Drizzt
Member
Annual firearms training a must for police, citizens
As debate about concealed carry continues, it is time someone from law enforcement clarifies the training requirements current law enforcement officers must meet under Wisconsin's Training and Standards Bureau.
I do not believe any police chief, sheriff or police administrator would intentionally mislead or deceive the public regarding their perceptions of current training standards here in Wisconsin, but some discrepancies need clarification.
Firearm training is mandatory before initial certification as a law enforcement officer, but there is no standard training requirement beyond that initial certification.
On Sept. 29, Rep. Scott Gunderson and Sen. Dave Zien co-sponsored The Personal Protection Act. AB 763 and SB 403 address two issues: rights for citizen concealed carry and to mandate provisions of H.R. 218 (Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004) for active and retired law enforcement officers.
These bills are appealing to the rank-and-file law-enforcement officers throughout Wisconsin as they address the implementation of H.R. 218, the federal legislation that some police chiefs, sheriffs and police administrators continue to oppose.
On Dec. 2, The Post-Crescent interviewed Appleton Police Chief Rick Myers, Neenah Police Chief Ray Appel and Outagamie County Sheriff Brad Gehring.
"All three of the area's top cops said their main concern about the bill is the lack of any substantial training requirement for those who would carry a concealed weapon.
"'One training requirement during the life of the permit is ridiculous,' Gerhring said. 'This is a deadly weapon we are issuing.'"
"Appel points out that before police officers can be certified they need 24 hours of intensive gun training and refresher courses two or three times a year."
On Dec. 5, the Green Bay Press-Gazette interviewed Green Bay Police Chief Craig Van Schyndle and Brown County Sheriff Dennis Kocken. "Training is one of his biggest stumbling blocks.
"'There's only one-time qualification with this weapon, whatever wea-pon (a person) is carrying and then it goes on forever, where a police officer needs to qualify four times a year,'" Van Schyndle said.
These interviews occurred more than one year after Wisconsin Attorney General Peggy Lautenschlager wrote a memorandum dated Nov. 17, 2004, from the Department of Justice to Governor Jim Doyle and Senate and Assembly Majority and Minority Leadership. That memo outlined her opinions regarding the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004 (H.R. 218).
Lautenschlager wrote, "Currently, in order to be certified as a law enforcement officer by LESB (Law Enforcement Standards Board), a recruit must complete a basic training program that incorporates a 48-hour block of instruction on firearms, the components of which include classroom lectures, activity-centered practical exercises, competency checklists, written examinations and scenario-based evaluations.
"A significant element of the content of this curriculum addresses tactical response and deadly force decision-making for police officers.
"Beyond these recruit training requirements, however, Wisconsin currently has no uniform statewide standard of continuing annual fire-arm training or qualification."
Many agencies do have their own departmental policies requiring officers to attend firearms training.
A policy is only a guide. No law enforcement officers in this state can lose their certification for failing to attend firearms training under a department policy.
However, if Training and Standards Bureau required annual firearms training, officers not fulfilling the training requirement would lose their certification, from the rank-and-file officer to the police chief, sheriff, and police administrator.
If police chiefs, sheriffs, police administrators, and editorial writers really believe only one training requirement in a lifetime for a citizen is ridiculous, they should be equally concerned since this is the current standard for active law enforcement officers here in Wisconsin.
Police chiefs, sheriffs, and police administrators that do not want "big brother" to dictate training requirements to their department should rethink their position.
If you maintain your position against standard training for active officers, how can you justify telling a citizen that they should allow "big brother" to set a standard for them?
Our citizens expect their law enforcement officers to receive far more training than a citizen, because we are held at a higher standard.
We need these police chiefs, sheriffs, police administrators, and editorial writers to work with us in urging our attorney general to promulgate a rule requiring law enforcement officers to attend annual firearms training and qualification regardless of their personal opinion on the Personal Protection Act.
Casey Perry is executive director of the Wisconsin Troopers' Association and chairman of the National Troopers Coalition.
http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051218/GPG07/512180602/1273/GPGnews
As debate about concealed carry continues, it is time someone from law enforcement clarifies the training requirements current law enforcement officers must meet under Wisconsin's Training and Standards Bureau.
I do not believe any police chief, sheriff or police administrator would intentionally mislead or deceive the public regarding their perceptions of current training standards here in Wisconsin, but some discrepancies need clarification.
Firearm training is mandatory before initial certification as a law enforcement officer, but there is no standard training requirement beyond that initial certification.
On Sept. 29, Rep. Scott Gunderson and Sen. Dave Zien co-sponsored The Personal Protection Act. AB 763 and SB 403 address two issues: rights for citizen concealed carry and to mandate provisions of H.R. 218 (Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004) for active and retired law enforcement officers.
These bills are appealing to the rank-and-file law-enforcement officers throughout Wisconsin as they address the implementation of H.R. 218, the federal legislation that some police chiefs, sheriffs and police administrators continue to oppose.
On Dec. 2, The Post-Crescent interviewed Appleton Police Chief Rick Myers, Neenah Police Chief Ray Appel and Outagamie County Sheriff Brad Gehring.
"All three of the area's top cops said their main concern about the bill is the lack of any substantial training requirement for those who would carry a concealed weapon.
"'One training requirement during the life of the permit is ridiculous,' Gerhring said. 'This is a deadly weapon we are issuing.'"
"Appel points out that before police officers can be certified they need 24 hours of intensive gun training and refresher courses two or three times a year."
On Dec. 5, the Green Bay Press-Gazette interviewed Green Bay Police Chief Craig Van Schyndle and Brown County Sheriff Dennis Kocken. "Training is one of his biggest stumbling blocks.
"'There's only one-time qualification with this weapon, whatever wea-pon (a person) is carrying and then it goes on forever, where a police officer needs to qualify four times a year,'" Van Schyndle said.
These interviews occurred more than one year after Wisconsin Attorney General Peggy Lautenschlager wrote a memorandum dated Nov. 17, 2004, from the Department of Justice to Governor Jim Doyle and Senate and Assembly Majority and Minority Leadership. That memo outlined her opinions regarding the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004 (H.R. 218).
Lautenschlager wrote, "Currently, in order to be certified as a law enforcement officer by LESB (Law Enforcement Standards Board), a recruit must complete a basic training program that incorporates a 48-hour block of instruction on firearms, the components of which include classroom lectures, activity-centered practical exercises, competency checklists, written examinations and scenario-based evaluations.
"A significant element of the content of this curriculum addresses tactical response and deadly force decision-making for police officers.
"Beyond these recruit training requirements, however, Wisconsin currently has no uniform statewide standard of continuing annual fire-arm training or qualification."
Many agencies do have their own departmental policies requiring officers to attend firearms training.
A policy is only a guide. No law enforcement officers in this state can lose their certification for failing to attend firearms training under a department policy.
However, if Training and Standards Bureau required annual firearms training, officers not fulfilling the training requirement would lose their certification, from the rank-and-file officer to the police chief, sheriff, and police administrator.
If police chiefs, sheriffs, police administrators, and editorial writers really believe only one training requirement in a lifetime for a citizen is ridiculous, they should be equally concerned since this is the current standard for active law enforcement officers here in Wisconsin.
Police chiefs, sheriffs, and police administrators that do not want "big brother" to dictate training requirements to their department should rethink their position.
If you maintain your position against standard training for active officers, how can you justify telling a citizen that they should allow "big brother" to set a standard for them?
Our citizens expect their law enforcement officers to receive far more training than a citizen, because we are held at a higher standard.
We need these police chiefs, sheriffs, police administrators, and editorial writers to work with us in urging our attorney general to promulgate a rule requiring law enforcement officers to attend annual firearms training and qualification regardless of their personal opinion on the Personal Protection Act.
Casey Perry is executive director of the Wisconsin Troopers' Association and chairman of the National Troopers Coalition.
http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051218/GPG07/512180602/1273/GPGnews
