Pointing a Firearm vs. Low Ready positions as "Reportable use of Force" in LE Policy

[jd950]

Police work in 2021 and beyond is going to be different than it was in early 2020 and before. Cops are going to be required to take more steps and more obvious steps to avoid and minimize force and will need to be able to clearly articulate how they did that or why they did not. For many, this kind of stuff gets a few hours in academies and the occasional in-service training and that is not going to be enough. It is also something that many cops have not embraced. The rules and the laws are here or coming for most of us and it will ultimately be up to each individual to develop the skills necessary to try and stay of trouble.

As to the original question...I am seeing agencies enact polices and local and state governments enact laws that state or suggest that "unnecessarily or prematurely drawing or exhibiting a firearm can serve to escalate a situation." I assume bad things will happen if the people making those decisions after the fact feel such a thing happened.

I am seeing policies like this:

A "show of force" report will be filed in "incidents NOT involving a use of force, but a firearm (no discharge) or physical hand control technique was used." The term "used" is not defined, but since it is distinguished from a gun being fired, and makes no mention of where it was pointed, I take that to mean unholstered.

A further proposed policy states a use of force report is needed for "incidents NOT involving a use of force or injury…where an officer un-holsters their firearm or CEW/TASER, intentionally points any firearm or CEW/TASER at a person, and no other force-related incident occurs.
"At a person" is not further defined. I assume the upshot is that unholstering is a show of force, and pointing a gun "at" someone is a use of force. I would guess low ready under this policy may require a use of force report.

An article touching on this issue from several years ago: http://www.theppsc.org/Staff_Views/A...ed-Handgun.htm

[AMC]

Police work in 2021 and beyond is going to be different than it was in early 2020 and before. Cops are going to be required to take more steps and more obvious steps to avoid and minimize force and will need to be able to clearly articulate how they did that or why they did not. For many, this kind of stuff gets a few hours in academies and the occasional in-service training and that is not going to be enough. It is also something that many cops have not embraced. The rules and the laws are here or coming for most of us and it will ultimately be up to each individual to develop the skills necessary to try and stay of trouble.

As to the original question...I am seeing agencies enact polices and local and state governments enact laws that state or suggest that "unnecessarily or prematurely drawing or exhibiting a firearm can serve to escalate a situation." I assume bad things will happen if the people making those decisions after the fact feel such a thing happened.

I am seeing policies like this:

A "show of force" report will be filed in "incidents NOT involving a use of force, but a firearm (no discharge) or physical hand control technique was used." The term "used" is not defined, but since it is distinguished from a gun being fired, and makes no mention of where it was pointed, I take that to mean unholstered.

A further proposed policy states a use of force report is needed for "incidents NOT involving a use of force or injury…where an officer un-holsters their firearm or CEW/TASER, intentionally points any firearm or CEW/TASER at a person, and no other force-related incident occurs.
"At a person" is not further defined. I assume the upshot is that unholstering is a show of force, and pointing a gun "at" someone is a use of force. I would guess low ready under this policy may require a use of force report.

An article touching on this issue from several years ago: http://www.theppsc.org/Staff_Views/A...ed-Handgun.htm

jd950, if you don't mind, can you tell me what states and agencies those policies are coming from? You can PM me for a work email if necessary.

Locally, and in my state at large, I have been unable to find any agencies mirroring the language we have. There are a few agencies that require a report any time a gun is unholstered, and a few that consider "Pointing a Firearm" to be Reportable Force requiring a supervisors investigation and report. Not a single agency I've found in California that I've communicated with has "Low-Ready" as Reportable Use of Force. There's quite a few other California LE folks on this forum, so if anyone is aware of anything to the contrary, please chime in.

[jd950]

jd950, if you don't mind, can you tell me what states and agencies those policies are coming from? You can PM me for a work email if necessary.

Sending a PM

[Jeff22]

I started as a cop in May of 1981.

My whole career, if I pointed a gun at somebody, a report was required to explain why.

[jd950]

I started as a cop in May of 1981.

My whole career, if I pointed a gun at somebody, a report was required to explain why.

The devil is in the details. "Pointing at" vs a low ready or similar position? Do you mean simply documenting the fact in a report or an actual use of force report? In some agencies, too many use of force reports can cause problems.

I don't think many people have a problem with the idea that actually "pointing" a gun "at" someone, as in "at gunpoint" warrants a report.

[Jeff22]

Doing a separate use of force or pursuit report for data capture is required by statute in my state. This is a relatively recent thing.

My agencies (I was working full time in one place and part time in another) were requiring that before the law required it, but still it’s relatively recent.

When I started I was amazed to discover that ALL police involved shootings were not reported to the FBI. They just gathered data on the incidents where officers were killed. That still surprises me. What if reporting detail on ALL police shooting incidents had been required back in 1980 or so. Just think of the vast amount of data instructors would have as a resource when developing training programs.