UNR Police Chief and his officers prefer executions to defensive shootings.

The Nevada Sagebrush - » States consider guns on campuses

Quote:

---

UNR Police Chief Adam Garcia said the police department would also be against any proposals to allow permit carriers to carry guns on campus, though they would enforce the policy if it did become law.

“Most police officers would rather respond to a shooting, not a shootout,” Garcia said.

---

So in other words, Chief Garcia is opposed to the idea of students being allowed to defend themselves because of an officers preference to the type of call they may find themselves responding to?

He doesn't want to have to go to a site where an intended victim stopped a threat in it's tracks. He would prefer to respond to the site of a slaughter where nobody had a chance.

What a (insert descriptive expletive here) guy.

Taking the concept of "officer safety" a little too far, are we?

I think any sane person would rather respond to a shooting vs. a shootout... I dont see the big deal about that statement.

From the Nevada Sagebrush:

(Excuse the goofy characters...)

Quote:

---

Police vote against chief
BY BRIAN DUGGAN AND NICK COLTRAIN
TUESDAY, FEB. 26, 2008 @ 3:23 AM
Ten out of 16 officers and four sergeants in the University of Nevada, Reno Police Department said they have no confidence in police chief Adam Garcia, according to an undated three-page memo.The officers and sergeants who signed the document about two weeks ago say that the department “is not prepared for a major incident like Columbine or Virginia Tech� because of low staffing levels, poor equipment and little training.
The officers also accuse Garcia of neglecting their safety and being out of touch with the department’s needs.
Ron Zurek, Garcia’s immediate boss at the university, and Jannet Vreeland, the interim provost, met with the police sergeants Monday about their complaints. Vreeland said they are “gathering information.�
They said it would be premature to comment further.
UNR President Milton Glick said the same, though he was disappointed that the complaint went public.
“I am very disappointed that the officers would have gone to the press with this, without going to Ron Zurek or me, especially in a time like this,� Glick said.
Garcia and Ron Cuzze, president of the Nevada State Law Enforcement Officers’ Association, gave different twists on the same story. UNR police officers are not permitted to comment to the media.
Garcia calls the three-page complaint a “laundry list� of grievances meant to discredit the department.
“This document is obviously so ambiguous (that) it says very little,� Garcia said. “The way it was presented and produced, it was obviously presented for a reason; it wasn’t meant to change things. It was meant to embarrass the department and the university.�
Garcia questioned the motives behind releasing the memo to the media last week before he saw it. He called the act “character assassination.�
Cuzze said the officers, not the union released the information to the media. He said it was the only way for them to get leverage in working with the university administrators. In the memo, officers said the vote of no confidence made its first rounds in August. But Garcia held a meeting and promised to fix the problems, they said.
“The last one (vote of no confidence) didn’t work and the only way they (the officers) can get their voice heard is with the media,� Cuzze said.
He said Garcia has tried to retaliate and discredit the officers in press reports. Garcia told the Associated Press that he might change the work schedule to five 8-hour days instead of the four 10-hour days worked now.
Cuzze said that is Garcia sending veiled threats to his officers.
“Police departments are run by intimidation and Garcia is one of the best intimidators and that’s ********,� Cuzze said. “They (the officers) are tired of his intimidation and they’re fighting back and they won’t quit until he (Garcia) is gone.�
When asked for a response to Cuzze’s comment, Garcia said, “I don’t know what he means by (intimidation). Does he mean expecting people to do their job?�
Garcia also raised questions of officers who are concerned about patrolling alone at night.
“I think it’s ironic, what’s going on in our community that we have officers saying they don’t want to do this (patrol alone),� Garcia said. “Shame on them.�
Garcia said “none of these officers are being worked to death� and UNRPD doesn’t need to hire more officers.
But officers want to do their jobs safely so they can keep the public safer, Cuzze said.
“That’s what the officers are really saying: stop telling these people (the public) lies, stop giving these people a false sense of security, give us the proper training and give us the proper equipment and let us do our job,� Cuzze said.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SIXTO

I think any sane person would rather respond to a shooting vs. a shootout... I dont see the big deal about that statement.

---

I know and understand what you're saying..but I hope you'll forgive me if I would personally prefer LEOs respond to draw the chalk outline around the bad guy's body rather than around mine. :smile:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TacticalCompact

He doesn't want to have to go to a site where an intended victim stopped a threat in it's tracks. He would prefer to respond to the site of a slaughter where nobody had a chance.

---

That's essentially what the guy is saying, yes, unthinking though that seems.

Quote:

---

UNR Police Chief Adam Garcia said the police department would also be against any proposals to allow permit carriers to carry guns on campus, though they would enforce the policy if it did become law.

“Most police officers would rather respond to a shooting, not a shootout,” Garcia said.

---

He is implying that allowing students to carry will cause 'shootouts', i.e. mayhem in the streets. The comment is more about the subtle smearing of concealed carry in general than about a logical preference of what situation an officer would prefer to respond to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stanislaskasava

He is implying that allowing students to carry will cause 'shootouts', i.e. mayhem in the streets. The comment is more about the subtle smearing of concealed carry in general than about a logical preference of what situation an officer would prefer to respond to.

---

I think you are correct. But the logical "reduction-to-absurdity" of his argument is that he believes LEOs would rather respond to dead victims than active shootings. As Sixto said, that is logical, as no sane person wants to be placed in harm's way by the actions of another...and we carry to be able to respond to such a threat. The chief seems to be discounting or dismissing that desire on the part of the law-abiding as unworthy of consideration. OMO, of course. :bier:

Quote:

---

He is implying that allowing students to carry will cause 'shootouts', i.e. mayhem in the streets.

---

Undoubtedly, there will be the odd criminal, here and there, that just hasn't been caught carrying yet. A few will certainly begin carrying once they deem themselves legal, and some of them will certainly go sideways and show their colors. It's to be hoped that each is quickly and effectively stopped by a citizen who knows the appropriate use of defensive weapons. A little thinning of the evil end of the pool isn't exactly a bad thing. It's the whole point of the exercise, actually (jail if possible, else morgue if they insist). There IS a distinction between good shootings and bad, in that sense.

But, as we all know, even with more criminals opting for suicide-by-citizen, it ends up being nowhere near the "blood in the streets," sky-is-falling type scenario the anti-gunners so dreadfully fear. Hasn't happened anywhere in the U.S. that MORE guns in the hands of citizens has occurred.

Well I see my pot stirring got nipped in the bud...

I know nothing about Garcia, but making my judgment from the article that SelfDefense posted I would have to say Garcia is a goof, and to consider the institution that hired him as Chief.
I'll go out on a limb and take an educated guess that he his an academic type with little or no real world experience, police related or otherwise. If he has had a full career in police work, its been behind a desk. Unfortunately for us, these types of chiefs are becoming more and more common.

UNR Police Chief Adam Garcia said the police department would also be against any proposals to allow permit carriers to carry guns on campus, though they would enforce the policy if it did become law.

“Most police officers would rather respond to a shooting, not a shootout,” Garcia

When I first saw that I thought he meant he'd rather the BG be executed rather than simply shot.
I'd rather be involved in a shootout than on the receiving end of a shooting. Anyone see it the other way around?

I don't think Chief Garcia really cares what happens- he wants the shooting to be done by the time his officers get there. Not particularly praiseworthy, but understandable.

I'll bet it doesn't matter to him whether there's one nut case who murders his ex-wife and then shoots himself, a nut case who murders a dozen innocents or a legally armed citizen who shoots the nut case. So long as the shooting is done before his guys get there.

Having said that, he probably would oppose any move expanding the legalization of places where anyone but an LEO could carry a gun. Why? Surprisingly, it's not because he's the devil incarnate; it's because he doesn't want his officers to have to waste valuable time thinking. If someone besides one of their own has a gun, the officers can just classify that person as "hostile" and act accordingly. It simplifies things.

It is, as others have pointed out, a perspective widely shared by those administrators who are desk and chair-bound, the number-crunchers, etc.

It isn't a point of view adhered to by people who face danger, though.

While I can't say I blame him in general for not getting too excited about having to show up in the midst of the shootout, this in particular seems incredibly cowardly and outrageously stupid.

I can also understand, from an LEO perspective, the problems inherent there -- that is, if they're responding to an active shooter, they take out the first guy they see shooting. But if they here that there's a GG and a BG shooting at each other while they respond... that puts them in a tough position. They can't just shoot and ask questions later, but they risk crippling and endangering themselves and everyone else by waiting until they can figure out who is who. Perhaps my greatest fear (unlikely and irrational though it may be) is getting accidentally taken out by a fellow CCW'er or an LEO with good intentions but poor discernment.

Still, he's basically saying, "I'd rather have a dozen dead and a clear BG than to have to figure out whose the BG and who is defending himself and others." Incredible. Appalling. Ridiculous. This guy is supposed to serve and protect?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by biasedbulldog

I can also understand, from an LEO perspective, the problems inherent there -- that is, if they're responding to an active shooter, they take out the first guy they see shooting. But if they here that there's a GG and a BG shooting at each other while they respond... that puts them in a tough position. They can't just shoot and ask questions later, but they risk crippling and endangering themselves and everyone else by waiting until they can figure out who is who.

---

Irrelevant!

They don't arrive on scene and get mixed up in the shooting anyway.
They stand behind their cars outside and wait till the shooter commits suicide, then they go in. See Columbine thru V. Tech.

The best person to stop the threat is not the cop who responds to the call and has to figure out what the deal is.

The best person to stop the threat is someone who is on scene and knows the score, ie. an armed potential victim. See Apalachian Law School shooting thru Colorado Church shooting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SIXTO

I think any sane person would rather respond to a shooting vs. a shootout... I dont see the big deal about that statement.

---

Prefer as in my own personal safety?

Or

Prefer as in achieving my goal of protecting and serving?