Again, Calm Down. Let The Process Proceed.

An officer involved shooting has the usual race baiters excited. We need to let the investigation proceed and determine the facts. 

I noticed just over a week ago the coverage of the shooting death of an Air Force airman by a sheriff’s deputy in Florida. The basic facts are fairly straight forward. The deputy responded to a call about a disturbance in an apartment complex. After an initial interview with the caller, he walks up to an apartment and knocks a total of three times. 

 

The first time, he knocked without announcing who he was, and stepped aside of the door. The last two, he clearly announced, “Sheriff’s office, open the door!” and was in front of the door. Presumedly he was visible to the tenant inside of the apartment.

 

Upon opening the door, the deputy did see a man with a pistol in his right hand, pointed down. The deputy immediately drew his weapon and fired multiple shots. The deputy requested an ambulance for the man, but he unfortunately died later at the hospital.

 

Now, what do we know at this moment. The deputy was called for a disturbance. And yes, this was a homicide, an unnatural man caused death. Was it a criminal act? Was it murder, manslaughter, or a justified use of deadly force? That is to be determined. 

 

How are we to judge this deputy on his actions. First, I would say as I’ve said countless times after a police shooting, calm down. The investigation is a complicated process and needs to proceed. The video is not the whole incident and the entire investigation will not be determined by it. 

 

A few years back I was one of over 200 cops on a police shooting which was initially believed to be justified operation. Further investigation showed the lead investigator had falsified his statements to get a warrant. A disaster to put it politely, but not obvious from the preliminary investigation.

 

The initial impression that gets rioters into the street is usually not the full truth. Remember the greatest lie of the 21^st Century, “Hands Up! Don’t Shoot!” Dozens of “witnesses” said Officer Darren Wilson shot Michael Brown for absolutely no reason, that he was surrendering to the officer with his hands up. They swore Brown never got close to Wilson. 

 

When the forensics came back showing power residue from Wilson’s gun on Brown, Brown’s blood in Wilson’s patrol car, and the entry wounds on the “top” of Brown’s arms, not the “bottom,” it showed their statements were not “accurate.” The witnesses quickly revised them to preclude the perjury charges. 

 

We have had multiple controversial police shootings over the last fifteen years and some have shown the officer’s actions justified (e.g. Brown, Adam Toledo), and some unjustified (Walter Scott). Where do we go with this case? Again, we let the process proceed. Each of the cases I’ve listed showed that competent investigation is required for the judicial system to work. 

 

Multiple times I’ve written how a defendant  walks into a courtroom, and only the jury can make his guilty in the eyes of the law. That is western jurisprudence. But let’s  not let the foundation of legal theory come in the way of a race riot.  

 

The usual race baiters have jumped on the case, determined to make a name (and lots of money) on this incident. Racial shyster Benjamin Crump was quickly on the scene, mis-stating (I’ll give him the benefit of a doubt) the deputy knocked on the wrong door. The video below shows he was at the correct door. 

 

Both Crump and Al Sharpton are now involved in this case, and those two should make anyone suspicious. They are only interested in money, power and fame. If a riot ensues, so be it. 

 

Again, let the justice system work its way out. We don’t need another “Hands Up! Don’t Shoot!” We don’t need another summer of riots. And that is what people like Crump and Sharpton long for. 

 

 

Why am I not surprised...the DOJ wants to emasculate a police force.

And women, children, and minorities will be hardest hit.

One of the great results of the end of the Obama regime is the war on cops has been slowed. But it's not over yet. The bureaucracy is still going hard and fast against local police, the premice of what they are concerned over is a lie (Hands Up! Don't Shoot!), and if others get hurt in the process, they are still going for the goal. Federalization of local and state police. And we see another example of the DOJ needing a purging:

ACLU, Black Lives Matter say plans to reform the Chicago police don't go far enough

Chicago police officers would be encouraged to avoid arresting people over minor offenses and would need permission from supervisors to make arrests related to certain infractions under a proposal by activist groups involved in the litigation over potential reforms to the troubled Police Department.

On Tuesday morning, the groups — which include the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois and Black Lives Matter Chicago — released their first organized responses to the proposed court agreement Mayor Rahm Emanuel and Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan introduced last month.

The criticisms are an attempt to influence the draft of the consent decree before it is submitted to a federal judge, which is expected to happen by early September. The activist organizations, the Emanuel administration and Madigan’s office are still wrangling over details of a potential court order that would eventually serve as a judicially enforceable mandate governing how officers use force and how they will be held accountable, among other issues...

...The groups proposed that the department be required to create a policy that encourages officers to use the “least intrusive response appropriate under the circumstances as reasonably understood by the officer at the time” in dealing with minor offenses. The suggested policy would encourage police to give warnings or divert people to “mediation or public health program(s)” rather than citing or locking them up. For a number of offenses, a supervisor would need to approve the arrest “unless not practicable under the circumstances.” Those crimes range from gambling and prostitution offenses to obstructing, resisting or assaulting a police officer

The activist groups also want the department to be forced to enact a policy on foot pursuits, which have often led to shootings and other uses of force. The consent decree proposed by Emanuel and Madigan leaves room for the creation of a policy but does not mandate it.

And the groups want officers to report every incident in which they point a Taser or a gun at a person, or even draw their firearms. The question of whether the department will have to report instances in which cops aim guns at people has been a sticking point between Madigan’s office and the Emanuel administration. Madigan’s office wants the incidents reported, and city officials apparently do not.

The potential consent decree would be one of the most substantive consequences of the scandal sparked in late 2015 by the release of video of Officer Jason Van Dyke, who is white, shooting black teenager Laquan McDonald 16 times. Van Dyke is scheduled to stand trial on murder charges next month.

The video touched off heated protests and led to an investigation of the police force by the U.S. Department of Justice. That inquiry led to a January 2017 report that described a broken Police Department in which badly trained police officers have engaged in brutality and misconduct with little fear of consequences...

OK, you give cops fear of consequences, such as being assertive and going out to prevent crime, there will be a reaction. Cops will simply log on at the beginning of the shift, answer their calls for service, go home at the end of the shift, and not care if they pass by a man getting assaulted or a woman getting her purse grabbed.

Do you want evidence of this? I posted on this in American Thinker last year. A point I made in that article was cops are, by their nature, not trusting. You screw them over and over, and then make correction, it will take time before they believe it.

Rahm Emanuel, the fish have been delivered to your door. But don't worry, the city will still elect you again and again. You have the magical "D" behind your name, and I don't see them ready for their own Rudy Giuliani. Yet.

God help the people of Chicago.

The latest and greatest from the People's Democratic Republic of Kalifornia....

One of my friends from high school got hired by the Los Angeles Sheriff's Office, and I caught up with him years ago on Facebook and email. And he mentioned how much he loved California and had no plans to leave. Well, things like this have changed his way of thinking.

"Mike, as soon as I get my 25, I'm not sure where I'm going, but I'm out of here!"

Like what you ask? Well, getting second guessed when you're a street cop, to be expected. Now to get this...

Civilian panel: LAPD cops broke policy after shooting man who fired at LEOs

LOS ANGELES — Los Angeles police’s rank-and-file officers’ union said it was baffled by a ruling this week that found a dozen officers acted outside of LAPD policy in using lethal force against a suspect who fired at officers and a police helicopter in Sunland...

...It was the first time the department used snipers in a helicopter to shoot a suspect though officers also shot at the suspect from the ground.

Craig Lally, president of the Los Angeles Police Protective League, said he was “kind of shocked” at the civilian panel’s split ruling.

“(The suspect) had a gun. He was shooting at officers. It was the ultimate safety risk,” Lally said Wednesday, adding that he had not yet seen the Inspector General’s report, which will be released in the coming days...

OK, we hear the usual suspects (BLM, DOJ, YouTube/Facebook experts, etc.) saying "he shot an unarmed man, that's wrong..." Now we have a suspect firing at officers and a police chopper, and it's still unjustified.

...Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck had argued that the 13 officers involved in the hours-long incident acted within policy. 

The Commission found that one police officer acted within policy in using lethal force. It was not clear Wednesday whether that officer acted from the helicopter or from the ground. 

Beck, echoing the findings of the department’s Use of Force Review Board, agreed “that an officer with similar training and experience (as the 13 officers involved) would reasonably believe Soderberg’s actions presented an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury and that the use of lethal force would be objectively reasonable,” according to his April 26 report to the Commission.

Lally noted that the officers tried to negotiate and used tear gas to diffuse the situation even after the attempts on their lives. The officers also operated with authorization from command staff... 

...The incident, which began on 9 a.m. that day, was prompted by a radio call at a home in Alethea Drive, LAPD previously said in a news release. A woman met Foothill Division officers outside the home after she awoke to find a man in the kitchen and then fled and called police. She told the officers there were firearms inside...

...Around 1 p.m., SWAT was on scene when the suspect began shooting in the direction of officers. Between 1 and 3 p.m., the suspect did not surrender and would intermittently shoot at officers, according to the department. During that same period, officers were involved in shootings with the suspect. In one instance, two officers shot at the suspect from a helicopter.

The suspect exited the residence around 3 p.m. and fell down a hillside, where he was determined to be dead. A handgun was recovered at the scene. 

The Commission found that officers and command staff acted within policy with regard to tactics, drawing and exhibiting a weapon, and less lethal use of force.

According to the Beck’s report to the Commission, a commander believed Soderberg was in a position where it would be “very dangerous for anybody to try to contain or engage him on foot.” 

The “aerial platform shooting” – or shooting from the helicopter – offered the ability to control the terrain from the air “and it was appropriate,” Beck wrote.

“It was essential to utilize the (aerial platform shooting) to prevent Soderberg from getting into the surrounding community,” thus prompting command staff to give approval to deploy it, he said.

Before he was shot, the suspect said he would “kill all those SWAT officers that are out there,” according to Beck’s report. 

OK. A turd is firing at officers and you're saying it's not right for us to return fire.  California cops, this is gonna be a serious gut check, going against what you believe, and have been trained to do. But if this is what will happen when your officers are clearly justified in using deadly force, what happens when it's a close call. And libtarded sacks of human excrement, days after the event, sitting on their asses in a comfortable chair, judge what you did as you were taking fire and wondering if you will make it home today. Pathetic.

Damned good shooting.....

Most cops never use their firearms during their careers. The stats are less than five percent of police officers use their weapons over a twenty year career. But you must be ready for it when ever that day comes. And it will not be as easy as the department range, as this video shows:

Louisville officer shoots through patrol car windshield, killing suspect

A police spokesman said that officers responded to a reported store robbery in the Portland neighborhood on April 24. A suspect matching the description of the store robber fled when police made contact with him. Police said that the suspect was “brandishing” a handgun and shot the suspect, who died shortly after being taken to hospital by emergency services. Police said that no officers were struck by gunfire...

Ion recalling Clint Eastwood’s immortal advise from Heartbreak Ridge, “Improvise, adapt, overcome!” This officer did, and handled the armed felon. But for some reason that wasn’t good enough for this TV reporter.

“...The former police chief for Madison, Wisconsin, David Couper, was quoted by The Courier Journal as saying the move seemed “reckless,” and that the bullet’s trajectory could have been changed when going through the windshield.”

OK, this is a shooting in Kentucky, why do you have to get an opinion from a former chief three states away? I am recalling the accepted (by the 4th Estate) definition of an “expert:” Anyone fifty miles away.

Sorry Chief Dave, the man handled the situation. Excellent work officer.

These tourniquets really work.....

Last year two of my officers had a man bleeding out from a bullet wound in the upper thigh. They applied a toruniquet, got him transported and in the opinion of the ambulance medic and attending ER physician, that saved the man's life. Not a bad return in investment for twenty bucks. I carry two and I hope I never have to do what this trooper had to.

Pa. trooper saves own life with tourniquet
Police said Cpl. Seth J. Kelly will undergo another surgery to remove a bullet

BETHLEHEM, Pa. — A Pennsylvania State Police trooper who was shot several times during a traffic stop remained hospitalized in critical condition Wednesday as authorities released more details of the violent confrontation along a busy highway.

Cpl. Seth Kelly, a 13-year veteran, likely saved his own life by applying a tourniquet after he was hit by gunfire Tuesday morning in Plainfield Township, north of Philadelphia, state police Capt. Richard D'Ambrosio said at a news conference.

Kelly, 39, suffered wounds to his neck and shoulder area and to his leg in the close-quarters gunfight, and was set to undergo another surgery to remove a bullet.

"He's battling. He's certainly not out of the woods by any means, but ... he is a very strong individual and he displayed a will yesterday that he wanted to live and get through this," D'Ambrosio said.

The suspect, 22-year-old Daniel Khalil Clary, of Effort, faces charges that include attempted murder of a law enforcement officer and aggravated assault...

...Kelly was helping another trooper arrest Clary, whom they suspected of driving under the influence of marijuana, when (Suspect Daniel Khalil) Clary began fighting with the troopers, police said. The struggle lasted nearly two minutes, and at one point all three men were "wrestling and rolling around" the right lane of busy Route 33 as cars and trucks whizzed by them on the left, D'Ambrosio said.

Despite being hit with a stun gun, Clary managed to break free, retrieved a semi-automatic pistol from his car and opened fire on Kelly and Trooper Ryan Seiple, authorities said. Both troopers returned fire, hitting Clary several times. Clary then fled, driving himself to a hospital where he was taken into custody...

Why didn't you deescalate, you didn't aha etc shoot him....sorry, I'm being sarcastic.

Trooper, all the best in your recovery and hopefully this piece of trash who shot your never sees the outside of a prison.

I have to say, this is a bit strange...

I've watched the news on the case of Officer Mohamed Noor shooting and killing Justine Damond last week. In my review, I've found these articles a bit thought provoking. Looking at these, they are not straight facts, not even completed analysis. They are snapshots with a heavy dose of opinion put in, as do my comments. Here we go.

Blue Lives Matter gives a decent overall look at the situation, with a link to the Star Tribune.

Possible Reason For Justine Damond Shooting Released

Minneapolis, MN – New details have been released on the shooting of Justine Damond which give a possible cause of the shooting.

The BCA released information on Tuesday from an interview with Officer Matthew Harrity, who was driving the patrol car when his partner, Officer Mohamed Noor, shot over Officer Harrity and through the driver’s door, fatally hitting Justine Damond.

In the interview, Officer Harrity said heard a loud noise prior to Officer Noor firing his weapon. The BCA said, “Harrity indicated that he was startled by a loud sound near the squad,” according to Star Tribune.

Immediately after the loud noise is when Justine Damond approached the squad car in her pajamas, and Officer Noor fired his weapon.

During the radio audio of the incident, a dispatcher references “two shots heard to the east.”

An officer responded, “We heard those sounds from the station, those are probably aerial fireworks.” It’s believed that those fireworks may be the loud noise that the officers hears.

It is not clear at this time if the shooting was an accidental discharge from being startled, or Officer Noor was responding to what he perceived to be gunshots while a person approached them, or some other reasoning. Officer Noor has still not been interviewed.

If the shooting is determined to have been accidental, criminal charges would be appropriate and are certain to be filed. If the shooting was an intentional act, then all of the circumstances would need to be judged to determine if it was objectively reasonable.

The incident initially occurred on Saturday night at around 11:30 PM when officers responded to a 911 call just north of the 5100 block of Washburn Avenue S. for a report of what sounded like a possible fight. Family members say that Justine Damond is the person who called 911.

According to unnamed “sources,” Star Tribune reports that both officers were in their vehicle as they pulled to the end of an alley on W. 51st Street between Washburn and Xerxes Avenues.

The officers were wearing body cameras, but did not turn them on until after the shooting. Early indications are that the officers were in full compliance with the department camera policy...

Some observations. One, why did the officer take his weapon out of the holster? If you heard gunshots (or fireworks) why pull the gun out while you're still in your car? Granted, pulling your primary weapon out while seated in your vehicle can be a challenge, the holsters are a point in the ass. That's why my backup 357 is loose in my pocket where I can easily obtain it. Also, I'm getting the impression this did not occur in Da Hood, so why so paranoid.
As far as the camera is concerned, they generally are not turned on until after you leave the car. Every idiot will scream "cameras should be on at all times...' but this is not practical. Batteries die if you use them 24/7, hell, getting through a shift can be a challenge. So yes, the seem to have been within policy.

Tse being said, Front Page Magazine has a radical idea on why the officer fired:

'First Somali' Officer Mohamed Noor Murdered Australian Woman

...This is what happens when you put diversity over public safety.

Justine Damond, an Australian woman, called 911 to report a sexual assault happening nearby. Instead she was murdered by Mohammed Noor, a Somali migrant with multiple complaints against him after only two years on the force.

And body cameras weren't turned on.

Mohammed Noor was a diversity hire. Part of the usual pattern of community policing bringing in recruits who match the demographics of local areas. This isn't always a bad idea. Until problematic figures have their problems swept under the rug because... diversity.

Mohamed Noor had little more than two years’ experience on the force...

...Noor joined the Minneapolis Police Department in March 2015 and is the first Somali-American police officer assigned to the 5th Precinct in the southwest part of the city.

In total, he reportedly has had three complaints made against him in two years — including the lawsuit.

Two are from 2017 and one from 2016 is closed and according to Lou Raguse of Kare 11 is marked ‘not to be made public’.

The two incidents we know about involved women. Including this latest one. And that's a distinct pattern. And a very predictable one.

Ms Damond, dressed in her pyjamas, reportedly approached the driver’s side window of the police car when it arrived in the alley and officer Noor shot across his partner at Ms Damond more than once from the passenger seat.

Firing from inside a car. And across your own partner. At a woman wearing pajamas who had reported a sexual assault.

“This was not a woman who would have presented any kind of threat to police. She was a gentle, loving person,” said Joan Hargrave, who lived down the street and befriended Ms Damond a year ago through a shared love of dogs.

She didn't present a threat to police. But maybe she represented a threat to the Somali mindset and the Islamic psyche...

I've watched this event with interest. The BLM crowd is screaming about how fast the process works when a black cop shoots a white woman. Hate to tell you, it's moving slow. And people are still putting out stuff with no support or justification (see part about him being Muslim).

Again, let this process play out. The officer has rights, the shooting needs to be investigated to insure it was justified, an if not, the legal process again the officer can begin.

Again, this is why we don’t rush to judge an event.

I’ve been hosting this blog for 8 years and the post that got the most traffic was on another incident where the cop was seen to be in the wrong. I’ve learned over the years to wait this out, you have to see all the evidence in an event.


In 2016, we were introduced to the latest Youtube/BLM celebrity, Diamond Reynolds, the girlfriend of Philando Castile. When I first saw this video, my first thought was “How cold…her boyfriend is bleeding out and all she is concerned about is getting on Facebook live.” Well, after the officer was put on trial and found not guilty, the video from the officer was released. A few things I would like to point out.

1:05 Starts talking to him

1:39 Officer Yanez tells Castile, “Don’t reach for it man!”

1:40 The officer loudly tells Castile, “Don’t pull it out!”

1:42 Officer Yanez pulls his weapon

1:43 Officer Yanez fires

2:07 He calls for assistance and medics

5:00 The supervisor talks control and moves Officer Castile away.

6:11 Back-up officers pull Castile out and start chest compressions.

8:50 Ambulance arrives.

When I first watched Ms Reynolds video, I had a question of why didn’t the officer call for medical support. But I also knew this was one side of what happened, so I should hold judgement until we see the dash cam video and other evidence is presented. Now that I see this I can say Officer Yanez acted quickly and properly, asking for backup and medical assistance. The back up arrived within three minutes and relive Yanez, and conduct first aid on Castile. In less than seven minutes an ambulance.

And after seeing this, I see no issue with the officer’s actions. It’s my opinion, but to say the least I’m in doubt the sincerity of his girlfriend after her only though of after her boyfriend was wounded was to get this on live stream. And it is also the judgement of the jury. Does this make the man "innocent," no. It means, in the eyes of the law, he is not guilty.

One other point I would make about this. I carry a pistol pretty much everywhere I go. If I am pulled over, the first thing I do it put my hands out of the window and announce, "Officer, my hands are where you can see them. I am armed." I present my ID and he knows he has a "friendly." Carrying a weapon is a responsibly and you must think of things such as what to do when confronted by a law enforcement officer. I have to wonder if Mr. Castile ever thought that situation through. I would think that should be on his mine seeing he had been stopped for traffic over fifty times.

To anyone who carries a weapon, or wants to, think before you do. To all my fellow cops, be safe out there.

The limits of "De-Escalating"

One of the constant rephrains from the cop haters (for lack of a better term) is "Police need to learn to 'de-escalate' the situation..." OK, here is what can happen if "de-escalating" fails:

Denver officer shot early Saturday morning after attempting to calm down man in crisis

Suspect also shot and is in surgery

A Denver Police Department officer was in stable condition after he was shot Saturday morning while attempting to calm down a man “in crisis.”

Police tried to defuse the situation before the man shot an officer, hitting him in the leg, Deputy Chief Matt Murray said. Officers returned fire, hitting the suspect. Both the officer and suspect were transported to separate hospitals and have undergone surgery. Both are stable however the man remains in critical condition.

“It really appears that he was having a personal crisis and in our attempts to try to defuse that, he made decisions to make the situation get to where we are,” Murray said...

The cop haters put out a lie that cops shot first, ask questions later. Bull, if only for the fact they know what they have to loose (felony conviction, loss of career, pension, family, etc). And over the last 20 years agencies across the land have trained more officers to deal with people in mental crisis. However, "de-ewcalating" techniques have their limit and, again, there are Monday morning quarterbacks to spare. To them I'll just ask, "Tell us how to do it on Sunday."

Officer, glad you're gonna recover.

Shoot or don't shoot, put together well....

In discussing this case, a fellow officer said he was already charged three times for guns or drugs since January 1st, 2017. Yet somehow he is out on streets. I wonder why. Could be that gang bangers have no fear of the broken judicial system in Baltimore, where the district attorney (excuse me, state's attorney) is more interested in getting her time on camera and riding on the backs of destroyed cops lives than working for the citizens of the area.

Now thankfully the officer is safe and there is an excellent video showing the punk had a weapon and was turning on him. But don't worry, the family will sue, the city will settle and the local race baiting poverty pimps will go on to the next miscarriage of justice. But watch this video:



A recent article on the issue:

18-year-old's fatal shooting by Baltimore police becomes flash point in debate over repeat offenders

For the third time in a month, 18-year-old Curtis Deal had been arrested on gun or drug charges. Judge Nicole Taylor wanted to be sure the young man understood what was expected if she released him to wait for trial.

"You're not going out at night, you're not going to get food, you're not going to meet your girlfriend. You're in your house," Taylor told him at Monday's bail review hearing, raising her voice.

"I'm giving you an opportunity to go to school and not be in jail pending this trial. The curfew is 1 p.m., 7 days a week."

Deal said he understood. Taylor wished him luck.

The next day about 3 p.m., Deal was fatally shot by a Baltimore police detective after allegedly jumping out of a vehicle being tailed by officers and fleeing through the same neighborhood where he'd been arrested the week before. Police said the detective chasing Deal shot him because he feared for his own life. The officer's body camera captured Deal pointing his gun at the detective just before the shooting.

Almost immediately, the circumstances of Deal's release became a flash point in the growing debate in Baltimore over perceived leniency for repeat gun offenders.

"It shows dysfunction, I believe, in our criminal justice system," said Mayor Catherine Pugh. "People who have those many gun charges probably should not be on our streets..."

I'm recalling the astonishment of the NY Times (it may have been Time, six of one, half-dozen of another) when they couldn't understand crime was dropping but prisons were filled. Go figure.

If the punk was in jail he would be alive right now. But thanks to a judge not getting the point he's a lost cause and letting him go, we dies like another kid in Da Hood.

Good news on the civil front...

In the last few years we have seen the spectical of one lie after another on police, the greatest one being, "Hands Up! Don't Shoot!" Remember when Michael Brown's mother attacked his grandmother, when granny was selling Justice for Michael Brown t-shirts? What's wrong Mom, you're trying to live off your dead son. Hell, Grandma was doing your job.

Well, not to be outdone trying to live off her dead son,

Federal Judge E. Richard Webber Orders Release of Documentation In Michael Brown Case

St Louis, MO – Federal judge, E. Richard Webber, has ordered the parents of Michael Brown to turn over requested medical and education records in their wrongful-death lawsuit. Their son was killed by former Ferguson Officer Darren Wilson in an officer-involved shooting in 2014 in Ferguson, Missouri.

According to Fox2 Now St Louis, U.S. District Judge E. Richard Webber issued the order on Wednesday, over the protests of his parents, Michael Brown, Sr., and Lezley McSpadden. The records that have been requested are: the parents’ medical records for the past five years, their son’s education records, and certain medical documents.

According to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Judge Webber said that the documentation must be turned over to defense attorneys by Tuesday. He said “The court will not limit the medical records to treatment sought by the plaintiffs for damages specifically related to this matter because (the) defendants will need to evaluate whether the claimed injuries actually occurred as a result of the death of their son.”

The documentation was requested by the defense attorneys who represent the City of Ferguson, the former Police Officer who was involved, and the former Police Chief of the Ferguson Police Department. In the lawsuit, Brown’s parents state they have “sustained permanent injuries including mental anguish” since his death.

Judge Webber dismissed the parents’ claim that the release of the records was “harassing and invasive” by further stating “Repeatedly asserting the same objections to each request is not enough to protect against disclosure.” Attorneys for Brown’s parents have argued that the death of their son deprived them of financial support through his future potential wages. Attorneys for the defendants have countered that Brown’s complete medical records are necessary and relevant in determining his ‘potenital life expectancy and future income...’

Gee, having to justify why you are taking money from people. I've seen people who have lost a child and normally they don't want to be reminded of the fact. But this woman and the step-dad seem to have no issue with it.

Also, remember how State's Attorney Marilyn Mosby filed trumped up charges against six cops in the Freddy Gray case. And she got her ass handed to her, 4 acquittals, and two dropped cases. Well, things are looking better for the officers:'

Officers’ Lawsuit Against Mosby Could Have Unprecedented Impact

BALTIMORE (WJZ) — The lawsuit that five Baltimore City police officers brought against State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby could have an unprecedented impact on her office. WJZ’s Mike Hellgren reports it faces some tough legal hurdles...

...The judge signaled he was dropping some of the officers’ claims against Mosby, but was still considering whether allegations of negligent and malicious prosecution would stand.

“It’s very nerve-wracking when you’re a political figure and a figurehead like she is,” said Warren Alperstein, legal analyst.

Alperstein watched the Freddie Gray-related trials unfold. He says if the officers’ lawsuit moves forward, it could have a disastrous impact on the State’s Attorney’s Office.

“You can bet that the officers and the attorneys are champing at the bit to get Mrs. Mosby under oath,” said Alperstein.

Where Mosby could face problems is in her unusual role as an investigator in Freddie Gray’s death, and that could strip her of her immunity against the lawsuit.

The officers argue Mosby provided false information about what happened to Freddie Gray, and they plan to grill her if they can get her on the witness stand.

“In a civil case like this, you as a defendant don’t have that right. You must testify or be held in contempt of court,” said Alperstein. “It is unprecedented. It is unheard of.”

The officers are also suing the sheriff. His attorneys say he relied on information from the State’s Attorney’s Office to fill out the statements of probable cause in the charges against the officers....

I hope they don't settle. I want to see her squirm on a cross examination. And then have her department bled dry after a multi-million dollar settlement.

Good luck guys.

Shoot, don't shoot, or die...

Make your decision quick. That decision may be your last.

These officers responded to a call for service and this man came out, with a knife, screaming "Time to die!" Tell me libtards, DOJ and law professors, what "de-escelation" technique would you use in the, may one second, you have before the man stabs you? Come on, get out there and show us how it's done!

Notice libtards, after justifiably shooting this man, what do they do. Apply first aid and tell him to "stick with me." I wonder if you would be like Carl Rowan, who writes multiple stories about the need for gun control, yet shoots an unarmed man in his pool.

Good work NYPD.

2016's final Darwin Award nominee!!!!!

WAFB 9 News Baton Rouge, Louisiana News, Weather, Sports

Man says he was shot while testing 'theory' about police brutality

Thursday, December 29th 2016

BAKERSFIELD, CA (KBAK/CNN) – A man who was shot by police last week after being pulled over says he wanted to prove to his friend that police officers are good people.

Last Monday, 29-year-old Jose Vaca was pulled over while driving with a friend. He got out of the car holding a rifle, which he’d purchased at a flea market and was not legally allowed to have...

OK, the reporter seems to mention this without much judgement. I think it's a safe assumption that Mr Vaca is a convicted felon and he's "not legally allowed" to possess a firearm. See comments at the bottom.

"...I exit my vehicle, I come to the front of the police vehicle, I put my butt of the rifle on the floor and I just put my hand up,” Vaca said.

The weapon startled the police officers, who opened fire without warning, according to Vaca.

"Soon as I hit the ground, I just attempted to play dead, and then they fired a couple more shots at me from the back as I was lying on the ground,” he said.

Vaca says he never planned to shoot the officers. Instead, he thought this would be an opportunity to prove a point he’d made to a friend months ago about police brutality.

"First thing that came to my mind is I'm already going to get pulled over. I know they're most likely going to take me in, but I’m going to try my theory real quick and see that it's true so she can believe there’s good officers in the world,” he said.

I think I speak for a lot of cops when I say, "We appreciate the sentiment on the profession. However, next time you get pulled over by a cop...don't have a gun.

Vaca says he was shot 12 times, with three of the bullets passing completely through his body; though the police report says only nine shots were fired. The man says it’s a “blessing” he’s alive.

Looking back, Vaca considers his experiment ill-conceived because it went “completely bad.” However, the man says he still believes there are good police officers in the world.

"They didn't know what to expect,” he said.

Nighter did the officer. You don't like to be surprised, we don't like to be surprised.

Vaca is currently being held on $400,000 bail, booked on 11 different criminal counts

People don't get 400K bail for a weapon's possession charge, and with "11 different criminal courts," that tells me he is not full coming with his story....

Why, shocking, he wasn't complete in his statement:

Man shot by police charged with attempted murder

Jose Vaca appeared in Kern County Superior Court expecting to be charged with unlawful possession of a firearm and gang participation, but Kern County Deputy District Attorney William Schlaerth added a new, much more serious charge.

"We added attempted murder," said Schlaerth...

...Vaca was pulled for a traffic stop on Dec. 19 at Oswell and Niles streets. In a jailhouse interview, Vaca admitted to having a rifle in his car.

He said he deliberately approached officers carrying the weapon to test a theory he said he had about police brutality. Vaca claims he never pointed the loaded weapon at officers. He said officers never told him to stop before they began firing....

He got out with the weapon in his hand, "...deliberately approached officers carrying the weapon.."
If you don't got a winner, at least top five!

Scary officer involved shooting....

As the investigation of Alton Sterling is on going, some facts have come up. He was a convicted felon, he was selling illegally copied DVDs (another crime) and he was showing off a gun that night.

I say that because we have an excellent video of how quickly officers can get involved with a deadly force incident.

From the Savannah Morning News:

Grand jury: Savannah-Chatham police 'legally justified' in fatal October shooting

Chatham County grand jury finds police officers in clear after traffic stop resulted in fatal shooting

The Chatham County grand jury on Monday found that Savannah-Chatham police officers were “legally justified” when they used deadly force to stop Tyrie Cuyler from fleeing a traffic stop in October.

“Grand jury finds that no further action is required,” the March term panel said in a civil finding returned after presentation of evidence Monday.

That presentation by Chatham County District Attorney Meg Heap and Chief Assistant Greg McConnell included body camera footage from officers Ruben Colon, Michael Gonzales and John Hauber at the scene. (Watch portions of the body camera video below.)

A fourth officer, Daniel Kang, did not activate his body camera.

Cuyler, 25, was shot and killed in a gun battle with Savannah-Chatham police officers shortly before midnight Oct. 27 after a routine traffic stop turned deadly.

Colon and Gonzales were shot and wounded by Cuyler before he was fatally shot when police returned fire at the intersection of 37th Street and Ogeechee Road.

Both officers survived.

Georgia Bureau of Investigation agents were called in that night and conducted the investigation, referring their findings Heap.

The March term grand jury on April 20 recommended a civil inspection and investigation into whether the officers’ use of force was justified and notified Savannah-Chatham Police Chief Joseph Lumpkin....

Lumpkin declined an invitation to respond to the presentment before it was published, which by law he is entitled to do, Heap said. She added that Lumpkin did appear before the grand jury considering the evidence.

...In their findings involving Cuyler, which the GBI said illustrated Cuyler’s “desperate motivation to use unjustified deadly force,” the GBI found that Cuyler:

Was armed with a .38-caliber Smith & Wesson revolver which contained three spent shell casings; the handle was wrapped with electrical tape in an apparent attempt to not leave fingerprints.

Had 16 individually packed baggies in his pocket containing cocaine … the possession of which is a felony.

Was a two-time convicted felon.

Was arrested on March 18, 2015, in McIntosh County for possession of a firearm by a convicted felony

Raped a female inside her West Duffy Street residence on Oct. 21, 2015. The case was still under investigation when he died.

Had raped another female inside her East Duffy Street home on Aug. 9, 2015. The case was under investigation at the time of his death...

I point out the convicted felon because he cannot, by law, possess a firearm. I see that "common sense gun regulation" really helped keep a gun from a turd's hands.

But look at the video. It takes less tan 3 seconds from the time he Cuyler that all the rounds are fired. I posted a couple of says ago on how fast a suspect can fire, even with several offices already drawn down on him. Scary, to say the least.

Remember, watch their hands and be ready. I'll justify why I was pointing my weapon at someone and not firing. Better that letter and my department's letter to my widow.

Be safe friends.

An example of why you can't "shoot the gun out of his hands..."

Here is a quick video of how things can go to hell quickly.

Jeffrey Cave Holding Gun At Side Is Able To Shoot First, Two Officers Shot

Joe GritOn October 1, 2016

Kingman, Arizona – On Thursday, a team of Bullhead City Police officers in full tactical gear confronted Jeffrey Cave, who was holding a gun down at his side. Despite the numerous officers who already had their sights on Cave, he still managed to shoot two of the officers before they could react and return fire.

Bullhead City Police were conducting a search warrant at the residence of Jeffrey Cave, 53, near Miami Avenue and Stockton Hill Road.The officers were searching for a stolen firearm. The team of officers approached the door of the home and announced themselves. Jeffrey Cave then came to the door with a firearm in-hand.

After officers gave Jeffrey Cave many repeated orders to drop the gun, Cave pointed the weapon towards the officers and shot two of the officers. A quick exchange of gunfire occurred, during which Jeffrey Cave was killed. Detective Dennis Gilbert was critically wounded but is now in stable condition after coming out of surgery.

A second officer was also shot, but his body armor saved him from injury. BCPD’s Emily Fromelt advised, “Lieutenant James Brice, 58, had one bullet pass through his clothing; however, he was not injured. The officers involved were wearing tactical ballistic body armor and gear during the search warrant.”

One can’t help but point out the similarities between this case and the recent officer-involved shooting a Keith Scott in Charlotte. Scott confronted officers while holding a pistol at his side. Keith Scott also refused repeated orders or drop his gun. Charlotte Police Officer Brentley Vinson finally shot Scott after giving him every chance to surrender and perceiving him as an immediate threat to the lives officers on-scene…

I counted five or six officers, all with their rifles or pistols pointed at the sack of shit, and he still managed to get two rounds off, hitting two officers, within two seconds. Look between the 52 sec and 54 sec mark on the video. Remember, the bad guy has the initiative, he will decide when he will shoot. You must react to him. So be ready for things to turn to shit, quickly. Be safe out there guys.

Another reason I would never live or work in California....

I've often said you couldn't pay me enough to work in California as a cop. In many areas the cost of living is ridiculous, the schools suck, the state government is spending money almost as badly as the Congress and the local politicians are often happy as hell to destroy any cop who takes an action. Case in point.

Los Angeles Police Commission Tells Officers to Run Away, or Else

Run away. If a police officer is confronted by a suspect with a weapon, those entrusted to set policies for the Police Department believe officers should run away. That’s the recent finding from the Los Angeles Police Commission which has turned Monday morning quarterbacking into a weekly agenda item at the three-ring circus they preside over every Tuesday morning.

In the Commission’s most recent decision on an officer-involved shooting, in which a suspect charged at two officers swinging an 8 to 9-inch knife, they faulted the officer for not “redeploying” to “create distance.” In plain English: the officer didn’t run away.

The key facts in this case are not in dispute. A female suspect, armed with an 8 to 9-inch knife, charged at officers, repeatedly ignored commands to stop, and was recorded yelling “shoot me” as she swung her knife from side to side.

The armed suspect quickly closed the gap between her knife and the police officers from 70 feet to less than 5 feet in under 10 seconds. That is when the first officer discharged his service weapon. The second officer involved had only three seconds to respond to the imminent threat. Even the Commission stated that “It was reasonable for Officer C to believe, in the moment when the use of force occurred, that the subject would imminently assault him with the knife.”

So where’s the beef?

The officers didn’t run away. The Commission, armed with video and their own political agenda broke down the footage frame by frame to determine that in the course of seconds, the first officer whose “position initially provided Officer C with a position of tactical advantage” lost the advantage as the suspect charged him. They wrote, “this advantage rapidly diminished as the Subject continued her advance, leaving him with neither distance nor effective cover as the Subject approached the space between two parked vehicles by which Officer C was located.”

Suspect charging from the front. Vehicles on either side. Where do you “redeploy?” Run backwards. This is absurd and it’s dangerous. What happens if the officer loses his footing with a charging suspect? What happens if the suspect runs into a nearby home or store and confronts its occupants with her weapon? What if the suspect also had a concealed gun? What is created when an officer turns tail and runs away is a large target. It’s called a back. The officer would put their lives in further jeopardy by running away if the suspect had a gun. At this close range, running away would create a self-caused danger to the officers and the public...

So I could see what we were talking about I checked out the YouTube video of the shooting.

OK, in 8 seconds (21 to 29) she closes the distance to the officers with an eight inch knife in her hands, while being order to stop by a man with a pistol pointed at her. The officer was blocked between three vehicles and could not easily retreat. He was in a position where he had reasonable fear for life or serious bodily injury, so yes, he could use deadly force.

Sorry the lady is gone, but mental illness is not a license to kill others. I've been Crisis Intervention trained since 2000 and I've had multiple refresher courses since then. Sometimes the techniques do not work and you are left with this.

But don't worry, the civilian sitting on their asses second guessing every decision you had to make instantly...they know best.

Unbelievable.

Tired officers hesitant to shoot black suspects....

Interesting look at the issue. Hey, there are a lot of tired cops out there on the street, and I'm about to take a nap before my shift starts!

New Washington State University study: Even tired cops are more hesitant to shoot black suspects

A new study concludes that officers tend not to be biased against black suspects in resorting to deadly force, even when fatigued and thus potentially more vulnerable to making angry, irrational, and impulsive decisions

The most explosive crisis law enforcement faces today is the allegation that rampant racial bias drives officers’ shooting decisions...

...Indeed, tired cops and rested officers alike are more hesitant to shoot black suspects than to shoot white ones in similar circumstances and to show better judgment in their shooting decisions when black suspects are involved.

“[T]oday’s police officers tend to be operating in a state of heightened awareness of the consequences of shooting a member of a historically oppressed minority group,” the study notes, and their extra caution regarding black suspects is not overridden even by the potentially debilitating effects of fatigue.

Lead author of the study is Dr. Lois James. She and her research associates, Dr. Stephen James and Dr. Bryan Vila, are connected with the Sleep and Performance Research Center at Washington State University in Spokane. A full report on the current study — titled “Does the ‘Reverse Racism Effect’ Withstand the Test of Police Officer Fatigue?” — has been accepted for publication in the peer-reviewed journal Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management. At this writing, the date of publication is pending.

Questions of Fatigue and Race

In an earlier study led by Lois James, scientific testing of a sampling of white officers revealed that overall they “hesitated significantly longer before shooting armed suspects who were black, compared to armed subjects who were white or Hispanic.” Also they were 25 times less likely to erroneously shoot unarmed black subjects than they were unarmed white subjects.

In contrast to activists’ vociferous claims, James reported that the research found that officer participants “even when they had strong implicit biases against black suspects were more hesitant when faced with black suspects in a simulator.” This hesitancy has been referred to as “counter bias” or the “reverse racism effect.”

Still, in light of the well-documented negative effects of fatigue on LEOs’ performance in other realms, James wondered if the hesitancy to shoot black suspects would vanish if involved officers were tired when their shooting decisions were made.

In other words, if an encounter occurred when an officer was dragging from a long shift, a crushing workload, or chronic sleep deprivation — surely a realistic possibility — would he or she still be “more hesitant to shoot black suspects compared to white suspects” and still be less likely to draw a deadly “mistake-of-fact” conclusion where black suspects were involved?

James guessed not. “[T]he parts of the brain responsible for executive functions such as moral decision making and impulse control tend to be affected the quickest by fatigue,” she explains.

So specifically, she hypothesized that officers would be “significantly quicker to shoot armed suspects” and “significantly more likely to mistakenly shoot unarmed suspects” when fatigued than when rested. And she expected the racial difference favoring black suspects to disappear when officers were tired; in effect, heightening the danger to black individuals...

...Surprise!

To James’s surprise, she told Force Science News, “My hypotheses weren’t supported” by the results. Instead, “Officers’ counter bias remained strong, even under conditions of fatigue.”

• Officers were “marginally” (although “not significantly”) quicker to shoot when fatigued than when rested — but on average they still took fractions of a second longer before deciding to shoot armed black suspects than armed white suspects.
• As to mistake-of-fact shootings, “the officers were more likely to shoot unarmed white suspects than unarmed black suspects in both fatigued and rested conditions,” James writes. Rested, “officers collectively shot 31 unarmed white suspects (3.6 percent of the total) and 2 unarmed black suspects (0.3 percent).” In the fatigued condition, they inexplicably showed an improvement in judgment, collectively shooting “23 unarmed white suspects (2.8 percent) and 0 unarmed black suspects (0.0 percent)”
• “No significant differences [in results] were observed [as to] participant gender and race,” the researchers report. “The key indication of the findings,” James writes, “is that both officers’ decisions to shoot and their tendency to be more hesitant to shoot black suspects than white suspects appeared to be unaffected by officer fatigue...”

Interesting look and if anything, this shows a form of the Ferguson effect in action. And that is scary. But there are cops out there worried if they pull a gun they will be the next YouTube sensation and the US Department of "Just-Us" will make it their mission in life to destroy them. I had similar worried two weeks ago when we had three suspects in a car, refusing to come out, and we were being videotaped by the local population.

If accurate (he does call for "more research," aka "give me more money") this is scary as hell, to say the least. Be safe out there guys!

How to draw and not draw...

WARNING GRAPHIC:



The narrator comments on both instances where an officer had to draw a weapon on a suspect who had his pistol out already. One point I would make is in the second example, the suspect had multiple potential shooters to cover, while in the first one he had only one. But it's a really good overview of two very deadly situations.

It's been a bad two weeks. In the Houston area we lost two cops, yesterday a deputy outside of New Orleans was murdered (the sack of shit murdered the man because he was on parole an didn't want to go back to jail!) and two deputies in Louisiana were shot while serving a warrant. Looks like they will be ok.

Be safe out there friends.

A shootout in Baton Rouge...

Gives you a great look at how fast this goes down. Scary.

Be vigilant out there.

Real life pistol training...with real bullets...

I've done training with "blue guns", modified pistols with chalk rounds, with my rifle (unloaded and with the bolt removed) and a laser gun. But this is incredible.

New gun training program in Eastpointe uses real bullets, scenarios

It's a first of its kind shooting exercise and it's right here in metro Detroit.

EASTPOINTE, Mich. (WJBK) - Imagine experiencing first-hand what it's like to dodge bullets. Would you be ready to fight back?

A new gun training program uses real guns and real bullets to give trainees a feel for what it's like to be in a real gun fight.

"It is the next evolution of training and it's as close to real as you can possibly get," says Bill Kucyk, the owner of Action Impact Gun Ranges. Kucyk will soon roll out the new training system for both civilians and those in law enforcement. The trainees and actors use real guns loaded with real bullets.

"For me, even having a ton of shooting experience, some of it - I don't want to say goes out the window - but in a stress scenario you kind of stop thinking about all that," says gun owner Stefan Bahri. You can watch his training exercise in Randy Wimbley's video report in the video player above. Bahri was trying to get back to his car when two men confronted him and tried to pick a fight, when one of them grabbed a gun.

Those moments where the stress kicks in is what kills. Literally.

"You saw a situation in Oklahoma where an officer thought he was grabbing his Taser but instead he grabbed his gun and shot somebody," Kucyk says. "That's because that officer stressed at that point in time. So exposing officers to this, we'll get a lot of that bad stuff out of the way, we'll discover it in advance, and then we can take corrective action.

"We put (multiple) races into our scenarios and what we're trying to determine is, did you have a pre-conceived notion to shoot someone of a race simply because of their race? And if we can identify some of those biases, as you refer to them, then we can correct them."

Even though a ballistic wall separates the trainee and actors, they are still able to come face-to-face, engage one another and, if it comes to it, use their guns.

"It's one thing to stand on the range and shoot at a target, but when you're confronted with a person and your brain is going; you're thinking; you're talking; it's a whole different scenario," says Oswald Leslie of Action Impact.

FOX 2's Randy Wimbley went through three different scenarios. The first two he tried to duck behind cover when the actor went for his gun. In the third scenario, Randy drew and fired as soon as he saw him reach for it. You can watch in the video player above.

"I will say in this, in the last go-around you had a couple under your belt," said Ian Murphy, critiquing Wimbley. Murphy is a firearm instructor with Action Impact. "What I did notice was your draw was a lot faster; you were more mentally prepared."

"That's the value of this training. So that it can stress you, find a way to correct you so that in a real-life situation perhaps it will save your life," says Kucyk. "When I say I want to save lives I am not kidding. I want to save officers' lives and I want to save civilians' lives."

Kucyk says he already has several police departments here in Metro Detroit interested in this training which will be rolled out sometime this summer. Until now, the only places this training has been used was in North Carolina and Virginia with members of law enforcement and military.

Hope they send an office to Houston. I would love to go through it.

A new look at Use of Force and Training.

Since the justified shooting of Mike Brown was used by the Obama Justice Department and the idiot who currently occupies the White House (no, this is not objective, not lying about it) used it to inflame people and led to riots and unjustified legal action against police, the usual suspects have said we need to relook at Use of Force. I'm the first to say doctrine and training should adjust as time goes on. In my lifetime an officer could fire a warning shot at a fleeing suspect and that was stopped. Gotta say that was right, the bullet will end up somewhere.

That as context for my comments, here is an article on a recent think tank forum on the issue.

A Revolution in Use-of-Force Policy and Training?

A battle is brewing among law enforcement leadership organizations about whether and how to change police use-of-force policy and training to be kinder and gentler. As the public, the media, and law enforcement professionals grapple with the persistent post-Ferguson issues, you on the street are surely scratching your heads.

In January, the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF), a Washington, D.C.-based think tank, weighed in with "30 Guiding Principles" at its meeting titled, "Use of Force: Taking Policing to a Higher Standard." These guidelines for use of force and use-of-force training sparked a lot of conversation among officers and those who believe officers have a tendency to use too much force.

"There is a real mismatch between what community standards are, what the community expects, what they think the law should be, versus what the training and the law allows for," Vanita Gupta, the Department of Justice's assistant attorney general for civil rights, told the Washington Post. Gupta said a national conversation about police objective reasonableness was potentially "revolutionary."

PERF Executive Director Chuck Wexler wrote in an e-mail to all PERF members: "In short, PERF's members are telling us that we need to take use-of-force policies and training to a higher standard than what is currently required by the court system. The Supreme Court's landmark ruling from 1989 in Graham v. Connor provides guidance on when police officers are allowed to use deadly force, but it doesn't provide guidance on how to avoid use of deadly force. In certain types of situations that occur thousands of times a year, police are confronted with persons wielding knives, rocks, or other weapons—not guns. In these cases, we are asking police departments to begin rethinking strategies and equipping officers with the appropriate training and tactics to defuse these potentially volatile encounters, in a way that ensures that both the officers and those they are dealing with may survive the encounter."...

First, the issue in Graham v. Connor was not use of options other than deadly force, but if force was reasonable and justified in the case of Mr. Graham being detained for investigation. Well anyone with some knowledge of the law and SCOTUS knows that the court generally goes to get pains to limit the ruling to issues raised by the complainant.

Some of the research that was used as the foundation of the PERF guidelines resulted from a trip to Scotland by several U.S. law enforcement leaders, to see how business is done over there. Scotland doesn't have a gun-crime problem, but they confront a lot of knives.

As if on cue, within 24 hours two police officers (one with the New York Police Department and one with the California Highway Patrol) were attacked and wounded by knife-wielding suspects.

The Wrong Track

No doubt some (perhaps many) PERF members agree with the organization's 30 Guiding Principles. But not everyone agrees with all of them. As a longtime PERF member and also a longtime member of the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), I and quite a few other PERF and IACP members I've spoken with do not necessarily think PERF is on the right track with some of its specific recommendations.

Here are a few comments I received in early February from police chiefs, trainers, and use-of-force experts:

"Why should my safety not be more important than anyone else's?"

"A smart cop reading through this bulls--- will salute smartly, smile, promise compliance, and then go out and do nothing, or as close to nothing as he can do without being fired or ruining his career."

"I agree with the stated concern of how to 'raise the standard' and still have a consistent standard that officers can understand… But I don't know how you change the standard for fast-moving situations where the officer is faced with a quick, threatening movement, even when the perceived threat turns out not to be a threat."

"I was sorry to see PERF not address training in basic skills."

"Much of the material is good, but it lacks that practical side that only comes from spirited, well-rounded, and educated debate."

Dissenting Views

The IACP quickly responded to PERF in an e-mail to its membership: "[T]he IACP is extremely concerned about calls to require law enforcement agencies to unilaterally, and haphazardly, establish use-of-force guidelines that exceed the "objectively reasonable" standard set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court nearly 30 years ago (Graham v. Connor). The creation of a multitude of differing policies and use-of-force standards throughout the United States would, undoubtedly, lead to both confusion and hesitation on behalf of law enforcement officers, which in turn would threaten both their safety and that of the citizens they are sworn to protect… As we move forward in examining law enforcement's policies and training procedures regarding use of force it is imperative that any reforms be carefully researched and evidence-based."

The next day, the Police Foundation released an infographic titled, "When Can the Police Use Force—and What Happens When They Do?" And in related remarks, the Police Foundation wrote: "Use of force is governed by laws at the federal and local levels, and its justification is dependent on the reasonable perspective of the involved officers at the very moment force was used—not on thoughtful, retrospective examination and questioning. Articulating and explaining this information to the public is critical because these incidents bring challenging and complex considerations that are often not apparent to the public. With this infographic, the public can be better informed about when the police can use force and how police are held accountable for use-of-force situations."

The Association of Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs (ALADS) weighed in a few days later: "'Hands up, don't shoot!' This is not a new protest group chant, but what law enforcement officers might be required to do, backing away with their hands up when confronting a violent situation… [T]he PERF proposals continue to focus all responsibility for the use of force, including deadly force, on the deputy or officer and absolve of any responsibility the suspect whose actions necessitated the use of force. In virtually every single instance of the use of force, had the suspect simply complied with the commands of law enforcement, use of force would not have been necessary."

The ALADS statement also quoted Executive Director Jim Pasco of the Fraternal Order of Police: "We don't believe that we should just move headlong based on PERF having taken a trip to Scotland, that we should just turn policing in a country, God knows how many times bigger than Scotland, totally on its head. We're not going to stand by and let police officers be sacrificed on the altar of political correctness."

Steps Too Far

There is much that is easy to support in the PERF principles. De-escalation training, slowing down incidents where circumstances allow it, intervening when another officer is over the line with use of force, thorough incident investigation and review processes, training that reflects agency values, improved training on handling the mentally ill… These are examples of items that I believe most law enforcement professionals support.

But misstatements by PERF about the so-called "21-foot rule" and misstatements about officer-involved shootings following failed TASER attempts in imminent deadly force situations make one wonder if anybody who has actually faced deadly threats was involved in the drafting of the document. Further, the 21-foot rule isn't a "rule," it's just a poor label for a reaction time experiment, and it most certainly does not mean that you always shoot a knife-holding suspect that is less than 21 feet from you.

Then there's the baffling PERF suggestion that, "If an encounter requires a use of force, officers should start at the lowest level of force that is possible and safe. Officers should never do anything to escalate a situation themselves."

Pardon me. Use of force that is safe? Established law says no use of force is "safe." In Garrett v. Athens Clarke County, 378 F.3d 1274, 1280, n.12 (11th Cir. 2004), the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled: "Almost every use of force, however minute, poses some risk of death."

And officers should never escalate? Folks, when verbalization fails, you escalate. When soft-hands-on tactics fail, you escalate. And you don't fight to a draw, you fight to win, quickly, which necessarily means using more force than is being used against you.

Getting Past the Noise

All of this rancor among police organizations over use-of-force policy and guidelines comes about in a tumultuous time of increased second-guessing of officers, rising violent crime rates, prolific videos, Black Lives Matter activism, fired officers and police chiefs, criminal prosecution of officers, controversy about "de-policing," and even politicized Super Bowl half-time entertainment.

Much of the current noise surrounds the question of whether law enforcement officers should be "warriors" or "guardians." People seem to have different definitions of these terms, so we talk past each other. Someone must bridge the Warrior-Guardian definitional divide between police leaders and the police on the street. We can't have a good discussion until we are on the same definitional page.

According to the Random House Dictionary, the term "warrior" has two meanings. The first applies to the military at war. The second is applicable to policing: "The term 'warrior' is often associated with images of power, confidence, accomplishment, integrity, chivalry, honor and integrity… They are disciplined… They develop mental focus… They develop an attitude of persistence… They train."

Guardians adopt a service mindset over a crime-fighting mindset, using patience and restraint while maintaining the capability to use force when appropriate....

Greg Meyer is a retired Los Angeles Police Department captain who consults nationwide on police procedures and tactics. He is a longtime member of the POLICE advisory board.

I've been off the net the last year as I've finished my masters and I'm reading up on this issue. Coming from most of my life on the streets, I look with jaundice eye at people sitting in a hotel conference room judging the actions of officers as they make instant lie and death decisions as their life is concerned. That being said, it is good to constantly re-evalutate training, doctrine, etc. But with the current administration and the polarized/politized Justice Department, guidance coming out now is not to be trusted.