Need help writing about high profile shoot outs (long)
This is a discussion on Need help writing about high profile shoot outs (long) within the Carry & Defensive Scenarios forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; First off, some background:
I am an maritime law enforcement officer. One of the many parts of my job is policing a large seaport in ...
January 19th, 2010 09:01 PM
Need help writing about high profile shoot outs (long)
First off, some background:
I am an maritime law enforcement officer. One of the many parts of my job is policing a large seaport in a third world country. In our jurisdiction, violent incidents are relatively common, but rarely involve firearms. Still, shooting incidents tend to happen every couple of years or so.
My unit (and the entire force, actually) has an absolutely horrible policy regarding firearms. Just to give you an idea:
- Junior enlisted personnel are not allowed to own or carry firearms off-duty. They just go to work each morning, grab their gear from the armory, and then turn it in. So, if they don´t personally own guns (and few of them do), they simply can´t get any extra training.
- Firearms qualifications are yearly. Each man is required to shoot 24 rounds of .38 or .357 at 15 meters, and that´s about it. Some of them can´t even hit a man-sized target shooting simple action. If it were up to me, I wouldn´t give guns to most of the unit, including some commissioned officers.
- The standard issue sidearm is a Taurus 65 revolver with six rounds, and no spare ammunition (!!). In fact, policy used to be issuing five rounds and carrying the revolver with one empty chamber, supposedly to prevent NDs if dropped (!!!). When I arrived at my unit I took the trouble of explaining to my XO the utter nonsense of that practice, and I managed to change that. Later I realised that the real reason behind it was that it made life easier for the armorer, since he kept the rounds neatly in the box and just had to pick out one row of ammo for each man.
- Issued ammo used to be SJHP .357, until command decided that HPs are not legal for military use (we are nominally military), and switched them to standard .38 158 gr. lead round nose.
So... Last year I attended USCG boarding officer school, where I got some pretty good LE training, and now I´ve been asked to submit a draft for a new maritime LE training manual.
I would really like to slip in some case studies where I can argue for changes in our current firearm policies.
I was thinking of mentioning the Matix-Platt case, and I´d like some help and information about other relevant shootings and any other info or ideas that could help me with my work...
January 19th, 2010 11:37 PM
If you are looking to justify better arming of your officers the North Hollywood Shootout wikipedia link was used by many police departments as justification for arming officers with assault type rifles. If you are looking for justification for more training I'm sorry I don't have any case/studies that come to mind other than common sense. I would bring forth the arguement that it greatly reduces chances of liability (if that is an issue in your area) to have your officers complete and qualify with their weapons. See if you can get them to institute a policy where they must be able to actually hit their target at multiple distances. I would also consider contacting the IDPA (international defensive pistol association) as they may have more informaiton for you in regards to justificaiton of training or at least they may be able to point you in the right direction. International Defensive Pistol Association
Most of us here on this forum understand that if we are going to carry a weapon that we must be proficient in its use to be able to effectively use it in a stressful situation. Are you allowed to train with your weapons on a voluntary basis? I would ask to at least have the opportunity to train and would pay for my own ammunition. I know gun laws vary and can be very restrictive in other countries and it may take "baby steps" to get your superiors to allow more training as any bureaucratic entity requires a cost analysis before approval. Compromise may be your best bet if you are dealing with someone that just doesn't want to spend money on any more training.
To those that paid for my freedom,
I WILL NEVER FORGET.
As with all statements I've made and All that I will make, please check your local laws to verify accuracy. (and if i'm wrong let me know as I like to be right in the future) After all I'm just some goofball posting on an internet forum.
January 20th, 2010 12:54 AM
You really need to have an expert come in and evaluate your training or lack of,and upgrade your weapons to include some carbines
"Outside of the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the country,"
--Mayor Marion Barry, Washington , DC .
January 22nd, 2010 07:27 PM
part of your agencys problem might be budget, hence getting new wepons might be an issue. hence i whould sagest incednts were officers needed more then 6 rounds. atleast get relodes and more tranning
By SecPro in forum New Members Introduce Yourself
Last Post: October 30th, 2010, 03:22 AM
By mrreynolds in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: October 5th, 2010, 10:27 AM
By SIXTO in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
Last Post: January 6th, 2010, 10:01 AM
By Rob99VMI04 in forum Defensive Rifles & Shotgun Discussion
Last Post: July 31st, 2008, 11:40 PM