And now this BS from PERF

[Wayne Dobbs]

http://www.policeforum.org/assets/30...principles.pdf

Dump the objectively reasonable standard, dump the danger zone on edged weapons, make nice with BGs trying to kill us....prepare to scream.

[voodoo_man]

...just some things

TRAINING AND TACTICS
16. Use Distance, Cover, and Time to replace outdated concepts such as the “21-foot
rule” and “drawing a line in the sand.”
Agencies should train their officers on the principles of using distance, cover, and
time when approaching and managing certain critical incidents. In many situations, a better
outcome can result if officers can buy more time to assess the situation and their options,
bring additional resources to the scene, and develop a plan for resolving the incident
without use of force.
Agencies should eliminate from their policies and training all references to the socalled
“21-foot rule” regarding officers who are confronted with a subject armed with an
edged weapon. Instead, officers should be trained to use distance and cover to create a
“reaction gap” between themselves and the individual, and to consider all options for
responding.

It's not "so called" it is the "reactionary gap" when someone has an edged weapon, 21 feet is the minimum safe distance.

They should replace distance, cover and time with force, space, time, it provides a better concept of what needs to be dominated in order to survive.

20. Tactical training and mental health training need to be interwoven to improve
response to critical incidents.
As noted above, strategies for dealing with people with mental health problems
should be woven into the tactical training that all officers receive, with a strong emphasis on
communications, de-escalation techniques, maintaining cover and distance, and allowing for
the time needed to resolve the incident safely for everyone. Officers who respond to scenes
involving people with mental health problems should be directed to call for assistance from
specially trained officers and/or supervisors (e.g., CIT-trained) if possible. As a best
practice, those specially trained personnel should be given the authority to manage a scene
regardless of rank. All other responding units should be directed to the on-scene manager,
briefed on the situation, and directed to follow the on-scene manager’s lead with respect to
tactics and especially any use of force.

This whole point was written by people who have no concept of these types of situations. First off, you rarely know you dealing with a EDP right away unless its clearly obvious, then they are rarely just standing there, they are almost always trying to kill/hurt you or someone else. Then they suggest we get "specially trained" personnel? LOL, yeah right. Half the time tasers don't work and when they do work an officer who has one needs to show up and be willing to use them.

TRAINING AND TACTICS
22. Provide a prompt supervisory response to critical incidents to reduce the
likelihood of unnecessary force.
Supervisors should immediately respond to any scene:
 Where a weapon (including firearm, edged weapon, rocks, or other improvised
weapon) is reported,
 Where persons with mental health problems are reported, or
 Where a dispatcher or other member of the department believes there is potential
for use of force.
Once on the scene and if circumstances permit, supervisors should attempt to
“huddle” with officers before responding to develop a plan of action that focuses on de-
escalation where possible. In the case of persons with mental health problems, supervisors
who are not specially trained

You want supervisors to respond to everything? Why? The whole concept is shortsighted. Supervisors do not need to respond to every single UOF incident, or any for that matter unless there is a discharge or an officer is hurt.

23. Training as teams can improve performance in the field.
Agencies should provide in-service training on critical decision-making, deescalation,
and use of force to teams of officers at the same time. When officers who work
together on a daily basis train together, coordination and consistency in tactics increase,
and the likelihood of undesirable outcomes during critical incidents decreases. Recognizing
that this approach may increase costs and disrupt scheduling, agencies should consider
alternative arrangements to traditional, day-long in-service training classes—for example,
by bringing in a team of officers for a few hours of training several times a year.


24. Scenario-based training should be prevalent, challenging, and realistic.
In both recruit and in-service programs, agencies should provide use-of-force
training that utilizes realistic and challenging scenarios that officers are likely to encounter
in the field. Scenarios should be based on real-life situations and utilize encounters that
officers in the agency have recently faced. Scenarios should go beyond the traditional
“shoot-don’t shoot” decision-making, instead providing for a variety of possible outcomes,
including some in which communication, de-escalation, and use of less-lethal options are
most appropriate. Scenario-based training focused on decision-making should be integrated
with officers’ regular requalification on their firearms and less-lethal equipment.

I actually agree with a lot of these two points, but they will probably never happen.

EQUIPMENT
25. Officers need access to and training in less-lethal options.
Patrol officers should be given access to, and regular training in, an appropriate
range of less-lethal weapons and equipment to support their critical decision-making and
de-escalation efforts. Personnel specially trained in mental health issues should be issued
and trained in the full range of less-lethal options offered by the agency.
EQUIPMENT
26. Agencies should consider new options for chemical spray.
Agencies should evaluate their current policies and practices on the use of chemical
spray, and consider alternatives that address officers’ concerns over cross-contamination
and flammability. One alternative that agencies can consider is PAVA spray (pelargonic acid
vanillylamide), which is now widely used in the United Kingdom. Unlike traditional CS or OC
sprays, PAVA has a more concentrated stream that minimizes cross-contamination and is
not flammable (meaning it can be used in conjunction with an electronic control weapon).
EQUIPMENT
27. An ECW deployment that is not effective does not mean that officers should
automatically move to their firearms.
Agencies should ensure that their policies, training, and procedures around the use
of electronic control weapons (ECWs) are consistent with the 53 guidelines released by
PERF and the COPS Office in 2011.1
Accounts of fatal police shootings often state that “the officer tried an ECW, it had no
effect, and so the officer then used a firearm.” This is an inappropriate way to view force
options. ECWs often do not work because the subject is wearing heavy clothing or for many
other reasons. An ECW deployment that is not effective does not mean officers should
automatically move to their firearms. Under the Critical Decision-Making Model, an
ineffective ECW deployment changes the situation and should prompt officers to re-assess
the situation and the current status of the threat, and to take appropriate, proportional
actions.
EQUIPMENT
28. Personal protection shields may support de-escalation efforts during critical
incidents, including situations involving persons with knives, baseball bats, or other
improvised weapons that are not firearms.
Agencies should acquire personal protection shields for use by patrol officers and
others in managing some critical incidents. Officers with access to personal protection
shields should be adequately trained on how to use the shields both individually and as part
of a team operation.

Agree with everything above except the last part. Every officer should have a bulletproof shield in the trunk.

[LSP552]

http://www.policeforum.org/assets/30...principles.pdf

Dump the objectively reasonable standard, dump the danger zone on edged weapons, make nice with BGs trying to kill us....prepare to scream.

Wayne,

I'm headed to oral surgery in about an hour. I should have waited to read that until he drugs kicked in! The sad thing is political LE administrators will gobble that quicker than a $10 New Orleans whore.

[Robinson]

As a non-LEO this makes me think it was written by people who have never had to work a shift in a high-risk environment or been confronted with real violence. It almost reminds me of the new trend in the UK in which soldiers are being sued for firing on enemies who were taking aim at friendly forces. The suits claim the soldiers should issue verbal warnings first.

If criminals don't want to be shot by the police they should not engage in criminal activity that poses a threat to others -- including the police.

[voodoo_man]

As a non-LEO this makes me think it was written by people who have never had to work a shift in a high-risk environment or been confronted with real violence. It almost reminds me of the new trend in the UK in which soldiers are being sued for firing on enemies who were taking aim at friendly forces. The suits claim the soldiers should issue verbal warnings first.

If criminals don't want to be shot by the police they should not engage in criminal activity that poses a threat to others -- including the police.

This is 99% of this issue with "policy" or such recommendations for change of policy.

Intellectuals thinking that they are smarter than experienced officer's who live in this environment every single day, hopefully the people of these communities that get these BS policy changes will say something about it as it does them the worst service.

[Range1]

Rant on. Okay, I tried to read it and could not finish it. Sanctity of ALL human life? I don't think so. I could never put the safety of a criminal over that of an innocent by stander or fellow officer. Can't do it and would not teach it. So glad I am out of it now just wish my son had gone with the fire department instead of the police. Good luck to all the active officers out there. Rant off.

[Chuck Haggard]

PAVA, yeah, about that, it's the one spray I wouldn't use. It's the only spray I know of with incidents of actual permanent eye damage associated with it.

[LSP552]

Might as well ditch the hierarchy of life thing as well. After all, the life of a hostage taker has the same value as his victim.

[voodoo_man]

Might as well ditch the hierarchy of life thing as well. After all, the life of a hostage taker has the same value as his victim.

I bet if we really wanted to we could find contradictions to many of the suggestions and opinions they make in this list.

[BobM]

I'm very glad I'm at the tail end of my career. I think I'm going to have to work harder to steer my nephew away from an LE career too