What can we learn from history?

[Sam1911]

For the life of me, I cannnot understand why every equipment discussion is turned into "equipment vs. training" argument.

No one is suggesting to train less because of better equipment.

For one thing, training costs as much or more than new equipment, and new equipment requires new training, which adds to costs. Some times you can have both. Sometimes one or the other. Sometimes neither.

Second, there is a natural kickback against any claim that more efficient weapons are the answer to the problems cops face. That's a too-easy "solution." We're "doing something" for the cops because we give them cool new guns. If being "out-gunned" wasn't really a problem 99.99% of officers ever faced, then upgrading weapons isn't a very wise investment.

If we can have anything we want, and have it now, by the bucketfull, GREAT. Give them new guns while we're giving them all the other stuff that they really need, too.

A pal of mine (and one of the five best shooters I've ever seen) is a NJ State Police Detective who told me, "Ask a cop if he needs a new gun or a new pen. He'll take the pen. At least it's something he'll USE."

 

[Sam1911]

A chance of oxygen masks used on a 747 among millions of passengers each year is even less than cops getting shot at, but that does not justify not having it.

(Pssst....those are included pretty much for the same reason those cool flotation seat cushions are: as "safety theater" to pacify the passengers and make them feel like they'd have some chance of survival in case of a catastrophic problem or crash.)

 

[TestPilot]

You sound like you're arguing with ME, trying to convince ME (or us) that switching to Glocks and ARs is a good idea. No need for that. I completely agree with you. What we're discussing here is why agencies and the law enforcement world at large hasn't been quick to do so, and isn't now, and won't be in the future.

I get that.

But, I still don't think it is primarily the cost that made them resist change in the matter of revolver vs. self-loaders.

Could have been a perception that self-loaders cost more? Yes.

But, I think it is mostly political. I've read articles that covers the struggle involved in the change, and the argument coming from the management resisting the change is mostly in the form of "It looks bad," "Why do you need that much firepower?" Rarely was "It's too expensive" mentioned.

I did not ignore the cost vs. benefit issue. Glock does not cost more than a 6 shot revolver. No money for rifle? Then just approve a private purchase. Which is already what many departments are doing.

Also, I do not really think rifle and a modern pistol is an "upgrade." It's just standard armament for someone who can get into things.

Struggle to change over to self-loading pistols was before my time, but I clearly remember the struggle to change over to the rifles which is still going on.

The top concern was always "It looks bad to the public."

 

[Sam1911]

First the cost issue:

I did not fail to look at cost vs. benefit issue.

Glock does not cost more than a 6 shot revolver.

It does if your department HAS revolvers, holsters, speedloaders, ammo, and a training program established.

It sure as heck costs A LOT to "upgrade" your department to something else.

If you want to argue that the department should make that switch when they're ready to "lifecycle out" the old wheelguns, sure. And that's exactly what has happened. But that sometimes takes a decade, maybe more.

No money for rifle? Then just approve a private purchase. Which is already what many departments are doing.

Ehh, sure. But there's all sorts of perceived liabilities that come with allowing officers to bring their own gear to work. Some departments (usually small ones, I think) do indeed allow that. Many do not -- no way.

Is it a good idea? Well sure, I think so. But I'm not in charge of that for any agency, county, state, or department.

We all tend to look at how "simple" things can be. ("Hey, all ya gotta do is tell 'em to bring their rifle and a box of ammo, and if they qualify with it, they can carry it...")

Other folks make their living sorting out just how complicated the same question can be. ("We have to write a protocol to establish which guns are allowed and which aren't. What if officer Dudley wants to use his HiPoint 9mm for his Patrol rifle and Officer Jamison wants to bring along his .470NE double rifle? That won't fly. And who's supplying ammo? And what are the testing reqirements? And what about the guys who still want to use a shotgun? And what if someone sues us because Officer Jamison blew through a school trying to take down an injured white-tail on the highway with his elephant gun? And what if neither Jamison's gun or Dudley's fits in the cruiser lock rack? And isn't carrying the department's standard weapon part of the uniform? And, and, and, and...")

I do not really think rifle and a modern pistol is an "upgrade." It's just standard armament...

Again, you're trying to argue with ME and convince ME. That's not necessary. Is a Glock and an AR an "upgrade?" It could be seen as one if you're issued a Model 10 and a Model 37. But whether it's an upgrade or "standard armament" doesn't matter if a lot of money has to be spent to change from thing A to thing B.

... for someone who can get into things.

For...who?

 

[RustyShackelford]

Are LE shotguns "outdated"?....

I don't know if Id call the 12ga law enforcement shotgun outdated.
If I were a patrol officer, trooper, game officer, or state/federal agent, Id want a 14-16" 12ga pump or semi auto shotgun close by.
One small PD near my metro area did a media release about arming the patrol officers with new big 12ga shotguns with safety orange stocks for bean bag rounds. Apparently the PD's chief or training staff think these less lethal stun bag rounds can reduce the risk of lawsuits or excessive force incidents.
Id be leery of that. A IL police officer is now facing criminal charges after firing a documented 5 rounds at a 95 year old nursing home resident.
The PD took a call & encountered the male going berzerk.
The officers deployed a EDW(Taser) but the prongs missed the 95 year old subject. The police officer who fired the stun bags claimed the resident had a knife & was non responsive.
He is the only cop now on trial for the incident.

 

[Warp]

And, we're talking about approving personal rifles and issueing pistols that cost less than its 6 shot counterpart. Not like spending a whole lot more money.

You should read this thread.

GEM is exactly right. Government agencies are slow to change due to the cost involved.

Even a small agency incurs significant expense changing duty weapons. It's often not the cost of the weapon, the manufacturers heavily subsidize that in the US, especially when Glock was trying to take over the LE market.

The cost comes in the form of ancillary equipment, holsters, magazine pouches, magazines, new ammunition (if you change calibers) and overtime for training. When my old agency switched from S&W 5906s to Glock 21s there was approximately 8 hours overtime and 1200 rounds of ammunition per officer involved in the transition, not to mention new holsters and mag pouches. Yes Glock sold us the 21s for approx $140 apiece (cost of replacing the tritium night sights on the aging Smiths) with trade in, but total cost was much higher.

 

[Sam1911]

I don't know if Id call the 12ga law enforcement shotgun outdated.

As I've mentioned before (and apropos of nothing, perhaps) officers I've trained with shared that in the urban areas they were from, many officers -- they would say almost all -- were very uncomfortable shooting "those (darned) cannons," meaning the 870s owned by their departments. They clamed that some officers literally REFUSED to even qualify with them.

The result of which was that the 870s were now stored away in arms rooms and each patrol car now had an AR-15 in the trunk.

Unfortunately those officers got little or no training on those either, and the rifles were not theirs, but assigned to whatever car they got from the motor pool that morning. Not terribly confidence inspiring.

Hopefully that's not the common situation nationwide, but it apparently is in some northeast metro areas.

 

[RustyShackelford]

Dated but.....

I recall reading a media item(mid 1990s, not a gun industry or LE source) about how LAPD officers were mandated to do re-quals on 12ga shotguns so old or worn out, they would jam or break on every police officer's certification.
I'm surprised the "command staff" of the LAPD would allow that but considering after the huge "BoA/North Hollywood" shoot out in 1997 the brass & chiefs ran out & got M16a1 5.56mm select fire rifles from the CA National Guard armory nothing is a huge surprise.

 

[leadcounsel]

Glocks and ARs today are a cost SAVINGS as compared to the service weapons of yesterday, all things considered. They are absurdly cheap, especially purchased on contracts. Ballistic vests are proven to be massive returns on investment, when a $400 vest will prevent tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical costs or funeral/life insurance payments. Not to be insensitive, but the bean counters will say a casket alone costs $10,000.

Training is also top notch and the investment there pays huge dividends.

For officers who require tons of training costs etc to use what are very simple tools, like modern firearms, I'd say they lack initiative and are in the wrong profession. I always questioned the folks in the LEO or Army who were dis-interested in learning about their weapon, and mastering it. Even if that required purchasing your own (a small investment, which serves a dual role of home defense at least), and going to the range on your own nickel - a good life skill to have and one that carries over to your own profession and frankly can safe your rear. So I don't see a HUGE cost there... if you're not interested in learning and mastering your duty weapon, perhaps you're in the wrong profession. If you're in the profession involving arms, you should want to learn about arms.

I feel one of the take-aways from history of public shootings, self - defense and even law enforcement shootings is that it really can happen unexpectedly and anywhere.

We've seen incidents of shootings during public council meetings, movie theaters, shopping malls, restaurants, schools, home invasions, public highways, gas stations, convenience stores, etc.

So one of the big things, for me, is paying attention to the environment (situational awareness) rather than having my head buried in my phone or deep thought. Looking around and sizing up people in public, looking for anything unusual, looking for exits, that sort of stuff. It's amazing what you see when you are paying attention, and equally amazing what other people fail to see. For instance, when you see someone's carry piece that is partly unconcealed, and see that other people are oblivious to it.

Another is not only mastering my carry/home defense weapons, and my assigned weapon in the military, but also gaining proficiency with as many common weapons as possible. The day may come when you're called into action in a "gun free" zone and gain access to the enemies weapon - and need to use it.

In this recent terrorist hostage taking in France, one of the hostages managed to grab an unattended terrorist weapon and tried to use it, but couldn't make it work. He was shot and killed for that failed valiant attempt...

 

[Warp]

For officers who require tons of training costs etc to use what are very simple tools, like modern firearms, I'd say they lack initiative and are in the wrong profession.

What?

How is that what we are talking about at all?

 

[leadcounsel]

What?

How is that what we are talking about at all?

Why take 1 sentence totally out of context from 8 paragraphs?

 

[RustyShackelford]

Funerals?....

Are LE agencies or US police departments pricing caskets?
That's one PD I wouldn't work for.
Body armor, weapons, vehicles, K9s, bodycams/DV systems, gear, etc can reduce some costs(sick time, over time, court fees, civil actions, legal fees, etc) but caskets, funerals, life insurance premiums(policy) isn't part of it.

Rusty
PS: it's been widely known that traffic accidents kill more sworn LE officers than line of duty use of force events every year(per FBI/NIJ).

 

[Warp]

Why take 1 sentence totally out of context from 8 paragraphs?

Requiring officers to buy the rifles on their own and asking them to "go to the range" themselves for "training" doesn't really cut it these days.

 

[Jeff White]

In today's litigious society an agency that authorized officers to purchase their own weapons and training would be setting itself up for a huge loss in court if there was a use of deadly force where the officer relied on personally purchased training

 

[Jeff White]

There are a lot of officers who do pay for training out of pocket, but that training is over and above what the department provides.

When we fielded the M16s that were acquired in the 1033 program, we first put AR15 trigger groups in so they were not full auto capable, then we developed a training program that every officer issued one successfully completed before they went in the squad cars. Officers who previously had private training on the AR15/M16 system with nationally recognized trainers were not exempted. The department wanted to be able to document that everyone was trained to a set level of competence.

 

[leadcounsel]

There are a lot of officers who do pay for training out of pocket, but that training is over and above what the department provides.

This is what I was suggesting. Professionals in ALL walks of life pursue independent training, not just what their employers offer.

 

[Warp]

This is what I was suggesting. Professionals in ALL walks of life pursue independent training, not just what their employers offer.

How is that relevant to the costs of a LEA changing firearms? How is that even relevant to one type of firearm vs another type of firearm?

 

[TestPilot]

Professionals in ALL walks of life pursue independent training, not just what their employers offer.

That sounds the same across different professions on the surface. But, it really isn't.

Let's say I work IT. I pay out of my own pocket to get Cisco certified or MS Network Engineer certified. Let's say I am a pilot, and I got certification to fly more complex type of aircraft.

I now own a marketable skills that makes me worth more. If the employer refuse a pay raise? I'd look for a job that will pay me for the extra skill I got which person without that certificate cannot perform.

"Hey your database is getting obsolete and I am the only one certified from the manufacturer to manage the new system. Don't want to pay me? I guess you'd be happy with the old OS that will run out of support next year."

Now, let's assume I am a police officer.

"Hey boss, I graduated the Super Duper Pistol 1000 course at Whatever Cite and now finished the Scary Carbine 9000 course from Hula Hula Ranch." The most likely response I'd get is, "Good for you. Now go back to patrol. No, you don't get a pay raise. We'd have a promotion board and we'd promote the next guy who gives a politically correct answer on a bull**** question given by a clueless HR goon, but feel free to bring up your training."

if you're not interested in learning and mastering your duty weapon, perhaps you're in the wrong profession.

The fact of the matter, how disagreeable and terrible it may sound on the surface, is that this is just not feasible for law enforcement.

Master? Define "Master." For most othe professions, it is easy. IT personnel only needs to master IT. Doctors only need to master medicine, and not even all of it, just their practice area. Pilots only needs to master piloting.

For a cop, that isn't the case. Master a pistol?

What about rifle?
What about baton?
What about Taser?
What about driving?
What about law?
What about investigations?
What about crime scene processing?

You can expect certain degree of proficiency in all of these areas, since it is critical, but "mastery" simply is not feasible.

You can expect a dedicated person to become either Bruce Lee or Rob Letham or Sherlock Holemes.
But, it is totally unreasonable to expect someone to be Bruce Lee AND Rob Letham AND Sherlock Holmes just to perform "a job." Yes, in the end, it is just a job.

And, even on top of that, the ignorant public would still say "What? Cops don't know special techniques to handle dogs without guns? What? Cops don't know how sensitive I should feel about them not respecting my dirka dirkastan ethnic culture that I have no business demanding Americans to conform to? What? Cops don't know how to diagnose mental illness better than a licensed physician that released the VT shooter from hospital? That is totally unacceptable!!!"

 

[Apachedriver]

TestPilot,

Everything you point out is true. However, there are professions in which independent high speed training you choose to get is not so much for the promotions alone but for your improved effectiveness and personal survival in the execution of duties.

A profession of arms is one such example.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

On the one hand, we ask "why didn't, why didn't why didn't" on the subject of buying more modern, more effective firearms for use by the police.

And on the other hand we ask "why are they, why are they, why are they" on the subject of "police militarization" when the do end up buying more modern, more effective firearms.

There is a cultural inertia within any body/agency which resists change, and that resistance is due to a variety of factors. Sometimes it's as simple as laziness, other times budgetary, yet still other times it's some form of "old fogey-ism". Most likely, it's a combination of all these and more.

Police agencies, like all other agencies, prioritize their needs and wants. Why? Well, for one, not every agency, or person within that agency, will necessarily agree on what those priorities are in the first place...that, and they can't realistically have it all, all of the time.

New guns to replace older, perfectly functional ones, or new radios to replace older, broken ones?

New guns or new cars?

Expend money on new guns, or expend money on fixing the building infrastructures for the police departments?

Increase the weapons budget, or increase the health care budget for the department?

More money on weapons, or shift money into the retirement system?

All these things are looked at relative to each other in the overall big picture. And like it's already been said, guns just don't play such a big factor that the need to replace them overshadows all the other things that have to be dealt with in the organization.

 

[leadcounsel]

TestPilot,

Everything you point out is true. However, there are professions in which independent high speed training you choose to get is not so much for the promotions alone but for your improved effectiveness and personal survival in the execution of duties.

A profession of arms is one such example.

Bingo...

And if you think being a pilot or surgeon is somehow easier than being a cop, well I just don't know about that.

Consider that maddeningly complexities and rapid technology advancements in airframes and platforms, weapon systems (for combat pilots) etc. Sure, they can't really "train" on their own, but I'd be willing to bed they can study and do simulators as much as they like. Same with surgeons.

Cops can train on their own, and frankly should have some vested interest in not being the next body bag or Officer Wilson. Yes, they SHOULD master the baton, taser, driving, study incidents and de-escalation techniques, etc. Even if it's at night, instead of something else.

More marketable you say? Take Ayood. He sure did carve out a niche didn't he. Private trainer, author, expert witness, etc.

 

[Warp]

TestPilot,

Everything you point out is true. However, there are professions in which independent high speed training you choose to get is not so much for the promotions alone but for your improved effectiveness and personal survival in the execution of duties.

A profession of arms is one such example.

Considering most cops never discharge a firearm in the line of duty I'm not sure how apt it is to refer to it as "a profession of arms".

Test pilot is spot on IMO

Cops can train on their own, and frankly should have some vested interest in not being the next body bag or Officer Wilson. Yes, they SHOULD master the baton, taser, driving, study incidents and de-escalation techniques, etc. Even if it's at night, instead of something else.

More marketable you say? Take Ayood. He sure did carve out a niche didn't he. Private trainer, author, expert witness, etc.

You seem to want their job/career to consume, no, be, their entire life.

I think Gilmartin might have something to say about that.

 

[RustyShackelford]

Another real example....

My county's sheriff who was recently re-elected returned approx $400,000.00 to the county budget in FY 2014.
This "savings" was then immediately requested back this year to fund new DV systems & bodycams.
Our intrepid sheriff(who retired from the large city nearby as a police chief around 2004 or so) first told the media & citizens he had no funds for cameras then after the 2014 civil unrest in St Louis/Fuerguson MO he switched up saying he always supported having DV cameras for sworn deputies.

 

[Apachedriver]

Considering most cops never discharge a firearm in the line of duty I'm not sure how apt it is to refer to it as "a profession of arms".

Test pilot is spot on IMO



You seem to want their job/career to consume, no, be, their entire life.

I think Gilmartin might have something to say about that.

Actually, I never stated that cops were part of the profession of arms.

There's are differences between having a profession and having a job. Some of it in is the perspective of the individual doing it. A lot of it is in what is required from oneself to excel, master, or just plain survive in the accomplishment of one's duties. Duties, mind you, that are taken voluntarily and most often performed as a service for a greater good in society.

Nowadays everyone is a "professional". A true professional knows that mastery of tasks or skills means his journey is continual growth thru education for improvement. There isn't an end point.

The police officer on the street chooses to become a professional LEO. Therefore, he owes it to himself, his fellow LEOs, and the citizenship to continually grow his knowledge base in law, tactics, interpersonal skills, weapons employment, etc.

Is this an idealistic view? Sure. But without ideals, what is it that's being strived for? And what basis would there be for holding administration to their responsibilities to those officers who stand the watch daily. (eta: The more professional the officers are, the higher the standards for their admin to meet.)

By the way, whether it's police officer, combat pilot, or surgeon, one's career is a large part of one's life and identity. At times, it does become consuming.
Someone just wants a job? Go be a mall cop, gypsy cab driver, or checkout clerk at a pharmacy. It's good, honest work and they can leave it all at the time clock until their next shift.

 

[Fred Fuller]

Trying to wrest this back onto the pavement...

But what can you take away from this as the world dynamically changes. Or does it dynamically change for you, or perhaps it does and you're simply oblivious to it?

Well... I still carry a revolver, and my 'house gun' is an 18" bead sight 870. I wouldn't say I'm oblivious to all that has changed in the world, but I am if anything even less likely to need either firearm in our current place of residence than I was where we lived before.

It doesn't mean I don't own Glocks and ARs ... I do. But as yet I see no reason to keep either immediately at hand.