Use of Force, Police Equipment, and Expectations

It has been a while since I have posted an article on LinkedIn but I felt that the past few years merited a brief and hopefully "eye-opening" experience for anyone who reads this.

I recently retired after 27 years of a pretty good Law Enforcement career. Last year when I made the decision it was based on a few things: 1. Being a supervisor was a great experience while at the same time it became groundhog day. Why? Because I was walking into an atmosphere of people complaining of the same things day in and day out. Things such as the report writing by officers, the administration complaining of something new to change from just days before, no one really communicating on important issues to get clarity on instead "complaining" about it. For me, I had the ability to chat with those above and obtain more clarity on what their objectives were. Well, at least during my conversations with them. Overall, I enjoyed the time with the street officers, the teaching, the learning, the laughs, helping the community, and my small role in giving them, the officers, leadership abilities. That was my biggest satisfaction in the end.

2. As I thought about all the years of running my business while being an active police officer, the excitement of teaching and helping others, traveling around the world and back only to walk into the same grind of negativity. I realized it is time to step on the other side of the badge and try to make a more lasting impact on educating not just the police but also the community of what really goes on in policing right from ground zero and not from a talking head that has a high title and one that has lost connection with their people.

3. Most importantly: It was just time. Time to move on to doing the things I love such as what we do in our business, helping make police officers better in what they do all as a whole in their job field. Time and time again I have seen leaders stay way too long in a position only to taint the views of their peers. When you have too much of the old way of thinking as a leader without opening your eyes to the varied ways of doing things in the "now" or at a minimum LISTEN to your people, you lose them right out of the box.

So, to the point of the title of this article: I have been talking with, interviewing, and discussing with police officers from all over the country about Use of Force, current policing practices, and equipment. Here is my spin on all of it. Every time we, as professional trainers and consultants are training our police, we are training them from our "ground zero" experience. I am seeing each day all the many consulting and training groups out here working with police departments and while some are true legitimate professionals, there are many more with either previous law enforcement, military experience, or technology-based companies pushing their products to police agencies but not a single one truly caring about: The Street Officer. You see, looking at the current police officer and the equipment that is issued to them, the responsibilities placed before them, and the accountability weighted on their heads and shoulders are primarily overlooked. For example: Look at all the equipment officers wear on their bodies every day. You have the body armor for what? Yes, to protect them from incoming rounds from bad people. Yes, there are bad people out there. Next, duty belt: Handgun with at least 40 plus rounds total to include extra magazines, maybe pepper spray, Taser in the appropriate holster and should be on the support side OPPOSITE the firearm, handcuffs, tourniquets, baton (if issued), radio with holder, police service rifle, ballistic shield and of course, the body-worn camera. Talk about a lot of WEIGHT on you the officer. Now take all this into consideration and compare it to all the training time they are provided in the USE of all this equipment. I have heard current and former higher ranks tell me "well it's up to them to read their policies and practice with this stuff on their own. We can't do everything for them." Well, I can agree to a certain extent however if you issued them this equipment, is it not the responsibility of the agency to get the officers well versed in better use and response with assorted equipment? Hell, even the police unions have an obligation to work better with the police agencies and their officers in getting them better trained all around with the heavy load they carry. Yet, we get officers who come to training and you can see the deficiency in many of their basic skills with some of this equipment. Why? Well perhaps when an agency is doing "taser training" for annual/semi-annual familiarization, it is NOT training it is just checking the boxes. Standing in front of a cardboard target and striking it with probes is just meeting a quick objective. But what about adding more of what we call "sudden combative congestion" deployment of the taser. Meaning, now try simple practicals role-playing dry exercises so trainers in the department can gauge the reaction of the officers going to a taser instead of a gun. The same thing can apply to OC pepper spray. Or how many times we ask officers "in a show of hands who goes to work looking forward to shooting someone every day?" No one raises their hands of course. But the next question is: "how many of you have a good chance each day at work in going to hands with a person on the job?" Every hand normally goes up. Hell, even the pencil pushers of an agency think they will not have to deal with that until one day when they step out for lunch with colleagues and suddenly "it happens" and they have to act. How about the deployment of gear such as the police service rifle or ballistic shield; very limited in many agencies of how officers can practice deployment of the new mounts in their patrol cars, storage of shields and taking tactical positioning, and knowing proper cover points when taking incoming rounds. De-escalation: where is the street element of instruction in teaching officers this concept? I once was asked by the New Jersey Division of Criminal Justice to assist them in the CLEAR training here in the state of NJ in the Spanish-speaking portion of the program. Work was done, it was used but never a "thank you for the assist." It showed me how the system works from way up top sometimes as an example and just moving to push more "stuff."

The job for police officers starts with a good mind, sound mind, a common-sense mind. But being dumped a bunch of computer-based training while sitting in a patrol car or behind the desk and in between calls, is this really showing "balance of training?" This is a very important portion of training and I support the online learning element but we have relied for too long it seems to be the agency's "out" but is it really the only thing the officers need? We expect them to carry all the gear on their bodies every day, act like doctors, attorney's, mental health counselors, a buddy, a sister, a brother, a tactician under stress while doing all this based off 100 plus slide PowerPoint while meeting the demands of agency police calls and enforcement of motor vehicle laws while having very limited time on basic simple hands-on principles? What happened to the 50/50 balance of assuring the police officer is given the TRUE balance of tools to help them become better and more proficient in their responses?

Finally for the agency instructors: If you are a trainer in your department and you are tasked with the assignment of putting together a good training element for your people, are you passionate about it? Do you know the subject matter of material you are about to instruct in? Have you spoken to your upper administration to go over your goals and objectives as to where you want to officers to be when the training is done? You see, it is the responsibility of all police officers and agencies as a whole to put together more effective online programs, and this all starts with good leadership, good instructors, and the police officers themselves to start having a more open mind in the training they are getting. If the officer themselves, see a deficiency in something, or a need for better training, it is best to request or voice professional opinions or concerns. After all, the weight of the world within each police officer's state, county, city, or town sits on the officer's shoulders. Society needs to help each other in being smarter and not just listening to the first 10 seconds of the media's "professional opinions" but rather gather true facts of what goes on in the world of policing to gain a better grasp of the inner workings of a police department while it is time we do better in giving the officer better training and education on the use of all their tools starting with their minds. Why? Because the world will always be watching.