DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... cop-charged-with-murder-analysis-v ideo/

A few posters have reached out in the past and thanked me for some of my insight in regards to police training, and even those who haven't, have often expressed thoughts about the need for more training. I came across this article just the other day and thought some of you may find it interesting.

The author is a retired police Lt, Jim Glennon. He works for a company called Caliber Press that is kind of a repository for all things police related. He himself has a degree (masters I think?) in Psychology and he often pairs up with an organization by then name of (IIRC) Force Science. They take a look at police uses of force and try to analyze the psychological and physiological processes in order to help create more effective training standards, amongst other things.

I've attended one of Lt. Glennon's seminars and I can tell you first hand he is a straight shooter. He believes that law enforcement is a noble profession and that the majority of officers are in it for the right reasons and generally do the job well. He's willing to push back against what he sees as unfair, uneducated, or dishonest representations BUT probably more importantly he looks at a lot of these kinds of situations and attempts to provide objective, critical analysis not so much to justify outcomes, but to analyze areas where training (or lack of) plays a role and can be improved.

I don't know much about this particular incident but the article I think has some value to be informative and possibly spur some constructive conversation.There is a short video of the bodycam footage for the incident. To see it I think you'll have to click the link and pull up the original article. It's less than 3 minutes long. I highly suggest watching it because one of the areas I've talked about before is that actions are judged by what "reasonable officer" would do. You guys will hear a stark contrast between the officers that responded and how they were handling the situation. I'll largely try to let the article speak for itself, but there are a couple spots I'll emphasize and add my 2 cents. I'll have some of additional thoughts on the backside.

**DISCLAIMER** I con't care about your whataboutisms, or false equivalencies. If you wish to bring race in to or try to make this about anything other than what it is and is intended to be, post what you want, but I'm not going to waste my time responding to it. I'd encourage others to do the same. There are plenty of other threads for that nonsense.

https://www.calibrepress.com/2018/04/cop-charged-with-murder-analysis-video/

Cop Charged with Murder: ANALYSIS + VIDEO
Failure to understand & prepare for stress is our profession’s most systemic problem
By Jim Glennon | Apr 23, 2018

Share on Facebook241Tweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Google+0Email this to someonePrint this page
On Nov. 15, 2017, 29-year-old Dustin Pigeon called 9-1-1 and advised a dispatcher that he wanted to kill himself. The man didn’t elaborate on the how, but suicide was his intent.

Oklahoma City police responded to the subdivision where Pigeon lived. They found the man walking around the residential neighborhood. In one hand he had a bottle of lighter fluid, in the other a Bic lighter. Now the police knew his method.

Three officers engaged Pigeon. The first two to arrive, Officers Eric Howell and Troy Nitzky, immediately recognized what was in the man’s hands with one saying to the other, “He’s got a lighter and fluid in his hands.”



Pigeon immediately started walking away from the officers who pursued him on foot. As they approached the suicidal subject who was walking around a house and into what looks to be a side yard, they continually told him to put the items down. Over a period of 20 – 25 seconds the officers gave those orders approximately five to six times. Pigeon refused to comply but stopped walking and stood under a large tree. At this point one officer ordered the man to put his hands up. Pigeon complied and stated, “My hands are up, my hands are up.”

The next order from one of the officers was, “Put the lighter fluid down.”

It was delivered in a clear, calm and concise manner but Pigeon still refused to comply. This occurred approximately 25 seconds after the officers made the initial statement about the objects in the suicidal man’s hands.

Immediately after the aforementioned command came a third officer, Sgt. Keith Sweeney. His orders had a different tone. Fast, loud with a touch of anger and certainly stress: “Hey put it down! Drop it! Drop it right now! Put it on the ground! I will [censored] shoot you! Get on the ground! Get on (inaudible)!”

Sweeney’s orders took place over a period of less than 8 seconds. Pigeon is illuminated clearly throughout this time. At the beginning he was standing still under the tree with his arms up, objects still clearly in his hands. As Sweeney moves in and says, “I will [censored] shoot you!”

Pigeon begins backing away from the officers, his arms dropping to his side.

It’s at that point, 8 – 9 seconds after Sweeney’s first orders, that you can hear a distinct POP! We know now that the sound was the discharge of a bean bag gun fired by Officer Nitzky who was attempting to subdue Pigeon without seriously harming him.

By my unscientific calculations, well less than one second after the bean bag discharge, Sgt. Keith Sweeney fires his first of five quick successive rounds at Pigeon with his 9mm pistol. The man immediately falls to the ground dying at the scene a short time later.

Those five shots out of the sergeant’s semi-automatic weapon, were fired in approximately a single second.

All told, from Sweeney’s first orders to the time he finished firing his fifth round, less than 10 seconds elapsed.

Indictments

In December 2017, one month after the incident, Sgt. Keith Sweeney was charged with second-degree murder and first-degree manslaughter. Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater said it’s the first time the district attorney has charged an Oklahoma City police officer involved in an on-duty shooting.

The purpose of this article is not to condemn Sgt. Sweeney or to second-guess the prosecutor. It’s for consideration. It’s for training. It’s to point out the incredible speed of a dynamic force event: How stress—specifically acute, sudden onset stress—can influence behavior and thought; how a lack of clear communication can be deadly; how your emotions, out of control, can influence your perception, observations, assessments, and ultimately your decisions and behavior. Much of the following is based on my conjecture (nobody who wasn’t there that night knows what exactly transpired and why). The points, I believe, still stand.

There are too many training points to cover at length here, but let’s discuss a few.

Time. Why the hurry? From an old guy’s perspective, time is almost always on your side. So take it. Howell and Nitzky appeared to be doing just that. They were clear and controlled and not rushing the issue. There didn’t appear to be any reason to rush the situation. Pigeon even complied with at least one order (putting his arms in the air), stopped moving, and engaged verbally to some extent.

So, while the commands are to put the stuff down, when you are in a situation dealing with someone who is suicidal and has the means to do it in hand like this guy did, you have to work for the small victories and not dismiss them. No, he didn't put the lighter fluid down, but he did put his hands up. That small thing is what gets your foot in the door and buys you more time. Crises pretty much as a rule don't de-escalate in one fell swoop... you have to build toward it.

Distance. Why move in? The danger is in being too close. Pigeon wasn’t threatening to hurt anyone else, no one besides the officers were even in the area. Distance was the officer’s best safety option at that point. Sweeney, it appears on the video, is moving towards Pigeon.

There’s an accurate and telling training point about distance that you should never forget: The closer you are spatially the more intense the interaction and the stress—for you and the subject. The more stressed you become the more chance you will experience cognitive deterioration, perceptual distortions, and the harder it will be to make an accurate and appropriate decision.

This is a point that I think I've known subconsciously, but seeing it in writing was kind of like a "Well, yeah, that makes sense" moment for me.

I believe Sweeney was very stressed given his tone, rate of speech, amplitude, and obscene language. He probably had more tunnel vision than the officers who were maintaining a distance. His skewed and distorted assessments naturally affected his decisions and subsequent behavior, i.e. moving towards someone he believes (incorrectly in this case) to be holding a knife. Why do that?

Communicate. This is so much easier said than done. In the academies around the country it’s emphasized that in such situations only one person should be giving orders. In reality, that almost never happens. This is for a few reasons. First, it’s difficult to determine who does what in evolving dynamic situations. Second, everyone feels a need to do something. The problem is three people giving different orders with different tones causes confusion for all. A third reason is we simply don’t practice what to say, how to say it, and who should be doing the talking. And we seldom advocate, train, or practice one officer taking control over others. What winds up happening are multiple officers working independent of each other.

While I am not one to believe that officers should never, ever use foul language (most cops believe a well-placed profanity often works), know that your use of threatening obscenities will not only raise the stress level of the person you are talking to, it most likely will raise your own stress level.

Force Response. Discharging any type of non-lethal weapon should be announced so everyone knows what’s happening and there’s no misinterpretation of who’s doing what. If you have time to deploy a less-lethal option, then you have the time to communicate that you’re going to do it.

I used to make fun of officers in tazing videos when they would say "Tazer, tazer, tazer" before giving out a dose of Edison's Medicine... but the more I learned about sympathetic responses and the dangers of the mix of lethal and less than lethal options, I've eaten some crow.

Stress Responses. Which brings us to the body and brain experiencing acute and sudden onset stress. When this happens, you will experience both stress responses immediately. On some level you might be aware of this stress, but not completely. Perceptual distortions kick in, tunnel vision and auditory exclusion being the most common. Odds are the three officers did not comprehend what each were saying and how they were saying it. In this case, for Sweeney at least, his perception was skewed as he interpreted what was clearly a lighter, at least to Nitzky and Howell, as a knife.

After the sergeant shot Pigeon, Sweeney asked the other officers, “Is that a knife in his hand?”

One responded, “It’s lighter fluid.”

This question by the Sgt in my estimation is him trying to fill in the blanks of his decision making process. I have no idea if he was asking to validate what he did, or if it was more of he knew he screwed up and was trying to cover is ass, looking to the other officer to corroborate his viewpoint.

Credit to the other officer for not backing off of what he saw and knew, and not corroborating the Sgt's stated view. Especially as a subordinate.

Back to the discharge of the bean bag gun.

Besides his vision being limited and/or distorted, Sweeney’s auditory abilities were most likely affected because of the high level of stress he was experiencing. Add it all up: his close proximity to what he has determined to be a threat, his highly aroused state, put him on edge. His muscles were tensing up and his finger was on the trigger of his 9mm. Then, to his immediate left: POP!

Why Did He Shoot?

I can think of three possible reasons Sgt. Keith Sweeney fired his weapon at Dustin Pigeon. Again, my opinion and I was not there …

One. He intentionally fired believing he was about to be attacked by a man with a knife. That would make the shooting justifiable if his belief was reasonable. In other words, to a reasonable police officer, would Pigeon’s behavior lead him to conclude that he was in immediate danger of death or great bodily harm.

I wish this paragraph could have been worded better. I had to read it a couple times because I thought he was saying the Sgt's actions were in line with what a reasonable officer would do. That isn't what it's saying, it's saying that if the Sgt had a reasonable belief, he would be justified. Clearly between the video, the audio, the actions and stated views of the other 2 officers, his was no where near a reasonable belief.

Two. The startle effect. Sweeney didn’t consciously pull the trigger repeatedly. It was a reaction to the sound. The sergeant, as we have established, was likely under extreme stress. His gun is out, his muscles are tightening, his finger is on the trigger, he has placed himself in a vulnerable position and is acutely stressed. A loud sound and he squeezes as fast as he can for one second. Five rounds towards Pigeon is the result.

Three. Sweeney, believing the other officers were firing (due to hearing that POP!), follows suit and discharges his firearm. Evidence of this may be found in a statement by Sweeney to Officer Nitzky after he fired his five rounds, “I didn’t know you had a bean bag.”

Add to all the other ways this Sgt messed up, there's also a failure in leadership. As a supervisor he should know what his people are equipped and trained with and what they have access too. I have a fairly large squad so I wouldn't expect my Sgts to know exactly who has what, but they do know there is enough of a mix of equipment and training (rifle, tazer, CIT trained officer) within the group that they can assume those resources are on scene to be accessed or will be momentarily.

It could also be possible the Sgt knew his guy had a bean bag round, but due to his approach and response, didn't know it was available.

Conclusion

Train. People are constantly looking at law enforcement in an effort to find ill intent, malevolence, racism, etc., etc., among it’s over 800,000 members. I don’t believe that 18,000 law enforcement agencies are imbued with such systemic issues. But training is a profession-wide problem. We must train better in the areas we are most vulnerable to avoid making mistakes that result in injuries and deaths. Officers should be trained extensively in understanding how to deal with people while experiencing a high level of sudden onset stress. But we pretty much don’t. We just hope everything just works out.

Sometimes it doesn’t.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



If you took the time to watch the video, there's two issues that occur towards the end that I wanted to take a moment to address.

1) Right after Mr. Pidgeon falls to the ground, the officers don't rush right over to render first aid. Most people are going to be critical of that, and I wouldn't necessarily blame them for that BUT don't forget what they were dealing with: a suicidal subject who presented the means to do it by self immolation; the lighter and lighter fluid. They weren't able to determine (at least I don't believe) whether or not this guy hadn't already doused himself. The slow and cautious approach you see by the officer at the end is him trying to ascertain if this person is still in a position to light himself up and take him with him.

The video ends right after so I don't know if they eventually did get in to a position to attempt life saving measures.

2) At the very end of the video is a small blurb about the media digging up social media stuff on the Sgt and mentions how he owns a clothing line pushing the "warrior mindset".

There's a lot to unpack with that topic and I'm hesitant to go there because this post is already such a bear, and if you're reading this sitting on the toilet, you're probably in danger of getting hemmoroids, but it does have some overlap.

But here goes anyway...

"warrior mindset' is a topic I struggle with quite a bit actually and I'm hoping a little bit of constructive dialogue can help me navigate that.

6 years Marine Corps and other life experiences... I understand what the "warrior mindset" is. I understand the necessity of it in my current profession. But I also understand there's a ... purposeful nuance?... to it's inclusion in my profession. It's a nuance not understood by the public at large, add to it the language used surrounding it, they are often turned off by it. And I get why.

If the public at large doesn't understand the nuance, how can I be sure my fellow officers understand the purposeful nuance?

I like Frank Castle a.k.a the Punisher as much as anyone else does.. as a character. But I don't agree with the iconography being associated with law enforcement. I'd almost say I at least understand why some use it, but I really don't. I can't tell you what aspect of that character resembles anything close to what my job is supposed to be. It's not an appropriate association to have IMO.

Some of the problem I think too is verbage. Words are important and the words you use matter. There's been a shift away from the term "warrior" and it's been replaced by "wolf hunter" and "sheep dog".

Both are meant to be representative of someone who protects innocent people from those who would do them harm.

I'm not terribly comfortable with this terminology either because the other half of that is it equates people to "sheep". In this respect "sheep" is supposed to be representative of innocent, well meaning people going on about their business unaware of the dangers around them.

But unfortunately as a society we've already decided equating people with "sheep" is an insult to represent people who can't think for themselves. I always cringe when I see the term "sheep" being used, no matter if it is with the best of intentions.

I tell my rookies that everyone has their own personality and that they need to learn how to incorporate theirs in to the job. People spot fakes a mile away and the job is more difficult if you try to pretend you are somebody you aren't. But I also tell them they need to develop other personas that they can switch to as the situation warrants.

Given the threats today, the public should want their cops to have the ability, I'll say again, the ability to become that warrior, wolf hunter, sheep dog as the need arises. Look to Parkland: if it's your kids in that school, or it's your office, do want the deputy who's going to wait outside? Or do you want that officer who was Officer Friendly 2 minutes ago who can switch in to a mode that compels them to go in, alone if need be, and have the mental/emotional fortitude to do what is necessary, to have the ability and skill set, to stop the massacre?

Help me out guys. How do we bridge that gap between necessity and purposeful nuance?

I don't know the Sgt in this incident. I can't say with any certainty what was going on inside his head, if anything. He has this clothing line. How far past purposeful nuance was he? How much of that philosophy was only used to to hype himself up?




Anyway, if you made it through to the end... you are a champ! LOL I hope this post answers some questions and spawns some new ones. Even if it doesn't, hopefully you guys will have at least one more wrinkle on the brain.

Before I actually give a thought out response, just want to let you know you’re soft for that disclaimer.

Anyway, moving on.

Watching the video, I have to first wonder who in that department has dealt with a suicide call. The officer with the body cam going sounds calm enough, and he isn’t approaching in any sort of threatening manner. The guy is clearly approaching the situation as if he’s responding to a suicide call.

Officer Sweeney, however, sounded like a guy who just had his wife file for divorce prior to responding to this situation.

So I. Immediately wondering what was going on with this guy that he was so aggressive and violent at the jump?

Did the officers not inform him that this was a suicide situation?

The other officers could’ve told him to back off and told him what was in he suspects hand.

Heat of the moment is zero excuse for this shooting.

When he yells “I will —— shoot you” should’ve been the light bulb moment for the other officers to get this hot head out of the area.

Again, heat of the moment is zero excuse for this shooting, because the cop had zero business escalating the situation in the first place, which is exactly what happened here.

This guy treated the situation as if the suspect was a terrorist suspect, and not a suicide suspect.

And that’s the problem that’s prevalent in this country. Cops are treating civilians like theyre Osama bin laden instead of frank from down the way.

So, we have a completely over the top cop, combined with other cops who can’t be bothered to open their mouths and let their fellow officer know what the situation is.

I don’t understand how lighter fluid gets confused for a knife. Which makes this comes off as a guy who had every intention on firing his gun, because the suspect did literally nothing to make the officer fear for their lives, or whatever get out of jail free card you guys love using.

And he warrior mindset.....I’m sorry but if we have cops talking about a warrior mindset, then they have zero business being cops. This isn’t Iraq or Afghanistan. This is America.

It’s one thing to try and push a clothing line with some catch phrases on it. It’s completely different when you have a guy trying to actively live that lifestyle.

I’m not sure what “conversation” you’re hoping for.

The psychology of why it happened?

Sgt. Keith Sweeney was extremely negligent.

I think he obviously violated some basic police protocols.

1) First officers had the situation under control.
2) It appears the suspect was nowhere near able to pose a direct threat to the officers.

I think Improvement can come by making this specific incident a must-see scenario and discussion for all police.

I’m guessing that all police agencies have mandatory annual “continuing education”.

This would be a great "case study".

This incident (and Sweeney’s punishment) should have a solid effect in helping prevent unnecessary death/injury in the future.

Key words - “...helping prevent…”

Ok, just re-watched the vid:

1) it looks like the Sweeney was one of the first on scene, actually I think he was the one closest. I didn't quite catch that before.

But that also points to the comment in the original article about the increase in stressors the closer you get in proximity.

2) Sweeney didn't say anything about a knife in when he shouted the commands.

3) This actually makes me even more curious as to how Sweeney arrived in the state that he did because he was the first there, was even closer, and didn't see what the other guy saw. He was so hyper focused I don't think he would have heard anything the other officers would have told him. and until he started shouting, I don't think the other two have any idea exactly what frame of mind he was in.

*this is combined with the 2nd post you just made*

if he was the first on the scene, then we need to know how long he was on scene. like, what was the time he engaged til the time the other officers showed up.

cause now i have to wonder if the guy simply lost his patience. its yet another dynamic that we have to consider.

since from what you said, he knew (or at the very least *shouldve* known) what the situation was, is it policy to have weapons drawn on a suicide suspect?

if so, thats something that should be considered in training. its not like the guy was in the middle of nowhere trying to light himself on fire, he was in the middle of a residential area, so i dunno if having weapons drawn in a residential area on a suicide suspect who doesnt have hostages is a smart move.

it causes panic, not only to the suspect, but potentially to the officer.

in suicide situations, its imperative that everyone involved is calm. the officer with the bodycam approached the situation the correct way. he didnt shout, didnt make threats. Sweeney escalated the situation. once the shouting started, the suspect dropped his hands. its important for the other officers to tell EVERYBODY to keep calm, even their own fellow officers. you can't have someone calm and another guy acting like he's on a steroid trip and expect the suspect to not do anything.


i also have to ask this.....and maybe this sounds jacked up, but i dunno.

if the only threat is the suspect causing harm on himself...then whats the point of shooting? there isn't a situation where he can cause harm to the officers, so there was no point in the shot.

if sweeney was there on the scene first, then how did he think there was a knife when he's clearly closer and can see whats in the suspects hand?

even the officer whose body cam we're viewing saw it was lighter.

yes, we agree on the warrior mindset. you can have a warrior mindset when you're about to do a drug bust on some thugs or cartel. you can have a warrior mindset when you're in a hostage situation but have a clear shot without harming hostages. you can have a warrior mindset when trying to stop a domestic violence situation with a guy with a deadly weapon.

but i can not possibly fathom why that would apply in this situation, and thats why even possessing that mindset is so dangerous.

it is especially difficult to turn on and off, and a lot of guys simply do not have a handle on that. i dunno if i even have a handle on it because i haven't needed a "Warriors mindset" since my last deployment ended in 2012.

as far as your question, i think i rather have the guy with the body cam show up over a guy like Sweeney.

thats the kind of guy who would end up accidentally shooting another kid trying to stop the actual kid who's doing the shooting.

"Warrior mindset" aka be as cowardly as you possibly can.

Part of the problem is that cops generally tend to be 'take charge' personalities. It is, after all, 90% of the job. People call the police because things are out of control. Taking control is the job.

On a high stress scene, having multiple officers 'taking charge' too often results in multiple officers giving contradictory commands. I have repeatedly cautioned my officers to watch for, and avoid this situation when possible.

The "constructive" in constructive conversation lasted even shorter than I expected.

what does this mean.

I'd be reticent to use those terms because they are borne of reference to, and popularized by, Chris Kyle/American Sniper and it elicits an image of an officer that fancies himself to be some form of wannabe super badass that protects by putting down bad guys. That is an image and mindset that works great in the military, but probably isn't the best frontline mentality for law enforcement... a.k.a. Peace Officers.

Warrior Mindset is the way most cops are trained these days. They like to pretend they're warriors in some sort of Army, beating up the bad guys like a Clint Eastwood movie. This Warrior Mindset leads cops to shoot people dead with knives when the person is 30 yards out. It's the training that says to release an entire clip into someone. If you look at what type of training cops who shoot unarmed people get, it's this warrior training that they receive. Warrior training makes police think they are in a war zone without structures like rules of engagement. It has been the most predominant form of police "training" for decades.

Recently, the guardian mindset has become a staple in police training, but it's rarely used, especially with older officers. Guardian training makes the police, actual policemen, people who serve and protect. It teaches policemen how to communicate with people in their precinct and deal with stressful situations. Police who receive this training have far less excessive force complaints as well as complaints in general.

What ever happened to the “Peace Officer Mentality”?

Sorry its been a couple days..

You're right, if he's not got a hostage and no one else is within distance to be harmed if he decided ti light up, to there should be no need to rush things (which btw is the main concept in current Crisis Intervention Training).

Which makes Sweeney's approach to this situation even more perplexing. There was no need to close the distance, no need for really anything he did.

And i do agree, the "warrior mindset" is something that has to have an off switch. You can still be tactically safe without trying to plan an invasion during every interaction with someone.

As far as having the gun out, if the means of suicide can be turned on you, then yes, but like W84 said, you're going to try to be more discreet with it if the situation warrat. Someone ODing on pills isnt likely to warrant drawing your gun.

You're leaving out the entire other half of the Guardian concept.

That half is the half that addresses when the use of frce or violence is necessary. Not every situation can be solved solely by talking. The public at large believes the opposite however. There is a time to stop talking and action is required.

That may seem harsh or Rambo like. It's just the truth of things. Having said that, being prepared to take action doesn't mean you get to disregard opportunities to de-escalate verbally.

Agreed absolutely. Suicide by cop is a real thing, people do shoot cops. That's a real thing, statistically rarer now than ever before, but it's still real. Sometimes police must use lethal force to save people, it happens. And that's what makes the Guardian training a lot better imo, because it teaches cops how to stay vigilant while also teaching them to protect and serve our communities.

I think obviously the biggest problem with Warrior training is that the police have no idea what it's like to be on the other side of that badge. I saw a thing in the New Yorker recently about how VR was used to create out of body experiences for people convicted of domestic violence. In the simulation, the criminal would be observing their body from the outside, then a simulated person would enter the virtual room they and their body were in and start attacking and berating the criminal's body. The criminal was out of body and couldn't react with the simulated person at all. At the end of the experiment all of them said that they experienced nothing like that before, and felt so defenseless and weak for the first times in their life. They could finally start to empathize with their victims and see how that behavior made people feel. I think Cops who go through Warrior training should be treated the same way as they do not understand how it feels to be on the other side of the badge, where 2+ officers are screaming out different commands. Had the SWAT team member in Arizona had a similar training, then he probably would not have shot Daniel Shaver as he was trying to comply with the officer. Tamir Rice would probably be alive if the Officer would've waited more than 2 seconds before emptying a clip into that 12 year old's body. That's the Warrior Mindset. And no, it's not a Rambo-esque mindset, it's a war criminal mindset. Up there with the Nazis who operated labor camps and the NKVD who ran the gulags. If a Warrior Mindset was Rambo-esque, you'd see a lot more raids and a lot less drugs on the streets. People might even like cops, if they had a Rambo mindset. But the Warrior mindset isn't that at all, which is a shame because it is sold as a Clint Eastwood style cool way to police.

Please don't take this as being snarky, because its not how i mean this. But out of curiosity, what era or part of history would be an example of what you mean by the peace officer mentality?

I'd say you'd be alone if you said the last 30yrs. 60's and 70's? Deaths for cops and minorities by cops were way higher back then than they are now. The 50's? Thaf may have been a time you could turn Johnny over to his folks and be assured the matter would be handled. But Johnny could alsp expect to get tuned up simply for running bis mouth and no one would bat an eye. A hundred years ago? I don't know.

I think sometimes the public has this romanticized memory of a period that might not have existed.

When i hear "peace officer" i think of someone charged with maintaining peace... Law and order. Not a version of David Carridine from Kung Fu.

In any event, however it gets defined, the job requires exponentially more responsibilities and roles. This job would be cake if maintaining the peace was my only task.

I was a Certfified Firefighter I for 8 years in the 90s.



Every call we went on, of course the cops were there first.

(Cops on the road.)

My personal favorite was responding to CO alarms.

As we pulled up in a Fire Truck(s) donning our SCBA*, the cops were already in the house/building without protection. Good way to die. Can take less than 5 minutes.



We trained for this type of stuff.

Did you?

Note: The warrior mentality does no good trying to save some one in a CO call.

Unconsciousness is almost immediate. No one gets saved.

That's a pretty big leap to go from Tamir Rice to Nazis my friend and no where near accurate. Not in metbod, authority, or cause.

I agree, everyone loves he Rambo cop, the cop willing to break the rules to get the bad guy. It makes for great television. But put any one of those fictional cop shows that showcase what who you are talking about, and I'll show you how that perpetrator would have gotten off scott free. There are so many Civil Rights violations showcased that if people actually knew what their Rights are, they wouldn't be popular.


Its funny because no one wants their rights violated, but people have no problem telling us to go violate someone else's lol

Admittedly the extent of my hazmat training is relegated to a little orange Hazmat Guide with a bunch of reference numbers and a general rule to always stay upwind.

Exactly.. everybody loves it on TV because the badass cop with good intentions always ends up being right... the bad guys are caught and the good guys are spared... and their "instincts" of who to beat the crap out of and who to trust are always spot on...

They should train you to have those instincts.

I get why you say that the dude who shot Tamir Rice and the Gestapo are different things, but that was my point. Cops with the warrior mindset are much more like them then they are Rambo and that was my point. While I get why the "warrior" police like to think of themselves of a hypermasculine version of their donut eating, 9 minute miles selves, it's a dangerous mindset for them to have when they think they need to be Rambo because they pulled someone over with a broken taillight. Especially when they are too chickencrap to pull a Rambo and take out some bad guys instead of a kid selling dime bags. It ultimately does a lot more harm to the department than good when you have these cops running around like crappy vigilantes. Especially when these "warrior" cops form a police "brotherhood" with their coworkers and have cultures that are against snitching, reforms or honest police work. It allows bad cops a lot more room to operate while besmirching the name of good cops. Look at Chicago and Baltimore, who have horrible police departments, whose cops are more likely to plant a gun on you than they are to help you. It's no wonder why the citizens of Baltimore and Chicago do not want to work with them or have anything to do with them. And this is the problem when we talk about police violating the rights of citizens, because the burden of proof falls on the victims of police violations instead of the police themselves. When police use the authority that the community gives them to lie and cheat, it paints a horrible light on the profession.

Personally, I don't want cops to violate anyone's rights. Instead, I'd like to see them spend some more time in the office than on the streets. Maybe try to find some white collar criminals for once as they get the real cash. Heck, if they want to play Rambo there in some Corporations' downtown office and push a manager out of a window, well I could think of worse civil rights violations. That part was a joke.

Wait a second, what are you going to tell us next? That you can't really get shot in the shoulder and be walking around in perfect health 48 hours later? That y'all can't have a firefight 30 feet apart from each other using automatic weapons firing off 30 rounds per second and still miss each other? Yea right who is going to believe that