. They are in order of precedence. The mission comes first (even if you and everyone around you DIES completing it, reference 6th stanza of the Ranger Creed), then you look out for the welfare of your men and/or brothers, then you worry about yourself last. I think in the general world, cops have that one backwards.

If the shoe fits and all.

Again this is not a personal attack and I value your input on this board, you do bring us a different perspective, that I consider before writing my comments.

[Basenshukai]

Originally Posted by miclo18d

Sorry, the video doesn’t lie. Tac Officer, I’d love to know, who trained you in CQB and Hostage Rescue? How much do you train in those tasks weekly, monthly, annually? Your answer will give you the reason for bad shoots in my opinion. (All rhetorical and I’m not insinuating you personally, but your profession). If the training is flawed and you practice it flawed it is almost as bad as excellent training that is never practiced. There is a reason Hostage Rescue/professional level CQB is only done by a few units in the military. Last question, how many departments, US wide, have “tactical” units? (Again rhetorical)

On another note (and these are not personal attacks but general observations). MOO. If you’re a cop and you say the words, “but I intend doing my very best to go home at the end of each and every watch.” you’re in the wrong job field, perhaps work in one of these Fieldss is a better fit (according to Forbes Magazine’s safest jobs of 2016).

Medical Records Technician
Interpreter/Translator
Paralegal Assistant
Dietician
Web Developer
Accountant/Auditor
Statistician
Computer Systems Analyst
Actuary
Mathematician

Some soldiers were taught a meme since they were privates. THE MISSION, THE MEN, AND ME. If you notice they are in a specific order. They are in order of precedence. The mission comes first (even if you and everyone around you DIES completing it, reference 6th stanza of the Ranger Creed), then you look out for the welfare of your men and/or brothers, then you worry about yourself last. I think in the general world, cops have that one backwards.

If the shoe fits and all.

Again this is not a personal attack and I value your input on this board, you do bring us a different perspective, that I consider before writing my comments.

Holy crap, dude, we just wrote about the same thing. I'm telling you we SF Regiment guys are somehow connected. LOL!

[miclo18d]

Originally Posted by Basenshukai

Holy crap, dude, we just wrote about the same thing. I'm telling you we SF Regiment guys are somehow connected. LOL!

I would bet it’s some Jedi mind meld shit from the Dark Side of the Red Empire! And I can almost guarantee we’ve shared some of the same dust in A-Stan.

[TacOfficer]

Originally Posted by miclo18d

Sorry, the video doesn’t lie. Tac Officer, I’d love to know, who trained you in CQB and Hostage Rescue? How much do you train in those tasks weekly, monthly, annually? Your answer will give you the reason for bad shoots in my opinion. (All rhetorical and I’m not insinuating you personally, but your profession). If the training is flawed and you practice it flawed it is almost as bad as excellent training that is never practiced. There is a reason Hostage Rescue/professional level CQB is only done by a few units in the military. Last question, how many departments, US wide, have “tactical” units? (Again rhetorical)

On another note (and these are not personal attacks but general observations). MOO. If you’re a cop and you say the words, “but I intend doing my very best to go home at the end of each and every watch.” you’re in the wrong job field, perhaps work in one of these Fieldss is a better fit (according to Forbes Magazine’s safest jobs of 2016).

Medical Records Technician
Interpreter/Translator
Paralegal Assistant
Dietician
Web Developer
Accountant/Auditor
Statistician
Computer Systems Analyst
Actuary
Mathematician

Some soldiers were taught a meme since they were privates. THE MISSION, THE MEN, AND ME. If you notice they are in a specific order. They are in order of precedence. The mission comes first (even if you and everyone around you DIES completing it, reference 6th stanza of the Ranger Creed), then you look out for the welfare of your men and/or brothers, then you worry about yourself last. I think in the general world, cops have that one backwards.

If the shoe fits and all.

Again this is not a personal attack and I value your input on this board, you do bring us a different perspective, that I consider before writing my comments.

I absolutely agree, in the military the mission comes first. Does a military commander consider the risks to his soldiers before taking action or is it "Damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead"? I'd like to think, every effort is made to minimize loss of life to our troops before committing to a mission. The level of training I've read on this board is a testament of how much your lives are valued to the mission.

According to current law enforcement policy, the sanctity of life is First.

For example, stolen vehicle racing through a densely populated area. The mission is to apprehend the felon. Does one adhere to the military creed and risk the lives of the criminal, officer and bystanders to accomplish the mission? Obviously not. Every call police take, has a uniques set of balances. Where I work, we have a no chase policy. You want to steal a car and race away, be my guest. The department has decided it isn't worth the risk of life or injury to all parties directly and indirectly involved. If possible, we'll use the fruits of an investigation to catch the felon later.
You are welcome to guess how many police have been sued by the offender for actions the criminal instigated.

My intent of the posts was to illustrate the various types of oversight/liabilities the patrolman face in the performance of his duties.

I'm not excusing this incident. I'm not even attempting to defend him.

If/when an officer is at fault, for what ever reason, there is accountability.

[PedOncoDoc]

Originally Posted by TacOfficer

According to current law enforcement policy, the sanctity of life is First.

In incidences like this, one must wonder whose life's sanctity is placed first by current law enforcement policy and whether said policy need be revisited.

[Streck-Fu]

Originally Posted by TacOfficer

If that’s what we call the totality of the circumstances, I would agree with you.

I take exception when someone generalizes and arrives at conclusions first and looks to support the narrative second. “They close ranks”....... Frankly, every officer I have workd with will tell you “throw the bums out that besmirch our name”. I don’t want the liability of working with some yahoo that nepotism/politics/gender/ fill in the blank, got him/her a uniform.

Too bad we only hear about the multitude of cases where fellow officers and administrators, or the union, obstruct such in house corrective actions. And, in the very rare cases charges are filed, the officers are overwhelmingly exonerated or given far lessor sentences than a civilian.