Complete Situational Unawareness

[Kleanbore]

Yesterday, my wife and I went to a computer store just outside the city limits of St. Louis.

The neighborhood is a little iffy, and I really try to observe and evaluate everyone in sight before parking.

Yesterday, there was a new SUV from a sheriff's department in the lot. A good sign.

As I walked toward the building, a man came around the corner. Black uniform with an embroidered badge. A modern facial hair style. Glock on the hip. Cell phone in one hand, and talking with the other .

He came to within a few feet of me, and without appearing to notice my presence at all, and turned back.

He was concentrating entirely on the phone call.

He walked in little figure eights, going out onto the sidewalk while walking right next to the corner of the building, and coming back, repeatedly, oblivious.

As he approached close to me on one of his rounds, the door to the store opened, and an elderly woman bounced out through the door after having fallen from her transport chair when it hit a bump. I expected him to help. Nothing doing. He didn't even notice that it had happened.

His female partner jumped from the SUV and ran to help. He looked confused, seeming to wonder what she was doing out of the car.

He then started trying to appear helpful, his false tone betraying his lack of caring.

I see people talking on cell phones and texting in complete oblivion to their surroundings all the time, but--an LEO?

Open carrying?

Five and a half years ago I posted the following on situational awareness:

"Before I got into this a few years ago, the only things I thought about were staying out of questionable neighborhoods and avoiding getting close to suspicious-looking people. Good ideas, but not sufficient. A few more for the sake of discussion:

• Do not head outside to investigate an ominous noise at night unless you have to.
• Take a look around a parking lot before you stop your car; if things do not look right, do not stop.
• Avoid parking in remote areas or next to vehicles that may conceal violent criminal actors.
• Keep your head on a swivel at all times, and particularly as you get into or out of your car.
• Get in and get going.
• If you have to sit in your car to wait for someone, lock the doors and stay very observant.
• If someone seems to be following you in your car, do not head home.
• If something seems amiss when you get home, do not go inside.
• Avoid walking close to the openings of alleys or close to the corners of buildings.
• Stay off the cell phone, and do not text while walking.
• Keep the ear buds out of your ears.
• When you are using an ATM or fueling or loading your car, do not let your concentration cause you to lose awareness of what is going on in your surroundings.
• To the extent possible, avoid going anywhere you would not be comfortable unarmed.
• If you are approaching or are approached by suspicious looking people, cross the street or head into a building; if they continue toward you, beware.
• If someone you do not know approaches you for some reason, keep your eyes on his hands, and stay alert for "the other guy."

"Thanks to Massad Ayoob, Michael Bane, Tom Givens, Kathy Jackson, Michael Janich, Rob Pincus, Mike Seeklander, and their associates for their helpful suggestions on these points over the years. And thanks to the late Jim Cirillo."

I would add "Be alert for anyone in a store, perhaps pushing a cart, who does not appear to be actually shopping. Could be a robber or an accomplice."

Any other suggestions?

Comments?

 

[MedWheeler]

I've seen this fairly often, too. The healthcare system that runs the hospitals here actually has a very efficient security system in place, and quite a few of the officers are recently-retired LE. I know and chat with a few of them, and frequently find myself able to approach one or two of them completely unnoticed. I tease them about it sometimes, telling them not to let me sneak up on them. I give these guys credit in the private security industry; healthcare security officers are not your typical "mall cops." They deal (and go hands-on with) some seriously sketchy people.

 

[Rick McC.]

All very good rcommendations.

That story is almost unbelievable!

 

[hdwhit]

Kleanbore wrote:
Five and a half years ago I posted the following on situational awareness:

What you posted on this site five years ago is irrelevant to your current post (unless you have some reason to believe the officer who is the subject of your current post actually read that prior post). So, let's let that go by the wayside.

Having done that, let's look at the remainder of the post:

The neighborhood is a little iffy, and I really try to observe and evaluate everyone in sight before parking.

What do you mean by "iffy"?

Are you saying the racial makeup of the neighborhood was different from you? Or were simply trying to say the neighborhood had a lower median income than you were used to experiencing?

If you felt that you might be physically assaulted simply because of your obvious income, then welcome to urban America in 2019. Your obvious income makes you a target.

Yesterday, there was a new SUV from a sheriff's department in the lot. A good sign.

Why?

Everything you post in the following seven paragraphs suggests that, but for the officer's [assumed] "partner", this was - based on the officer's performance - actually NOT a good sign.

In fact, a parked police vehicle whose occupant(s) will do nothing - is meaningless.

As I walked toward the building, a man came around the corner. Black uniform with an embroidered badge. A modern facial hair style. Glock on the hip. Cell phone in one hand, and talking with the other .

So, someone in a black uniform with a "modern facial hair style" is okay? Are you really asking us to believe that had the man "in aa blofficer been an African-American with a large "afro" hairstyle it wouldn't have been okay?

Are police officers "okay" if they have a "modern facial hair style"? Is so, you should thank your lucky stars you never crossed your southern border and ended up in front of me since I look like "Papa Smurf".

Also, you say the officer had a cellphone in one hand and was talking with "the other".
Talking with "the other" what?

• The other mouth?
  
• His other hand?
  
• Perhaps his other brain?

Be careful here. At trial, indirect statements such as these illicit questions such as I posed above and can only serve to impeach the police statements or render them nothing but meaningless babble.

He came to within a few feet of me, and without appearing to notice my presence at all, and turned back.

He was concentrating entirely on the phone call.

So? Do you know what the phone call was about? Who was it with? Was he perhaps getting orders from his superiors? Was there a developing case he needed to know about? Was he perhaps getting updated on a recent case?

Your post assumes the call occupying his attention was personal (or trivial) or was in some other way unrelated to his duty.

But what if your assumption is wrong?

He walked in little figure eights, going out onto the sidewalk while walking right next to the corner of the building, and coming back, repeatedly, oblivious.

As he approached close to me on one of his rounds, the door to the store opened, and an elderly woman bounced out through the door after having fallen from her transport chair when it hit a bump. I expected him to help. Nothing doing. He didn't even notice that it had happened.

Okay. Someone on an intensely personal phone call focused on the call and doesn't notice someone who has fallen (even though their "partner" does and renders appropriate treatment).

His female partner jumped from the SUV and ran to help. He looked confused, seeming to wonder what she was doing out of the car.

You assume the other officer was the man's "partner", but you don't know that.

Assuming they were partners, isn't this exactly the sharing of duties that partners or subordinates are for.

What is your problem with the scenario as it transpired?

He then started trying to appear helpful, his false tone betraying his lack of caring.

I see people talking on cell phones and texting in complete oblivion to their surroundings all the time, but--an LEO?

You have already indicated that you have no idea what the call was about, or its significance. Since you assume the female officer was the male officer's "partner" (and not the other way around) this leads you to a conclusion that may not be accurate. In any event, the old lady received appropriate help from the officer's "partner" (a role you assume the other officer occupied because she 1) was female, or 2) got out of the vehicle second, but actually have no way of knowing).

Frankly, it seems to me you took an assumption as if it were fact and then compounded assumed conclusion on top of assumed conclusion to create a narrative that fit your underlying prejudices and then treated if as if it were an established fact.

 

[Browning]

What you posted on this site five years ago is irrelevant to your current post (unless you have some reason to believe the officer who is the subject of your current post actually read that prior post). So, let's let that go by the wayside.

Maybe he didn’t want people to think he was spamming the same post everywhere.

What do you mean by "iffy"?

Are you saying the racial makeup of the neighborhood was different from you?

What if he was saying that this issue was a possible threat?

Are you saying that people are never targeted for physical attack due to their race?

Or were simply trying to say the neighborhood had a lower median income than you were used to experiencing?

Could be either ... or both. Or none of the above.

If you felt that you might be physically assaulted simply because of your obvious income, then welcome to urban America in 2019. Your obvious income makes you a target.

Actually crime rates are down.

Everything you post in the following seven paragraphs suggests that, but for the officer's [assumed] "partner", this was - based on the officer's performance - actually NOT a good sign.

I think he’s guessing that most officers wouldn’t have the same lackluster performance.

In fact, a parked police vehicle whose occupant(s) will do nothing - is meaningless.

The female officer did something. He said as much.

So, someone in a black uniform with a "modern facial hair style" is okay? Are you really asking us to believe that had the man "in aa blofficer been an African-American with a large "afro" hairstyle it wouldn't have been okay?

Instead of sifting through his post for the mere hint of racial bias it might be better to just guess that he was just giving the reader an idea of what the guy looked like.

It’s called window dressing.

Are police officers "okay" if they have a "modern facial hair style"? Is so, you should thank your lucky stars you never crossed your southern border and ended up in front of me since I look like "Papa Smurf".

I don’t know, would you have noticed his presence and noticed that the woman fell?

Seems to me that this is what he’s drawing attention to, not his skin color. What race he is isn’t even mentioned.

“Modern” could have meant hip hop. The answer is that we don’t know. Why? Because he never told us.

So? Do you know what the phone call was about? Who was it with? Was he perhaps getting orders from his superiors? Was there a developing case he needed to know about? Was he perhaps getting updated on a recent case?

Your post assumes the call occupying his attention was personal (or trivial) or was in some other way unrelated to his duty.

But what if your assumption is wrong?

Maybe he caught part of the conversation that gave him an indication that the call was personal.

Okay. Someone on an intensely personal phone call focused on the call and doesn't notice someone who has fallen (even though their "partner" does and renders appropriate treatment).

Or maybe he was right the first time.

You assume the other officer was the man's "partner", but you don't know that.

Aren’t they each other’s partners? I’m partnered up with a female at work. I’m her “partner” just like she’s my “partner”.

The word doesn’t imply that one is a subordinate and doesn’t have a male/female connotation.

Assuming they were partners, isn't this exactly the sharing of duties that partners or subordinates are for.

Sure, he just noted that the male didn’t notice him or the fallen woman.

What is your problem with the scenario as it transpired?

It’s pretty obvious, that the guy didn’t notice either his presence or the fallen woman.

You have already indicated that you have no idea what the call was about, or its significance.

Actually he never said that he knew what the call was about.

He never said one way or the other. Since the man passed within a few feet of him it’s almost a certainty that he caught part of the conversation.

Since you assume the female officer was the male officer's "partner" (and not the other way around) this leads you to a conclusion that may not be accurate.

It might be accurate. Then again it might not be.

We’ll never know. It’ll remain a mystery.

In any event, the old lady received appropriate help from the officer's "partner" (a role you assume the other officer occupied because she 1) was female, or 2) got out of the vehicle second, but actually have no way of knowing).

Or she just happened to notice and the guy on the phone did not because he had poor situational awareness.

Frankly, it seems to me you took an assumption as if it were fact and then compounded assumed conclusion on top of assumed conclusion to create a narrative that fit your underlying prejudices and then treated if as if it were an established fact.

Frankly it seems to me that you’ve got some issues and a narrative of your own.

 

[Jeb Stuart]

Wow, trying to be politically correct these days is getting very old. Personally am just sick of it. But back to the Post which was about "situational awareness". A good bit of advice in the first post by the OP and in my opinion one of the most important topics in the world we live in today. Maybe even more important that actually carrying a firearm. And like any other thing in life, it takes dedicated practice. A concentrated effort for at least 90 days to make it a habit. I was in the electronic security industry for decades. Hundreds of classes in Surveillance cameras and security etc. For instance, one of the major causes of murder for women is at the workplace. Walking to their car from work etc. Jealous boyfriend, husbands, divorce, rapes etc. The OP gave some great advice, use it or just move on.
For folks that spend a lot of time in the woods hunting and scouting for deer for instance.Ever notice that you can spot a deer when others cannot see even looking at the pointed direction? Same with every day life. I left a store one night, and was doing my usual situational awarness when I spotted a slight movement near my car. Yep, some gun bent down and trying to break in. I followed through with the correct procedure with my carry and the guy took off running. Just one example.
In today's world, it really is a jungle with predators. and they can be anywhere, near your home, the convenience store, atm, parking lots, at work and on and on. Even taking the dog for a walk in YOUR safe neighborhood. Stay alert, stay focused. As SGT Barnes said in the Movie Platoon. "Out here in the bush you gotta keep your S*** wired tight at all times." Folks we now live in the Bush. Don't be carried out in a body bag.

 

[Kleanbore]

What do you mean by "iffy"?

Few people around, yards from the most violent city in the country...which is why the store is moving.

Are you saying the racial makeup of the neighborhood was different from you? Or were simply trying to say the neighborhood had a lower median income than you were used to experiencing?

No, and no. Not a residential neighborhood, no median income, no racial make-up.

If you felt that you might be physically assaulted simply because of your obvious income, then welcome to urban America in 2019. Your obvious income makes you a target.

What might have been "obvious" about my income?

Talking with "the other" what?

Hand. Descriptive figure of speech.

So? Do you know what the phone call was about? Who was it with? Was he perhaps getting orders from his superiors? Was there a developing case he needed to know about? Was he perhaps getting updated on a recent case?.

Doesn't matter at all He was a potential victim, setting himself up for a violent ambush.

Your post assumes the call occupying his attention was personal (or trivial) or was in some other way unrelated to his duty.

It does not.

You assume the other officer was the man's "partner", but you don't know that.

Same uniform, from a county somewhere else.

What is your problem with the scenario as it transpired?

Isn't that obvious? Had I been describing a civilian carrying openly and behaving the same way, would you have to ask that question?

Since you assume the female officer was the male officer's "partner" (and not the other way around)

Can one person be a partner , but not the other?

Frankly, it seems to me you took an assumption as if it were fact and then compounded assumed conclusion on top of assumed conclusion to create a narrative that fit your underlying prejudices and then treated if as if it were an established fact.

What are you talking about? What " underlying prejudices".

 

[jmorris]

Comments?

It doesn’t shock me to see people that do not pay attention to anything or even think. Proven by the fact that there are products available so parents don’t forget their kids when they leave the car....

edit: ha, ha, like where the brackets are...I’ll blame that on not having my readers on

 

[Jeb Stuart]

[QUOTEComments?]

It doesn’t shock me to see people that do not pay attention to anything or even think. Proven by the fact that there are products available so parents don’t forget their kids when they leave the car....[/QUOTE]

They pay attention all right. To their Cell phone. A lot of people cannot even walk, or drive without the stupid device in their face. It seems what is on their Facebook page is more important than lives, to include their own or their children's.

 

[film495]

there's no situational awareness when people are staring at a cell phone screen … none. and people drive, and walk around doing this … I used to for sure, until someone pointed out to me I walked in front a moving car, staring at a cell phone screen, and did not even notice at all.

 

[unclenunzie]

For what it is worth, I read the OP's post as describing a personal observation of lack of situational awareness on the part of a police officer. Someone who should through training and job responsibility be more aware of his surroundings. The intent of the post was to share this observation along with past postings that could help educate the reader. I know I learned from it, and I'm glad it was posted.

I'm also keenly aware of biases that exist in the world, and I saw none of that in the post. I grew up in an urban environment and when someone talks of an iffy neighborhood, an image of higher physical risk comes to mind - no, wait, that's not quite it, it comes to the back of the neck, to the gut, years of personal experience tingle the self-preservation circuit. OK to walk on this street, avoid that one over there, but move quickly and with purpose. Pay attention without looking like you're paying attention.

When I moved away from my urban roots, it took me a while to pick up on the completely different "tells" of an iffy neighborhood where they exist in rural places. Same story, avoid places that give you the shivers, pay attention.

 

[Kleanbore]

For what it is worth, I read the OP's post as describing a personal observation of lack of situational awareness on the part of a police officer. Someone who should through training and job responsibility be more aware of his surroundings. The intent of the post was to share this observation along with past postings that could help educate the reader.

You got it!

I know I learned from it, and I'm glad it was posted.

Thanks. Glad you found it helpful.

I'm also keenly aware of biases that exist in the world, and I saw none of that in the post.

Good.

By the way, should anyone care, the officer who did rush to the aid of the person who had fallen was African-American. I saw no need to mention that.

 

[scaatylobo]

I am NOT at all in the slightest bit "p.c".

SO, let me state the OBVIOUS, if your white or appear so and getting out in a neighborhood that is NOT one you would expect to blend in = then you better be a bit more aware than normal [ hope your ALWAYS practicing Sit/Aware ] and if that makes me a "racist" then I take EXTREME umbrage at your ignorance.

I ran toward gunfire in any and ALL neighborhoods,and I asked to patrol the black hood,as that was where I felt the most welcomed when called.

I only "judge" others when it would be foolish or downright stupid to ignore such.

That does in no manner cloud my love of my fellow American,regardless of their race,color etc !!

And retired now,I will still stand in front of ANYONE that is being attacked for their faith,color etc.

But to add to the list of cautions,one I got from Massod Ayoob ------------ ALWAYS CHECK OUT THE INTERIOR OF ANY "YES ANY" VEHICLE THAT YOUR ABOUT TO ENTER..even if its in your garage.

Rant off.

 

[Old Dog]

Have we come to this? Hard to believe we have a member of the Political Correctness Enforcement Committee onboard who felt so compelled to quickly and completely dissect the OP's post in an obvious attempt to prove profiling, racial and economic bias while staying so oblivious of the actual message. Kleanbore, don't worry, some of us got it.

It is sad, though, with each passing year to note that situational awareness is becoming non-existent with each new generation and technological advances ... My wife won't even accompany me on one of my rare visits to Seattle anymore, as she's tired of me narrating to her how the SPD cops won't even get out of their patrol vehicles anymore (well, unless someone's been shot). The lessening of situational awareness by citizens is sadly become a cultural norm, and law enforcement suffers from it as much as everyone else.

 

[TikkaShooter]

Have we come to this? Hard to believe we have a member of the Political Correctness Enforcement Committee onboard who felt so compelled to quickly and completely dissect the OP's post in an obvious attempt to prove profiling, racial and economic bias while staying so oblivious of the actual message. Kleanbore, don't worry, some of us got it.

It is sad, though, with each passing year to note that situational awareness is becoming non-existent with each new generation and technological advances ... My wife won't even accompany me on one of my rare visits to Seattle anymore, as she's tired of me narrating to her how the SPD cops won't even get out of their patrol vehicles anymore (well, unless someone's been shot). The lessening of situational awareness by citizens is sadly become a cultural norm, and law enforcement suffers from it as much as everyone else.

Me, myself, and I don't consider profiling if one dresses like a gang banger. I'll respect the message they are sending. Thanks to my grandson, I know what gang tats are.. How many here know would be an interesting question... Or the color red and Hispanic gangs?

I'm very un-PC and I dislike being in urban areas or big crowds. My senses go to overload.

If so many of today's people had situational awareness what could they do if there was a situation besides dial 911 on their cell phone??

 

[MedWheeler]

Kleanbore writes:

..the officer who did rush to the aid of the person who had fallen was African-American. I saw no need to mention that.

Evidently, there are those who do feel that race must be considered in even the most innocuous of discussions. Mentioning it, or failing to mention it, can be perceived as prejudice.

 

[JeeperCreeper]

What is this thread??

Is this Facebook... Or a diary??

Sounds like a frustrated rant hidden behind a "lesson of the day" that really has no take away

 

[George P]

If you're that paranoid about your local scenarios, then ordering online is your answer, even from Walmart - they now deliver. If you are that worried - and I'm not saying that being in St. Louis you shouldn't be - you still have choices that will not place you in danger

 

[Kleanbore]

If you're that paranoid about your local scenarios, then ordering online is your answer, even from Walmart - they now deliver.

Do you have any understanding whatsoever of the meaning of paranoia?

Friends who, like me, have been using delivery services have other reasons for doing so. Convenience, better use of time....

If you are that worried - and I'm not saying that being in St. Louis you shouldn't be - you still have choices that will not place you in danger

I do not live in St. Louis, and the many places to which I usually go place me in very little danger,

Of course, anyone knowledgable knows that ATMSs and gasoline stations do attract criminals, and that criminals can get to and away from any of them very easily.

Hence, the advice in the OP.

 

[shafter]

It sounds to me like the deputy on the phone was probably handling a call for service at the store or vicinity. He was on the phone with his suspect/complainant/supervisor trying to figure things out. Law enforcement spends a good deal of time on the phone while handling calls for service and this call could have been anything from something relatively minor to a big deal. No way of knowing. The deputy had enough awareness to know when his partner was getting out of the vehicle to get involved in something. His seeming lack of caring could have been genuine lack of caring or his attention was on something more important considering his partner was already helping the old lady.

It's impossible to maintain complete vigilance all the time, especially when engrossed in another task. Most of us think we're really good at situational awareness and we probably are, while we're thinking about situational awareness, but as soon as you force the mind to focus on something it loses the ability to really focus on anything else. Obviously I don't know this deputy or the situation he was involved in. He could have been anything from a complete dub to a pretty sharp guy who was filtering out what needed his attention at the moment. Hard to say without more facts.

 

[Kleanbore]

What is this thread??

Is this Facebook... Or a diary??

Sounds like a frustrated rant hidden behind a "lesson of the day" that really has no take away

What is it that you are trying to ask?

 

[George P]

Do you have any understanding whatsoever of the meaning of paranoia?

Friends who, like me, have been using delivery services have other reasons for doing so. Convenience, better use of time....

I do not live in St. Louis, and the many places to which I usually go place me in very little danger,

Of course, anyone knowledgable knows that ATMSs and gasoline stations do attract criminals, and that criminals can get to and away from any of them very easily.

Hence, the advice in the OP.

People still use ATMs? Why?
I have no issues at gas stations, but then again, I don't fill up at 3 AM either.
I stay away from crime-prone cities to avoid these scenarios.

 

[Kleanbore]

t sounds to me like the deputy on the phone was probably handling a call for service at the store or vicinity. He was on the phone with his suspect/complainant/supervisor trying to figure things out. Law enforcement spends a good deal of time on the phone while handling calls for service and this call could have been anything from something relatively minor to a big deal. No way of knowing.

It really doesn't matter, does it?

The deputy had enough awareness to know when his partner was getting out of the vehicle to get involved in something.

Only after he almost tripped over her.

It's impossible to maintain complete vigilance all the time, especially when engrossed in another task.

It is impossible, period.

Obviously I don't know this deputy or the situation he was involved in. He could have been anything from a complete dub to a pretty sharp guy who was filtering out what needed his attention at the moment. Hard to say without more facts.

Again, it doesn't matter.

By concentrating on his call, walking back and forth without seeing things around him, and be repeatedly walking right past the corner of a building, he exposed himself to ambush and to the taking of his gun--for a considerable period.

 

[Kleanbore]

I have no issues at gas stations,

What do you mean?

but then again, I don't fill up at 3 AM either.

Nor do I, but ambushes at gasoline stations do occur in rush hours and in mid day.

There is no basis for assuming that criminals on the road are more likely to need money, gasoline, or a different car when they come upon a gasoline station at 1:00 AM than at 1:00 PM.

I stay away from crime-prone cities to avoid these scenarios.

So do I, but police chiefs and sheriffs in the outlying "good" municipalities and counties routinely go on television to warn their citizens about how naive it is to put much stock into that idea. Criminals go where they are going by automobile. Those who may not momentarily have one can acquire one in ma few minutes.

The highways provide both access to, and egress from, areas in which victims will likely have more money.

 

[George P]

What do you mean?

Nor do I, but ambushes at gasoline stations do occur in rush hours and in mid day.

There is no basis for assuming that criminals on the road are more likely to need money, gasoline, or a different car when they come upon a gasoline station at 1:00 AM than at 1:00 PM.

So do I, but police chiefs and sheriffs in the outlying "good" municipalities and counties routinely go on television to warn their citizens about how naive it is to put much stock into that idea. Criminals go where they are going by automobile. Those who may not momentarily have one can acquire one in ma few minutes.

The highways provide both access to, and egress from, areas in which victims will likely have more money.

Maybe where you live. I do not have those issues where I live; guess that's why my comments are as such. As to the previous mention of paranoia, I see a LOT of it among gun owners; the ones who feel they have to stash guns in every room, who won't take a shower without one in arm's reach, who feel they can't live in their own home without wearing a gun, and on and on. These folks are real, as is their paranoia. I refuse to live what's left of my life in that state of stress. If you choose to do so, that is your choice and you're welcome to make that choice.