Cops vs. Gun Guys

[DBLAction454]

Before reading this post understand that I am in no way bashing police officers. I give them the utmost respect as my father was a police officer for some time and I have multiple close friends who are officers as well.

But most cops are not gun guys... They know the gun they carry for their job and that's it. Those guys also do not like knowing that people besides themselves carry and own guns as well which gun guys know and encourage.

True story:
Last summer I was in a car accident on the highway. Car was totaled (I was uninjured thankfully) but while waiting for tow I told the officer I had a concealed carry and it was in my vehicle and I wanted to put the gun on before the tow truck came. I keep my gun in a case while driving if its a longer drive and its not on my hip... So the officer watches me put on my weapon and its my USP45. My friend got there to give me a ride home and as the officer is walking with my to his vehilce I notice the officer is carrying a USP as well which I've never seen before on any of my local PD. So our conversation went like this.

Me - "Hey does your whole department carry USPs or just you?"
Him - "Whole department"
Me - "Cool. I love my USP45, carry it everyday" (I make a gesture to my hip)
Him - "Thats not a USP45"
Me - "Yes it is, its not stainless like yours but its a USP45"
Him - "No its not"
Me - "Yes sir it is. (I move my clothing out of the way) I have night sights on it but its a USP45"
Him - "Oh yeah I guess you're right"
Me - (Amazed that he expects I wouldnt know what my own weapon is) "Yeah its awesome, cant beat 12 rounds of 45"
Him - "You mean 10?"
Me - "No mine holds 12"
Him - "No it doesn't"
Me - (Here we go again) "Sir they can hold 12"
Him - "I don't think so"
Me - (Frustrated I pull my spare mag from mag carrier and offer it to him) "Count them"
Him - (Looks at mag for 2 seconds and goes) "Oh wow I thought they only held 10"
Me - "Your dept only issues you 10 rounders... I would buy some 12's"
Him - "Yeah maybe I should"
Me - "Have a nice day sir"

I swear to every word of that conversation. I couldn't believe that he was arguing with my about my own weapon. The mag thing I can kind of understand but actually what the gun is? He was a nice guy and I'm not bashing him at all but after telling some of my cop buddies the story it's just clear that MOST cops are just not gun guys. Having a gun is just a part of their job. Kudos to all police officers for the job they do every day.

[Corey]

I got my amateur radio license when I was a teenager. While I have not used a radio in years I expect I still know a metric ton more about radios than the average cop who carries and uses one daily. Why would guns be any different? This isn’t a criticism of anyone, just an observation that we will have more expertise in things we participate in for our own enjoyment, fulfillment, whatever; versus those things we do only because we have to.

Besides, how much do cops really need to know about guns, or radios, to do their job. Beyond a certain level of maintenance and operation, not much. Still, no need for one to display their lack of insider knowledge publicly. The fact that a cop doesn't know as much about my hobby as I do does not surprise me in the least. Even if it is something relevant to his job.

[Byron]

I got my amateur radio license when I was a teenager. While I have not used a radio in years I expect I still know a metric ton more about radios than the average cop who carries and uses one daily. Why would guns be any different?
Word.

Growing up, I figured that all cops and troops were gun experts by virtue of their profession. Time and experience have obviously shown me otherwise, but also opened my eyes to the fallacy of my original assumption.

I now think of it this way:

Many people use a computer as a critical part of their job. Yet if you wanted to find a computer expert, would you just randomly pick a person from any modern office? Would you call up your buddy and ask him which PC to get, just because you know he spends 50 hours a week on a PC at his job?

People can be functional with all sorts of tools that they only have superficial understanding of: that tends to be the way we try to design said tools in the first place. If using a computer for 50 hours a week as part of your job doesn't make you an expert on computers, then certainly carrying a firearm as part of your job isn't any more likely to make you an expert on firearms.

I think that this assumption is so strong with firearms just because they are tools that hold certain mystique to the general public and are only "professional tools" to a very limited number of professions.

[Tamara]

I'll bet Albert Pujols doesn't even know what brand of lathes they use in Louisville... ;)

[jetfire]

I'll bet Albert Pujols doesn't even know what brand of lathes they use in Louisville... ;)

/thread

[JodyH]

There are a lot of self-proclaimed "gun guys" who are pretty damn ignorant about firearms (even ones they own and carry) as well.

[Byron]

I'll bet Albert Pujols doesn't even know what brand of lathes they use in Louisville... ;)

/thread
I agree with Caleb.

Pack it up, folks; we're done here.

[G60]

As long as they're not so ignorant as to be a liability to themselves or their fellow officers, I don't expect them to be firearms experts.

[Drang]

My father, 25 years Detroit PD, is pretty much a Gun Culture v1 guy: hunted, did well at annual quals, NRA member and somewhat knowledgeable about guns, but also knew his limitations. (As Josey Wales might have said...) When the other cops were getting Hi Powers or S&W 39s, he stuck with a K Frame .38; I once asked him why, and he said he preferred his 12 gauge.
FWIW.


I'll bet Albert Pujols doesn't even know what brand of lathes they use in Louisville... ;)


I agree with Caleb.

Pack it up, folks; we're done here.

Not until someone tells me who Albert Pujols is.


(Yeah, yeah, "Google is your friend", "Let me Google It For You", blah, blah. That kinda ruins the point...)

[NETim]

My father, 25 years Detroit PD, is pretty much a Gun Culture v1 guy: hunted, did well at annual quals, NRA member and somewhat knowledgeable about guns, but also knew his limitations. (As Josey Wales might have said...) When the other cops were getting Hi Powers or S&W 39s, he stuck with a K Frame .38; I once asked him why, and he said he preferred his 12 gauge.
FWIW.





Not until someone tells me who Albert Pujols is.


(Yeah, yeah, "Google is your friend", "Let me Google It For You", blah, blah. That kinda ruins the point...)

He's Mrs. Pujols' boy.







:)

[Dan_S]

You know what is a shock to me?

That anyone is surprised by the factors that contributed to the starting of this thread....

Cops don't, by simply having a badge, magically know anything about guns. In fact, they might not *care* about a gun as anything more than simply one more thing they're required to lug around on their belt all day, right next to the taser, pepper spray, cuffs, and radio...


Whats surprising about that...??

[S Jenks]

http://youtu.be/f5cL-h3Pj1o

[NickA]

Cops don't, by simply having a badge, magically know anything about guns. In fact, they might not *care* about a gun as anything more than simply one more thing they're required to lug around on their belt all day, right next to the taser, pepper spray, cuffs, and radio...


And as some of the cops here at PF have pointed out, the gun is the tool most cops are least likely to ever use. Though I would hope they're at least familiar enough with their duty gun to know it's capacity, how to clear malfs, how to clean it, etc. If they can discuss the finer points of Glock vs 1911 vs SIG, cool, but not necessary.
That said, I do wish the training for actually using the thing was better for LEO's, since if they do need it, they'll need it.

[jlw]

It's hard to approach this topic without using generalizations.

I'm currently in my 15th year of toting a badge, and I have been a firearms instructor since 2003. By an overwhelming percentage, the folks that enter the profession had very little experience with firearms prior to their initial academy training. Some coming from the military had the rifle training, but they weren't up to speed on pistols, and the "good ole boys" may have shot at deer and doves, but again, they didn't have the experience with pistols. Very, very few folks were shooters who were even close to proficient.

Simply going through the academy and the annual required firearms qualifications does not a "gun person" make.

Even some of our instructors/SWAT guys don't have a plethora of general gun knowledge. I have personally seen SWAT guys not know how to open the cylinder on a revolver because they came onto the job after revolvers had passed out of the norm, and they had never loaded/unloaded one much less fired one.

Previously, we would schedule numerous "open range days" with provided ammo, paid time to shoot, and instructors on hand for coaching, and those days would get very little turnout. So, at the start of this year, I issued a memo that there would be no remedial training for those who failed to qualify and that there would be no positions created for those who couldn't qualify. Attendance has increased dramatically at the open range days.

Finally, I frequently hear snide remarks from competitive shooters concerning the lack of perceived accuracy by peace officers in deadly force situations. I wrote this response (http://chiefweems.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/my-response-to-competive-shooters/).

[Chuck Whitlock]

So how do we change the perception of the general public that "cop" = "gun expert"?
So that all the pro-gun-control chiefs ramblings only get the consideration that they actually warrant.
Is it even doable?

[Byron]

Is it even doable?
I sincerely doubt it.

[steve]

About 20 years ago I had a trainee show up for his first day. He was carrying a semi-auto and our department issue gun was still a revolver. Many had transitioned to semi-autos that were personally owned. I started discussing his gun with him and he told me it was a "self-loader". I asked him what a self-loader was and he told me he put the magazine in and when he pulled the trigger it self-loaded. I tried explaining that he had to load the chamber first and he looked quite puzzled. Once the light went on and he realized his mistake, it was a Kodak moment.

[S Jenks]

So how do we change the perception of the general public that "cop" = "gun expert"?
So that all the pro-gun-control chiefs ramblings only get the consideration that they actually warrant.
Is it even doable?

Stop making every primetime cop drama end in gunplay would be a start. For far many people, TV = real life. I have a relative who bitches constantly about State Police and how all they do is write traffic tickets, how they should investigate real crimes, etc. His favorite show is NCIS.

[hufnagel]

So how do we change the perception of the general public that "cop" = "gun expert"?
So that all the pro-gun-control chiefs ramblings only get the consideration that they actually warrant.
Is it even doable?

to the general public the belief that "cop == gun expertise" is a requirement to their fantasy that the police are there to protect them 24/7 and will be there at their immediately at their time of need. puncturing that fantasy is too disturbing and world-rocking for them to comprehend. they have mentally elevated the police to the level approaching sainthood, if not godhood, and expect them to do no wrong. the fact is they're just flawed human beings like the rest of us, dealing with the same budgetary and time crunches we all do. if your boss asked you to spend your non-office time and your own personal money for tasks involved with your job, you'd balk too. it doesn't surprise me that police balk at doing the same... especially with the current price of ammunition! combine that with the legal (NY's obscene trigger pull requirements) and mechanical (too big, too small, too powerful weapon, etc.) issues it's no wonder qualifying is all some care about.

[Chuck Whitlock]

Hufnagel,

You may be on to something, there.

[cclaxton]

to the general public the belief that "cop == gun expertise" is a requirement to their fantasy that the police are there to protect them 24/7 and will be there at their immediately at their time of need. puncturing that fantasy is too disturbing and world-rocking for them to comprehend. they have mentally elevated the police to the level approaching sainthood, if not godhood, and expect them to do no wrong. the fact is they're just flawed human beings like the rest of us, dealing with the same budgetary and time crunches we all do. if your boss asked you to spend your non-office time and your own personal money for tasks involved with your job, you'd balk too. it doesn't surprise me that police balk at doing the same... especially with the current price of ammunition! combine that with the legal (NY's obscene trigger pull requirements) and mechanical (too big, too small, too powerful weapon, etc.) issues it's no wonder qualifying is all some care about.

The generalizations in your post don't allow for the consideration that we are individuals and the "general public" is not a monolithic entity to be pigeon-holed to make a point. The same is true of "cops". They are not a monolithic group to be pigeon-holed and you are not allowing for the individuals and the great variety of LE groups that exist.

I shoot IDPA matches and we have about 30% of our shooters in this area are LE, or LE-related (i.e.-DHS). Another 30% or so are military or ex-military, and the rest civilians. And, within that 30% LE I see master level shooters and I see average shooters, I see LE whose hands shake when they shoot, I see SWAT-members that take way too many shots on target just for fun, ...etc. I am making the point here that Law Enforcement Officers are individuals, and their skills and temperament vary. I think it is wrong to generalize about them. Not only that, but some departments are better trained and others are not, and some have more funds for practice and some have no funds for practice. There is a lot of variance.

Also, I think you got it wrong about the General Public thinking that police will be there 24/7 to protect them at a moment's notice. Nobody in my neighborhood is so naive to think that the police response will be fast enough for a fast-acting criminal or domestic assault. There is no fantasy about that. Although I will admit that my neighbors put more faith in LE to problem-solve a life/death situation than should be given. Police can only do so much in a given situation and are under stress when there is a threat of violence and do make mistakes. I don't think the "general public" is under the impression cops can do no wrong....we see it in the news almost weekly.

If you want to make the point that police are not as well trained as they need to be or that the public is more confident in police than they should be, then make those points without generalizing about cops and the general public.

CC

[hufnagel]

I think you and I have different perspectives, based on where we live.
VA has a large and active gun culture with a demographic that believes in taking care of themselves.
NJ has a large and active demographic of trough feeders who want nothing more than to collect a welfare check while their baby momma drives a mercedes. They call for the police for the stupidest of things and take no responsibility for themselves. They will in one breath spew venom about the police being all over them and their business, then in the next rant about them not being there all the time when things go wrong.
The old guard in the departments around here are more into the "gun culture," or at least recognize the need to be trained on their use and keep up with that training. The new guard however don't give a damn about firearms skills.

Believe me when I say... I wish I lived in your world. :)

[ToddG]

cc -- Using your local IDPA population as a sample of LE in terms of handgun proficiency is terribly skewed.

[jlw]

cc -- Using your local IDPA population as a sample of LE in terms of handgun proficiency is terribly skewed.


Of course, using IDPA as a sample of general gun knowledge of gun owners and even shooters can be skewed as well. Years ago, my first exposure to IDPA was at an indoor match. I got asked numerous times why I wasn't carrying my S&W 4006 (issued) cocked & locked. The folks apparently believed that any pistol with a hammer could be carried in such a manner.

It was years before I gave IDPA another try.

[cclaxton]

cc -- Using your local IDPA population as a sample of LE in terms of handgun proficiency is terribly skewed.

Good point, although that cuts both ways: I have seen just as many LEO's that were low skilled and not as careful/controlled as they should be...but I concede your point.

My main point of this was that we should not generalize...we are all individuals and LE departments vary a lot in their training and their funding and this contributes to a wide variety of skill and training.

As a tangential point: I saw the Police One survey and it interested me that 4% of LEO's Rarely or Never carry their firearm when off-duty, and only 59% Always carry off-duty. This illustrates my point: There are many shades of grey when it comes to LEO's or the General Public and we should avoid generalizing them.

CC

[ToddG]

Good point, although that cuts both ways: I have seen just as many LEO's that were low skilled and not as careful/controlled as they should be...but I concede your point.

My main point of this was that we should not generalize...we are all individuals and LE departments vary a lot in their training and their funding and this contributes to a wide variety of skill and training.

I don't think the OP was generalizing, though. In fact, he's basically saying the same thing as you: It's a mistake for people to assume that ALL cops are <insert skill level here>.


As a tangential point: I saw the Police One survey and it interested me that 4% of LEO's Rarely or Never carry their firearm when off-duty, and only 59% Always carry off-duty.

That's probably the best evidence of how skewed the survey result was, then. I doubt you could find any major LE agency in which only 4% choose not to carry off duty.

[cclaxton]

That's probably the best evidence of how skewed the survey result was, then. I doubt you could find any major LE agency in which only 4% choose not to carry off duty.

So, are you saying it is probably much higher percentage of off-duty LEO's don't carry?
CC

[ToddG]

So, are you saying it is probably much higher percentage of off-duty LEO's don't carry?

No, I am not saying it is probably, I am saying it is absolutely incontrovertibly unquestioningly a higher percentage.

[cclaxton]

No, I am not saying it is probably, I am saying it is absolutely incontrovertibly unquestioningly a higher percentage.
Hmmm...that makes me question the validity of the whole Police One Poll.....

For everyone's reference, posted here in PDF form: http://ddq74coujkv1i.cloudfront.net/p1_gunsurveysummary_2013.pdf

CC

[Dave J]

Hmmm...that makes me question the validity of the whole Police One Poll.....

It wouldn't be completely surprising if the responses of 15,000 officers who care enough about their jobs to participate in a professional forum were somewhat different than what you might get from 15,000 officers chosen completely at random, much in the way that the attributes and practices of the PF.com demographic might be a little different than the gun owning population as a whole.

That doesn't, in my mind, invalidate the results of the P1 poll.

[Nik the Greek]

It wouldn't be completely surprising if the responses of 15,000 officers who care enough about their jobs to participate in a professional forum were somewhat different than what you might get from 15,000 officers chosen completely at random, much in the way that the attributes and practices of the PF.com demographic might be a little different than the gun owning population as a whole.

That doesn't, in my mind, invalidate the results of the P1 poll.


As appealing as the results may be, the fact that it's a self selecting internet poll invalidate the results for me. In my opinion, it's not evidence for anything you could cite in an argument anyway.

[Chuck Haggard]

What the poll shows to me is that a large and measurable part of what is a small population in the US thinks gun control is stupid. There is only something like 200,000 cops in the entire US. Most of them are probably not P1 members, but of those we have a large numbers against gun control.

Is it proof of something? No, but it is an indicator that the anti gunners are very wrong in their assertion that cops in general want gun control.

[LOKNLOD]

What the poll shows to me is that a large and measurable part of what is a small population in the US thinks gun control is stupid. There is only something like 200,000 cops in the entire US. Most of them are probably not P1 members, but of those we have a large numbers against gun control.

Is it proof of something? No, but it is an indicator that the anti gunners are very wrong in their assertion that cops in general want gun control.

Bingo. I realize that as a scientific poll it might be lacking, but as a show of numbers that there are lots of cops that don't support gun control, contrary to the misleading of other media sources, it's pretty good.

[hufnagel]

I can tell you that of the 4 PD members (we have 24 active officers across all ranks) I've spoken to at some length about firearms, NONE of them carry any kind of firearm when off duty. Their reason in every case was... liability. This is the Sue Me State after all. Apparently their insurance will NOT cover them if they're involved in any shooting incident while off duty, with or without a gov't supplied firearm. They also claimed they would NOT respond to an incident/altercation in progress near them if they are off duty, for the same reason. I can totally understand the first reason (although it disgusts me that lawyers have brought it about) but I would hope the latter would be tempered by their desire to serve and protect. It does however go to my belief that my safety and security is primarily if not wholy my responsibility. I am ok with that. Just let me have the tools I feel I need to enact that safety and security.

Hope I didn't get too off-topic there. :)

[hufnagel]

Also I can understand the concern that the P1 poll could be biased because of the reasons expressed. The question is how can you/we/me confirm or deny the expressed concern over skewing? I guess if you could find 15,000 active duty officers that are NOT a member of P1 to answer the same polls you could compare the results. How would you do that though?

I'm going to cling to the hope and belief that it's a valid poll and representative of officers as whole across the country.

[NETim]

I just wish the Dems would quit generalizing about the US population and quit trying to punish us all for what a few have done.

[cclaxton]

I just wish the Dems would quit generalizing about the US population and quit trying to punish us all for what a few have done.

NeTim: Nice to know we agree on something. However, it's not just Dems...most Republicans are supporting Universal Background checks and many are supporting high capacity magazine restrictions and "assualt weapon" bans. Agreed it is the majority of Dems, but Republicans deserve some blame here as well.

CC

[David Armstrong]

Hmmm...that makes me question the validity of the whole Police One Poll.....

For everyone's reference, posted here in PDF form: http://ddq74coujkv1i.cloudfront.net/p1_gunsurveysummary_2013.pdf

CC
As I mentioned on another post, the whole Policeone survey should not be considered particularly valid. It does not meet the basic rules of good survey research. It only tells you what a self-selecting group of Policeone members think, and trying to relate that to the LE community in general is rather questionable.

[David Armstrong]

What the poll shows to me is that a large and measurable part of what is a small population in the US thinks gun control is stupid. There is only something like 200,000 cops in the entire US. Most of them are probably not P1 members, but of those we have a large numbers against gun control.

Is it proof of something? No, but it is an indicator that the anti gunners are very wrong in their assertion that cops in general want gun control.

Not sure where those numbers came from, but the official numbers run between 800,000 and a bit over 1 million LEOs, depending on definitions.

[BillP]

No, I am not saying it is probably, I am saying it is absolutely incontrovertibly unquestioningly a higher percentage.

My employer mandates off-duty carry in policy. We are a large agency. Most interpret it to mean a baby Glock or. 380 and no spare mag. Off-duty holsters of choice seem to be Uncle Mike's softy IWB or clipdraw...or the geniuses with a Serpa paddle holster under a t-shirt.