Handgun/Pistol Weapon Mounted Lights, Approved or Not

[L-2]

I work for an agency which still hasn't generally approved weapon mounted lights (WML) on our G17Gen4 handguns (or our shotguns, but let's limit this to handguns for now).
I've heard there are several other agencies in the country without approval, too.

Someone please explain to me what is keeping various management/managers/departments/agencies from giving the OK? Perhaps this will help our union in drafting a proposal with a better chance of approval the first time instead of it being shelved or immediately denied.

Many of us would even buy our own lights and holsters if the employer couldn't afford to do so.

All of us have gone through handheld light instruction, training, and qualification in the various police academies in my department. Somehow, having a flashlight (weapon light) mounted on the gun with a different type of switch is forbidden. WHILE MOST ADDITIONAL TRAINING IS GENERALLY GOOD, IS IT REALLY NECESSARY TO HAVE ADDITIONAL TRAINING JUST TO USE/DEPLOY A WML?

I can only imagine why management, agencies, and government lawyers are frozen with their inaction to approve, yet I/we are the ones working in the dark. At least I'm allowed to use good personally-owned Surefire flashlights. We can possibly get away with carrying a weapon mounted light, like a Surefire X300, separately to mount on the gun temporarily or use as a handheld, but then we couldn't immediately holster the weapon & light without first taking off the light. Doing this would likely be a policy violation as we'd have mounted & used an unapproved device to our handgun, even if temporarily.

I would like a mounted WML; along with a handheld flashlight; and no additional training due to time and the expense of training all officers (or if optional, does the officer need to get that training certificate first and who is certifying, how long and how much $?).

Additional Info. I'm in California and I didn't see any specific requirement (but could have missed it) regarding any training cert for WML usage:
https://www.post.ca.gov

[voodoo_man]

My opinion is that the top brass of whatever PD are afraid of new stuff they didn't have.

Plus one of the things that may occur is a discharge rather than a light discharge, but that completely training dependent.

Find a local, to you, PD that has a good and working WML policy and copy/paste, including training.

[HopetonBrown]

One of the reasons is that they're afraid officers will use WMLs as general purpose flashlights, or sympathetic response when using a DG switch. Here's a recent study about the LASD using WML with DGs. There's a story of an officer directing traffic with his WML and lighting a round off in the process. I can't remember if it was in this report, but I read somewhere their WML training was a 30 minute instructional video.


https://oig.lacounty.gov/Portals/OIG...e%20Report.pdf

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_25...ntal-shootings

[BehindBlueI's]

One of the reasons is that they're afraid officers will use WMLs as general purpose flashlights, or sympathetic response when using a DG switch. Here's a recent study about the LASD using WML with DGs. There's a story of an officer directing traffic with his WML and lighting a round off in the process. I can't remember if it was in this report, but I read somewhere their WML training was a 30 minute instructional video.


https://oig.lacounty.gov/Portals/OIG...e%20Report.pdf

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_25...ntal-shootings

This.

Our GO mandates you must carry a flashlight in addition to WML.

[AMC]

My agency prohibits WML's for our issued pistols (which is all you can carry). There have been multiple attempts to change this policy, including by a previous range master, which were actually signed off by the previous chief. It just went away. A few strong personalities on the range staff were opposed, and simply ignored the proposed change, so it went away. If was recently proposed again.....and the Response was "Oh man, no way! The liability!"

I agree with Mike Pannone that a WML is a no brained on an LE service pistol, but it isn't magic. Policy should mandate carrying a handheld as well, and training in proper tactical use of the light, with handheld and WML, is a must. As it is, we have none of the above.....just a lecture about the Harries technique and how incandescent flashlights are way better than LED cause tried and true and smoke and stuff. Every time I go to our range I feel like kicking a baby.

[secondstoryguy]

It's stupid to not let guys use them. I don't use mine often but it's super handy when I do. Like when you put someone at gunpoint and want to talk on the radio at the same time or need light, a gun and a hand to open or climb over something. I can understand not letting folks use a DG type switch but don't see any problems with on the light switching.

[L-2]

H.Brown, I've read over the referenced links. This does give me a good idea as to what an administration might or must consider. I, too, wouldn't want even one (extra) negligent discharge to occur because I'd approved WMLs. The downside could be increased risk to the officer, but we just don't seem to be losing LEOs due to the lack of WMLs and we don't seem to be shooting and missing due to the lack of WMLs either (perhaps, LEOs might have taken a shot if they could see better and use 2 hands on their weapons, but these things likely will not be often reported).

Thanks everyone for your opinions, so far.

[Sammy1]

I just went through this with my agency. When it was finally approved it was approved but not funded, you have to buy it yourself, holster & light. Now all the people who have been crying for WML only four of us have them. Yup, you know who the warriors are in my Dept! We have a clothing allowance but some want it but not bad enough apparently. Sometimes for the Admin is comes down to $ for equipment and training and others consider liability (ie officer directing traffic with his WML or the famous trooper doing HGN with his WML!)

[Surf]

Our agency does not allow them in general use, however our unit is an exception. We use rifle, pistol and shotgun WML. We have our own budget plus a much more comprehensive initial and ongoing WML and low light training which is hard to accomplish for other units or Officers so we are granted the exception. This is directly related to budget and time and resources of our unit.

Most agencies are concerned about budget and liability, real or perceived. How much is it going to cost them to equip each officer with maybe a new pistol but also the light and a new holster or holsters? Within that budget may fall training hours and the logistics to make that happen. The other big concern is potential liability issues and is the amount of initial or ongoing training going to mitigate any potential negatives. So with this type of combination to consider it is easy to see why certain decisions are made by an agency. Larger agencies and this is even more complex of a situation to deal with.

[stinx]

My agency issues a wml to all personal, We issue Detectives and admin a compact version of our duty pistol. All personal received 4 hours classroom training on the wml including policy/procedure as well as dry drills with blue guns. All then received 4 hours low light live fire training with wml and handheld light. Yearly all personal receive 4 hours of low light training. All personal issued surefire fury handheld lights with holster. All marked units have a Maglight 600 lumen LED flashlight mounted on the partition.