That is very interesting information. I appreciate the links.
I am not sure it answers my original question. How is the capability being claimed validated? Is it through self-reporting or through an external process? In either case, what is the frequency that the determination is made?
Last edited by Kevin B.; 04-13-2019 at 01:59 PM.
C Class shooter.
From the NTOA standards:
The objective of this document is to establish a basic set of standards for the association’s member agencies and to serve as an efficient core set of concepts and principles that improve standardization within the profession of tactical law enforcement services. Any agency that chooses to use this standard as a benchmark for performance and operations does so voluntarily. The NTOA does not mandate compliance with this standard or attach such compliance as a prerequisite for any benefit granted under membership.
Yes. I saw that. My question was more along the lines of, if an agency/organization voluntarily chose to use the NTOA standard, who assessed whether they actually met the standard and with what frequency?
I assume the answer is no one.
Apologies again for the inquiry.
C Class shooter.
Thanks. I reached out to a few people as well.
C Class shooter.
I will say, admitting a personal prejudice, that there's a certain beauty to the concept of pigs flying...
There's nothing civil about this war.
As far as I know, there’s no one from the outside checking. It’s purely voluntary standards in an attempt to standardize across the country.
I have an individual membership to NTOA, and my department has an agency membership. We’ve never been asked if we’re following their standards.
A few years ago, you could pay to have NTOA come and evaluate your team and make suggestions, but I don’t see that as an option on their website anymore.
Last edited by TC215; 04-13-2019 at 04:23 PM.
I think I'd be more supportive if the Sheriff had just said, "The boys have worked hard, and we wanted to reward them with something fun."
The justification given in the article, however, was pathetic. The idea of parachuting in large numbers of folks to establish law and order, vs. air landing them instead, doesn't pass the common sense test. I can visualize situations that might not be easily reachable by rotary wing where inserting some folks by parachute might make sense -- for example, to reopen fixed wing runways, or provide navigational assistance for cargo drops, but I'm fairly certain that DOD isn't going to ask a county agency's five-jump chumps to fill in for Air Force STS or Army Pathfinders. And the National Guard can in fact do law enforcement, as long as they're under state control or Title 32.
If FEMA is funding this boondoggle, I'm disappointed.
Last edited by Dave J; 04-13-2019 at 04:27 PM.