Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17

Thread: Police firearms policy-SME suggestions.

  1. #1

    Police firearms policy-SME suggestions.

    Based on the Fairfax thread, I thought I would throw this out there as maybe a constructive guide for someone like Cody to see what those who write/or have written firearms policy would like to see for agencies. I would request that the moderators on this forum keep a very tight lid on this thread and try to limit posts to truly educational and constructive posts on a very serious subject. Also, I would suggest that if you have no experience writing policy, implementing policy, and having your policies court challenged....please save posting those ideas elsewhere. For the SME's here on this subject (not forum SME's, folks who a court has determined you are an SME) I am curious to see your ideas for policy as well. In the end, it may be a worthwhile endeavor to get together and actual create a model policy here for folks looking to update their agency policy. The next post will be some ideas I typed up tonight of the top of my head.
    Just a Hairy Special Snowflake supply clerk with no field experience, shooting an Asymetric carbine as a Try Hard. Snarky and easily butt hurt. Favorite animal is the Cape Buffalo....likely indicative of a personality disorder.
    "If I had a grandpa, he would look like Delbert Belton".

  2. #2
    Thoughts on policy regarding deployment of firearms by law enforcement

    First and foremost, he goal of the policy is to encourage best practices for the safety of the officer and public. Often, policy is written with a very short sided view and the goal is some sort of means to prevent liability when it often creates it. Policy should be fairly generic to allow officers to properly handle a crisis based on what is actually occurring rather than a vision created in a sterile administrative environment.

    Policy is not a replacement for training-period. The attempt to use policy for this goal is a complete and total abandonment of leadership by management and political officials. Training should be used as the first and most important step to attain goals. That training needs to be relative, recent, on going, and reviewable to ensure that it is best practice. Those who cannot or will not respond to training should be dealt with as individuals and policy should not be used to avoid correcting individual officer's deficiencies through restriction of all.

    In the case of firearms deployment, these are often situations that are highly chaotic, stressful, very unique and often very unpredictable with no two ever really alike. The key to creating policy is simplicity and training. First, absolute adherence to basic firearms safety rules as an agency wide culture is likely all that is needed to create good policy.....as an example:

    Firearms are always considered loaded. This simple mindset will demand a level of seriousness that should be present whenever a firearm is around. This encompasses not only officers individual firearms, but those encountered in the field whether recovered as evidence, in the hands of citizens or other officers, or as found property. This mindset prevents incidents from occurring in which unsafe activity is deemed acceptable because someone assumes a firearm is unloaded or non-operational. We should also not second guess officers in regards to status of any object that looks like a functional firearm. Until confirmation is made, by anyone who handles it, anything that looks like a firearm should be treated as a loaded and functional one. Those devices used in police training to simulate firearms should be easily recognized as training tools and should be used properly and whenever possible for training.
    Muzzle Discipline. Officers need to be constantly aware of where their muzzles are covering. Pointing is a conscious act, covering truly encompasses an officers responsibility at all times. Officers should avoid covering anything they are not willing to destroy with a firearm. If they do have to cover something with a muzzle they should be able to articulate exactly why they did it. This should be consummate with current laws both state and federal, and in accordance with current Supreme Court decisions that cover an officers actions in this regard. It is recommended that if an officer covers another person with a firearm muzzle, they should document that action in some form (arrest report, notes, or call disposition). Most importantly, their actions must conform to a "reasonable man" standard. It is highly recommended that officers who wish to have better access to their firearm in a situation should use appropriate ready positions that will always be situation dependent. It is critical that training in appropriate ready positions to provide the best tactical advantage to officers is on going to reinforce proper use of both ready and contact positions and good muzzle discipline at all times.

    Trigger finger. The trigger finger should be off the trigger and in register along the frame of the firearm and away from the trigger guard unless a target has been identified and a decision to shoot made. This should be a conscious action and articulable by an officer as to why a finger was on the trigger. Equally, the department must provide on going quality training that reinforces proper trigger discipline and to be aware that officers may unconsciously place a finger on a trigger during times of intense stress or fear. This needs to be mitigated through training. Officers that cannot respond to training in this regard should face potential discipline, and remediation. If the officer still cannot respond to documented training and remediation, they should not be allowed to carry a firearm and their police powers suspended.

    Backstop. Officers should be aware of their target and what is beyond. This is also a mindset issue and one that is critically important. Officers must positively identify a target before engagement with a firearm. Emphasis should be placed on proper containment of an officers rounds if fired. Due to the nature of law enforcement, the best way to contain rounds fired is that they strike the intended target. Emphasis should be placed on marksmanship and gun handling in all department firearms training. A 100% hits on a standardized silhouette training target will be required in training to ensure that this emphasis is understood by all members of the department. While a passing score (70% minimum) may be less than 100%, any officer that misses a target in training or qualification will be immediately disqualified and remediation will begin. If an officer is unable to qualify with 100% hits on target after remediation, they will be restricted to station duty until they can qualify with both a passing score and 100% hits. If they cannot perform this task in a reasonable timeframe, their police powers will be suspended. This standard is a department wide standard and regardless of rank or assignment.

    Critical elements of training. Training will be constant and on going. It will be reflective of actual police firearms usage that covers threat assessment, threat elimination (verbal, lethal non-lethal), proper pre and post shooting actions. It will emphasize gun handling in a 360 degree environment. It will emphasize a high level of marksmanship skill, and application of those skills in realistic time standards. It will emphasize professional gun handling at all times, and be focused on the importance that use of lethal force level implements deserve. The department shall place an emphasis on on-going use of force training on a monthly basis (including but not limited to, briefing training, video presentation, distribution of appropriate articles regarding use of force cases, and review of current events and court decisions). The department will provide quarterly firearms qualification. At least annually, the department will provide dedicated training to operations in low/no light with firearms for those officers assigned to any detail or area of the department where it is likely that they will be faced with use of force decision making in less than optimal lighting conditions (this can be done with live or training weapons as deemed necessary by the use of force training staff). The department shall provide advanced training and/or instructor development training to their firearms training officers on an annual basis at minimum, to ensure quality and relevance of the training they provide. Firearm training officers will be required to score at a 90% or better on the department firearms qualification courses and will be tested monthly to ensure they meet this standard. 



    Basing a policy on the above allows the officer a great amount of latitude with firearms deployment. It places shared responsibility with the agency to provide training that reflects the goals of the department for proper use and deployment of firearms, and a responsibility on the officer to both respond to training and use that training as a standard for how they operate in the field. Proper training, proper response to training, and application of training in the field will protect the officers, the public and the agency equally. It also provides for a means to get rid of those in the position of providing training who should not be and force an agency to place people in a training assignment based on some level of ability and not as a retirement job or hiding place for members of the department. The key is to force accountability on everyone....including the executive and political management.
    Last edited by Dagga Boy; 02-02-2016 at 08:45 PM.
    Just a Hairy Special Snowflake supply clerk with no field experience, shooting an Asymetric carbine as a Try Hard. Snarky and easily butt hurt. Favorite animal is the Cape Buffalo....likely indicative of a personality disorder.
    "If I had a grandpa, he would look like Delbert Belton".

  3. #3
    Site Supporter Erick Gelhaus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Wasatch Front
    If the discussion is policy, not training, I would not put the training specific verbiage in policy. I subscribe to the belief that policy needs to be easily understood and re-explained when asked of the officer, not the instructor. Ones view on this may change when they have to discuss policy (multriple policies) at deposition.

    Graham standard plus Garner and numerous other case law decisions will be the foundation for policy. When it comes to "appropriateness" there will be a general definition but specifics will be covered in training and tested in scenarios.

    One qual with each weapon per year, actual training with each in the other three quarters or more frequently.

    More later as the thread develops.

  4. #4
    The original document didn't translate well from my iPad to the forum. Firearms police would be separate from training policy, but the key is you have to have both. How many times have we seen things like weapon mounted light policy.....with no training policy. Eventually, we all know, with the training element written into policy, the administration will find a way to not do it, cut it from budgets, etc. Truthfully, management is in far more need of policy to require training, than the troops are to dictate actions in the field.
    Just a Hairy Special Snowflake supply clerk with no field experience, shooting an Asymetric carbine as a Try Hard. Snarky and easily butt hurt. Favorite animal is the Cape Buffalo....likely indicative of a personality disorder.
    "If I had a grandpa, he would look like Delbert Belton".

  5. #5
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Allen, TX
    You've alluded to it above, Darryl, but there has to be a policy mechanism to deal with folks who don't meet the standards and it should be a short process ending in significant improvement and success OR reassignment/termination. The "frequent flyer" program of remediation needs to go away to ensure program and policy credibility and to strengthen the organization's liability positions.
    Regional Government Sales Manager for Aimpoint, Inc. USA
    Co-owner Hardwired Tactical Shooting (HiTS)

  6. #6
    The single most important thing I got pushed through at my place to change the culture was a means to fire folks who could not qualify in conjunction with increased firearms training and an emphasis on solid performance instead of standards aimed at getting the LCD's to pass.
    Just a Hairy Special Snowflake supply clerk with no field experience, shooting an Asymetric carbine as a Try Hard. Snarky and easily butt hurt. Favorite animal is the Cape Buffalo....likely indicative of a personality disorder.
    "If I had a grandpa, he would look like Delbert Belton".

  7. #7
    Member cclaxton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Vienna, Va
    How big of a role does budgeting have to do with training versus policy? On the political side I see legislators wanting to pass laws instead of approving budgets...because taxpayers don't like higher taxes. If so, is there a way to get taxpayers to see the benefit?
    Cody
    That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state;

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by cclaxton View Post
    How big of a role does budgeting have to do with training versus policy? On the political side I see legislators wanting to pass laws instead of approving budgets...because taxpayers don't like higher taxes. If so, is there a way to get taxpayers to see the benefit?
    Cody
    Do you have any idea what the costs for a suggested level of training would be versus those arising from poor training and policy such as lawsuit costs? Maybe rough numbers per year could be helpful.

  9. #9
    Site Supporter KevinB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Quote Originally Posted by scw2 View Post
    Do you have any idea what the costs for a suggested level of training would be versus those arising from poor training and policy such as lawsuit costs? Maybe rough numbers per year could be helpful.
    5,000 rounds a year = maybe 2k at most
    Range Staff = already salaried
    Range = already owned
    Guest Instructors = say 2-4 a year for a week each, 20-400,000 k depending on who/what etc.
    Logical Policy : about 15min to write



    City Lawsuit for negligence - in the M's



    Risk mitigation and ass coverers should be crying for training
    Kevin S. Boland
    Director of R&D
    Law Tactical LLC
    www.lawtactical.com
    kevin@lawtactical.com
    407-451-4544




  10. #10
    Member cclaxton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Vienna, Va
    Quote Originally Posted by KevinB View Post
    City Lawsuit for negligence - in the M's
    Risk mitigation and ass coverers should be crying for training
    That is a really great point. Fairfax County has paid out at least $6M in Civil Litigation over three incidents I know of. Think of all the extra training that could have bought. And, we now have one cop on trial for murder...intangible costs in lost productivity, management distractions, etc.
    Really good point...
    Cody
    That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state;

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •