Originally Posted by Officers'Wife
If, as you say, the 'blaster' is the least important tool on their belt... Why are they issued 9mm automatics with large magazine capacities. Logic says a large slower moving projectile would be more appros for safety and the larger magazine would be irrelevant.
Also, if the tool is unimportant, why are LEO's required to have one in the field? Even restaurants the owner has declared a 'gun free zone' cannot ask an LEO to remove his weapon.
I love questions like this because they illustrate just how little the public and even our very own family members understand the job that we have taken on.
It seems that the public, and even our family members in some instances, focus only upon the gun and not the individual Officer and his/her personal qualities and attributes assuming that the sidearm on the Officer's duty belt is the source of his authority. I say this, not to belittle anyone, but rather to explain that such "tunnel vision" is typical since we are such visible figures in the public eye. Consider that those who do not know a Police Officer personally have only second-hand information in addition to how Hollywood portrays the job and it is easy to see how they could begin to believe that our lives are like any one of the myriad "action movies" that seem so popular these days.
So, why do Officers carry a sidearm, of varying capacities and calibers and why is it required as an issued piece of equipment?
As a sworn LEO with over twenty years afield, the answer to this question is both simple and complex all at once.
Simply put, the greatest implement that I bear in the field is a "compound tool" composed of my intellect and common sense (they are very different things), my training and my experience set. The material equipment that I have with me daily (uniform and badge, gun, handcuffs, baton, mace, notepad/pen) is secondary to the 'software' (my intellect, common sense, my training and experience) that I carry around in my head because without that 'software' the other tools are inert and without value. The 'tools' (sidearm, handcuffs, etc.) are important and quite necessary, but they are only a means to an end. We have them because we might need them and we do not know when that time will be so they must be with us always.
Long before I arrive at the determination that I will need to employ my duty sidearm, I have to use that "compound tool" to 'de-escalate' the situation that I am dealing with first by verbal resolution and mediation and as the situation develops depending upon how willing the 'actors'
are to cooperate or resist, the range of possibilities can either increase or decrease in terms of what will happen next. Rest assured that the variables are infinite, unpredictable and beyond my control in most cases.
Sometimes, I can get the parties involved to come to an understanding and there is no need for further action.
Sometimes, the parties remain unwilling to resolve the issue and I must make an arrest which may, or may not, become a violent interaction.
Sometimes, one of the parties is not only intent on resisting resolution (to include an arrest), but also determined to harm someone including me, possibly grievously and then I must act in the gravest extreme which may mean that I have to take a human life in the course of my duties. Thankfully, such action is a very rare event as it is something that do not relish the thought of doing regardless of the circumstances involved.
As for the caliber of, and type of duty sidearm/ammunition that we have at our sides, it is most usually not our decision to make and usually made at the Departmental level based upon whatever criteria the administration deems most important and relevant for such a selection.
The point that I strive to make is that Police Officers are only human beings and that no matter our level of training we are not omnipotent, infallible beings who possess the ability to control every situation that may arise. When a situation exceeds what little control we do have over it (and it ain't much, trust me) then we can only act in such a manner as to mitigate the "runaway train" effect with the tools and training we have available.
I often hear folks challenge an Officer's authority during various incidents/arrests with questions and statements like "Who are you to make the decision?", "What gives you the right to arrest me?" or "There has got to be something better than letting someone do this job."
In answer to this, I can only offer you this:
There is no one else except for us (human beings) to do this job unless you want a machine (technology permitting, of course) to make the decisions. We (human beings) are all that we have and just as in other fields of employment, there are good ones, incompetent ones, honest ones, corrupt ones and this is the best we (humanity) can do. It is far from perfect due to our imperfection, but it is also all that we have and that is how it is.
GS
