Ah.  People want training for police in recognition of replica guns.

I wanna see the syllabus.

I want to see how anyone who knows the meaning of the word “replica” is going to structure that training.

From the Merriam-Webster.com online dictionary:

 noun rep·li·ca \ˈre-pli-kə\

: an exact or very close copy of something

Now, let’s see. If it’s an exact copy, how is the officer (or lawfully armed citizen) going to be able to tell that it’s not the real thing, exactly? Does he or she wait for the first shot? Uh-oh, that could be a cap or a blank. Wait for the first bullet to hit, maybe, and make sure it’s not a BB, an air gun pellet, or a little Airsoft projectile?

News flash for those who need it: Bad guys use replica guns BECAUSE they are very hard to distinguish from real ones.  That’s why their victims give them money during their robberies. Why would a robber use a fake gun? Maybe he can’t access a real one that day.  Maybe he is under the (usually mistaken) belief that if it isn’t a real gun, he’ll be charged with something less than armed robbery if he’s caught.

Paint the fake ones bright colors? Please.  They’ll just paint them flat black, the way they remove the orange muzzles from Airsoft guns or paint them to match the rest of the gun, already.

And what about all the pink and other cute color REAL guns on the market today, an idea that goes back to the old High Standard Sentinel pastel .22 revolvers in pink, gold, and sky blue of the 1950s?  What about the real guns I see with Hello Kitty™ and such on them?

And what of the punks who take their REAL guns and paint the muzzles or the whole thing Day-Glo™ orange, in hopes of making an arresting officer hesitate long enough that the criminal can murder the cop?

I wanna see the syllabus.  This idea strikes me as a big, steaming pile of unicorn feces.

51 COMMENTS

  2. Mas,

    You may see such an idea as the feces of the unicorn, as for myself? I consider it that of the rocking horse!

    Needless to say perhaps, yet the idea that a replica can be safely and successfully determined to be such by Law Enforcement in the field is surely crazier than a bag of snakes!

    In my experience, people making these kinds of ridiculous suggestions simply do not even come remotely close to comprehension of the conditions, issues and circumstances faced by Police. Often these same folks buy into the idea that Hollywood – esque trick shots such as shooting a weapon out of the hands of an assailant is legitimate…

    Oi vey! It’s ludicrous.

    Rather than seeing the syllabus, I would love to see the day where in such gibberish was left in the realm of entertainment and fantasy as opposed to being actually suggested to the people whom are tasked with the heady mandate of protecting Law and order.

  4. The real-gun-inside-a-toy has been rumored. Most difficult to detect.

    Two things I hate to see: the innocent catching rounds, and police officers being compelled to hold fire until the police or others are fired upon.

    Yep. Toy guns have been around for hundreds of years, but could be banned everywhere any time, now. Kids really need to learn to use common sense, to listen to and follow reasonable instructions, and to stop shooting people, too. Wonder if we will see some honest firearms safety commercials, or even some exemplary Hollywood stuff. Imagine the Terminator following orders to stand down that are given because the police see that he is presenting in error. Hope springs eternal!

  5. Can we assume that this will coincide with the training of public school teachers to recognize the subtle differences between a pop-tart with a bite taken out, or a finger being pointed with a thumb up, and a real gun? Can we expect them to be severely punished when their irrational fear and resulting over-reaction is found to be unjustified?
    What? There’s a difference?

  7. Back when the massive importation of Chinese surplus weapons began, a local dealer in my area who dealt exclusively in these inexpensive (at the time) guns, had many of the Tokarev pistols powder-coated in bright neon colors (green, pink, etc.) and built a display with them laying in a pile of brightly colored, plastic children’s toys. Without picking one up for inspection, one would never suspect they were real. I expressed my disagreement with his marketing tactics. It was not illegal, but the intention was the opposite of making a toy look real. It was intended to make a real gun look like a toy.

    Does anyone really expect a police officer to stake his or her life on their (or anybody’s) ability to distinguish real from replica, at deadly force distances?

    How about teaching folks responsibility for their own actions rather than demanding super-human cognizance from our police?

    OOps! I’m letting my right wing-nut-ness show again. Sorry, I promise to attempt to change my dangerous thought processes. In the near future, maybe……

  8. part 1) threat identification
    identifying the person in possession of the weapon
    (2 min:classroom)

    part 2) immediate threat determination
    review the standard of opportunity, i.e. not shooting people in the back
    (5 min:classroom)

    part 3) improving accuracy
    increase accuracy and precision, using multiple targets
    shooting at the threat
    staying on target
    (16 hours:on range)

    that was my take of the news articles.

  9. As they used to say in banking, “know your customer”. I have read a report of a cop shooting a kid who had low power bb guns and was not threatening, he just did not drop it fast enough.

    I know a cop that shows his abdominal scars he got from a 12 year old in Chicago with a machine gun.

    I believe I would know the difference on whether it was a harmless kid versus a precocious gangster, but things are different when one is there.

    As opposed to training on the weapon’s reality, more training should be on the body language of the citizen the officer is dealing with.

  10. Does the syllabus really matter? The course will be taught by an Ivy-league professor with a doctorate in criminal psychology who speaks of “30 caliber clips” and “dum-dum” bullets as if they really existed.

  11. Sigh, these are the same people that say you should shoot to wound, or shoot the gun out of their hands… SJWs want unicorn farts rather than actually having the criminals be RESPONSIBLE for their actions.

  12. I agree that what they’re asking for is absurd. It does sound like the officer(s) in question may need additional training so that they hit their intended target, instead of the person their intended target is pointing a gun at.

  13. Maybe they *could* benefit from a marksmanship intensive, as the kid who was shot wasn’t the one holding the pseudogun.

  14. I suppose while it’s easy to tell a replica from the real thing when they’re side-by-side on a table, it’s not so at a distance and when you’ve expectations of confronting a gun man.

    Hmmm . . . has it ever actually happened a real gun being discussed as a toy/fake/replica? The opposite has occurred e.g. John Dillinger (apparently) escaping prison with the aid of fake pistol. But are there any confirmed cases of the other way round?

  15. Mas, you missed one possibility which makes this training further problematic: How long will it be before we lose a LEO because he hesitates when faced with a real pistol that’s had its muzzle painted orange? #bluelivesmatter

    The protest side of this has got it wrong again by — if the news account cited by Mas is accurate — focusing on the alleged unfairness of shooting someone with a toy gun rather than focusing on the instantaneous-confrontation/quick-shoot aspects of the incident. That may also be justified, if the news article is correct, by the allegation that the possessor of the replica was “pointing [it] at another boy.” More detail is needed to be able to evaluate that issue. #blacklivesmatter

    I have another comment, but I’m going to put it in a separate post because it’s so different in concept.

  16. More than that – I wanna see Earl Ofari Hutchison and Najee Ali put their money where their mouths are, take said training course, and pass with perfect 100% scores before the syllabus is promulgated to LAPD.

    At least Quanell X(http://www.khou.com/story/news/local/2015/02/04/quanell-x-trains-with-the-missouri-city-police-department/22901953/) and Jarrett Maupin(http://www.fox10phoenix.com/story/27788056/2015/01/07/activist-critical-of-police-undergoes-use-of-force-scenarios) had the guts to walk a mile in a cop’s shoes, and changed their tunes as a result…

  17. These are the same people who think an unarmed attacker can not pose a deadly threat (even after they’ve tried to grab your sidearm to use it against you) and who ask why couldn’t you have just shot him in the arm or the leg to stop him he was such a good boy just getting his life back together and he shouldn’t have had to die just because he tried to murder someone (every single time)

  18. When I first saw the first line, I thought it might be about something entirely different.

    The Open Carry advocates here in Texas are following the cops around. Some of them are carrying long guns, which is generally legal under Texas law, but some are openly carrying pistols. They can do that because Texas law excludes from the definition of “firearm:”

    “(A) an antique or curio firearm manufactured before 1899; or

    “(B) a replica of an antique or curio firearm manufactured before 1899, but only if the replica does not use rim fire or center fire ammunition.”

    Most of the open carry folks are carrying pre-1899 real pistols, loaded, but it’s the replica part that’s interesting here. Replica is not defined by the statutes. The question is just how close a copy does a pistol have to be to be a “replica”? Does a “replica” Colt Navy 1851 with a brass frame in .44 caliber count as a replica since all originals of that mode had steel frames and were in .36 caliber?

    Another interesting question not related to the replica issue is whether cartridge pistols which were manufactured continuously as the same model from before 1899 until after 1898 generally fall under exception (a) or whether it’s the manufacturing date of the particular copy of a pistol which must have had to been manufactured before 1899. And in both cases, how is a LEO who encounters an open-carry advocate supposed to either know or figure this out?

    Not that I support these fools, but they’re raising some interesting legal questions.

  21. Mas,
    Another excellent article. One question, though. The “painting a real gun Day-Glo orange” to make a cop hesitate; is that based on actual incident(s) or is that a scenario thought up by someone involved in LE training?

  23. The first documented case I heard of a real gun painted to look like a toy came out of Louisiana, twenty-some years ago. Do a google search for a crackpot who calls himself “kwikernu” (“quicker n’ you”). Yeah, it’s out there.

  24. “And what of the punks who take their REAL guns and paint the muzzles or the whole thing Day-Glo™ orange, in hopes of making an arresting officer hesitate long enough that the criminal can murder the cop?”

    EXACTLY!!!

    Your entire article is right on the money. But that one sentence brings up a particularly frightening premise I’ve often pondered – one that I hope the wrong people don’t read. Fortunately, those types don’t tend to hang around here.

  25. The only way I can think of to reduce the danger is that when a cop gets a call about a young man holding a gun (but not making demands and not yet shooting anyone) is to train police to try and make the challenge from behind cover. If the cop is behind cover, he can afford to hold off shooting a bit longer knowing that the suspect would be unlikely to hit him unless he took the time to aim carefully. This might give a kid time to put down a toy.

    It’s even better if you can send two cops, both behind cover in different places. While one makes the challenge, the other will have his gun trained on the suspect ready to fire the moment the suspect appears to be trying to shoot.

    Aside from that, a police spokesman might say something like this: “You don’t want us to shoot suspects who are holding toy guns? How about the public not calling us to deal with suspects who are holding toy guns?”

  27. Criminals painting real guns to look like toys is also happening, further confusing the issue:

    Real Guns Built To Look Like Cute Toys Are Putting Children, Police Officers At Risk (CBS SF Bay Area)
    http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2015/01/27/confusion-over-real-guns-built-to-look-like-cute-toys-put-children-police-officers-at-risk-livermore-san-francisco-bay-area/

    Police: Ohio man painted gun red to resemble toy (PoliceOne)
    http://www.policeone.com/Officer-Safety/articles/7982121-Police-Ohio-man-painted-gun-red-to-resemble-toy

    Paint, Conceal, Shoot: Individuals painting their guns to make them look like toys is terrifying (Courts & Sports)
    http://courtsandsportsradio.com/2014/12/08/paint-conceal-shoot-individuals-painting-their-guns-to-make-them-look-like-toys-is-terrifying/

  28. I took many of advanced tactical classes and as stated above which it played out for me in the field avoiding many shootings was too issue your verbal commands from behind a position of cover and at a reasonable distance not so close that they could shoot me accurately. This is critical to allow you time to one access what’s happening, two give the person opportunity to drop his her weapon, three keeps you the officer safe, four provides TIME. There is no rushing up to man with gun call as example the 10 year old in Ohio playground officers pulling up a few feet away from boy with rifle directly in front of playground and forced to shoot immediately due to not having yourself positioned behind cover the officer simply wants to go home so he’s faced with tough decision and fires. Justifiably so at that point but bad tactics in approach….

    Remember cover, distance-further back you are increases likelyhood of not being struck by suspects gun fire, don’t rush-time is on your side.

    Yes if you have to take a life please don’t hesitate that could make the difference of you going home alive or your family burying you but I am just offering my advice based on training, experience and what I experienced worked so many times. If your responding to one of these calls, stay back, utilize cover in your approach, issue your commands and this is how you should handle the majority of man with gun calls except active shooter.

  29. This is a bad business from both sides.

    actually .. from 3 sides:

    *(1) why are you running with a youngster with a replica gun in his hand; don’t you know it’s asking for trouble? But .. that’s putting the bad on the innocent who was shot, so forget that!

    *(2) you’re the youngster with the toy gun in your hand? Why are you carrying that? Don’t you know better, in this day and age? Haven’t you heard about kid getting shot with toy/replica guns? ( But .. that’s putting the bad on the innocent who was NOT shot, so forget that!)

    *(3) You’re a cop, and you shot a kid before you even knew if it was a real gun? Gee, if it was me, I would have …. uh, maybe shot the kid with the gun. Not sure I would have been able to NOT shoot first, ’cause I would probably be freaking out, too. But you know .. I don’t know enough about the circumstances to be sure he gun wasn’t pointing at me or my partner.

    Okay, fourth point: I SURE wasn’t there, so I can’t say who was right and who was wrong. Kids play, they aren’t mature enough to be responsible. But there are a lot of kids who play with REAL guns, and shoot cops with them. Maybe the parents could step in here and ensure that their kids understand that there are consequences in all our actions; if you want to stay safe, you need to be seen as safe.

    Fifth point? Who sez the cops are the only ones who are trained to use their guns? Some training sergeant let this ho-dad patrolman out on the street without ensuring he could hit who he should have been aiming at, and that’s the TRUTH! (If you’re going to be a trigger-happy hodad, you should still be accurate!)

  30. Mas, I apologize for saying that you missed the paint-the-muzzle thing. You’d already nailed that and I totally missed it.

  31. Seems to me the problem here is that the people who want the training think the gun is the threat. It isn’t. The threat is the person who intends to harm you.

    Along with Steven R, I think the LEO training should focus on evaluating the individual being encountered. Particularly in light of the number of “I thought his cellphone was a gun” and “he made a furtive movement” shoots where telling the difference between real and fake isn’t even in play.

    Except in gun control circles, “person holding a gun” (even a real one) does not equal “person who intends to harm you and needs to be shot.”

    Cops (including chiefs) who disagree might consider that during their career they will spend more than half their time off-duty, out of uniform, carrying a gun. And then they’ll retire and spend all their time that way.

  32. How about parents training their kids not to brandish these replica weapons in public?

    When the liberals respond to citizen stupidity by saying “the police need to be better trained in _____” (replica weapons, race relations, empathy with the community, etc)– it’s just a backhanded way of blaming the cops.

  34. We should listen to our Dear Leader who’s much wiser than Solomon, when he recommends that Americans should ban ALL guns so no innocent kids will be harmed when they point real or replica firearms at police or armed citizens who may start shooting to defend themselves. With both real and fake guns removed from private hands, only the military, law enforcement which includes the Secret Service that protects politicians, and bodyguards who provide security to our wealthy elites, we lowly peasants can defend ourselves with baseball bats and tennis rackets against armed thugs and terrorists. Besides, we’ll still all be armed with cell phones, so we can call the police who have no Constitutional duty to protect individual citizens, when we are threatened by evil goblins.

    Many moons ago when I was a patrol officer in a very bad part of town, I was ridiculed by my macho w/m supervisor for drawing my SIG 220 on a b/m of sixteen who was carrying what later turned out to be a pellet rifle in the street and pointing it at various things. The PD used solo patrol units so I was by myself and I was not going to assume the kid had anything than a real rifle. The suspect ignored two commands to put down his weapon until I showed him the business end of my SIG from behind my vehicle, at which time he dropped the pellet rifle on the ground. He then mumbled something which I couldn’t understand and I discovered why, when he opened his mouth to show me a bunch of lead pellets under his tongue. I told him to spit out the projectiles, which he did into his hand, then told me he was only shooting at birds and other animals in the neighborhood. I advised the kid it was against the law to shoot at animals inside the city limits and he could be charged with animal cruelty, then I took his pellet rifle for safekeeping and handed him a receipt for it so a parent could pick it up from the PD’s property section. The pellet rifle was a single shot bolt action which looked like a real rifle and not something like a Daisy lever action which looks more like a toy from a distance of about thirty feet.

    This incident goes to show that some people are not very bright and things can go bad quickly if they make a wrong move. When you walk down the street with a realistic looking firearm and a police officer comes up behind you and orders you to put it down, it’s best to obey immediately and not do anything stupid like turn around quickly. My supervisor was an idiot also for laughing at me and making jokes about a dumb rookie drawing down on a kid with a pellet rifle. I have a Beeman R1 and RWS rifle which can launch .177 pellets at 1000+ fps that can cause serious injury or even death if the projectile hits the right spot like an eye or throat. I would not be surprised if that kid is even dumber now as holding stuff made of lead in one’s mouth is not the smartest thing to do.

  35. Stupidity breeds stupidity. So I hope none of the people in favor of this have any children. The gene pool is muddy enough. Police do not need training in “gun” reconition. They only need more target practice. And less crap from the limp wristed amoung us who think “Officer Smith” should risk his or her life trying to figure out if the thug’s gun is real. If you are foolish or brazzen enough point any type of weapon, real or not, you deserve to be shot. Our police men and women do not get the respect the deserve.

  38. Not that it makes much difference when the bad guys are painting the ends of their guns orange, but the story originally linked by Mas says that the replica in this incident had no orange tip but an LA Times article says that it did and shows, in a video linked in that article, a photo of a replica gun with a small orange tip:

    http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-lapd-replica-gun-20150212-story.html#page=1

    Interestingly, the photo in that video appears to be of the same gun in the same box as in the photo about halfway down in the first article in the article linked by Mas, but shot from a different angle to show the very small orange tip. The fact that it could be photographed from such an angle so as to not show the tip could, of course, also explain why the LAPD officers didn’t see it, either. (Another interesting feature of the photo in Mas’ article is that the gun is in the box with its muzzle pointing away from the end of the box clearly labeled “MUZZLE THIS END”. I draw no conclusions from that fact and the angle of the photo which doesn’t show the orange tip, but simply note it for the record.)

    The only significance of the presence of the orange tip is that it does make the calls for better training on replica gun recognition perhaps a little more understandable (though not any more practical).

    The LA Times story I’ve linked does give additional weight to the possibility that the officers felt the need to act quickly to protect one of the kids and adds that they only fired when the kid holding the replica turned towards them still holding it after being ordered to drop it. The kids say that the cops just yelled freeze and started shooting.

    One more thing: Statements by local activists such as mentioned in these stories are only the opinion of those local individuals or organizations. Projecting them onto, or attributing them as, the opinions of all liberals is just the opinion of the person doing that, not reality.

    Finally, there’s this: Mas and I have had some discussions in the past about how “reasonable belief” self defense laws put people who are mentally handicapped due to disease, injury, or age at risk. An unvarying expectation of instant obedience by LEO’s has the same effect. Kids are often stupid and want to argue and don’t have the life experience that adults have to realize what’s at stake. It would be interesting to ask the kid who was holding this replica (who wasn’t shot) if when he was ordered to “freeze, drop the weapon” was turning to say and demonstrate to the officer, “but it’s not a weapon” (or, in both cases, words to the same effect). Note that I said _unvarying_ expectation: I certainly agree that in many cases, kids or mentally handicapped or not, LEO’s will have the real need to expect instant obedience because #bluelivesmatter, and that will on occasion unfortunately lead to tragedy due to the inability of the victim to fully understand and react to the command. But once again, in every incident the devil is in the details and there is excellent evidence that people of color, especially young black males, get less benefit of the doubt than white people. That’s where #blacklivesmatter has some weight.

  39. Speaking of instant obedience, as I did in my last post above, I’d like to pose this question: Officer Eric Parker of the Madison, Alabama, PD is being fired and charged with assault for the use of excessive force against Sureshbhai Patel, 57, an Indian man, who was visiting his son and decided to take a walk in their neighborhood. The following is the most detailed explanation of what then happened I’ve been able to find:

    “On Feb. 6, a caller who lived in the Hardiman Place subdivision off of County Line Road placed a non-emergency 911 call to Madison Police, describing an individual walking around houses in the neighborhood and peering in garages. The caller said the person had been exhibiting the same behavior on the previous day, Feb. 5., and described Patel as a black guy, around 30-years-old, after being asked by the 911 operator.

    “It was then that Parker and his trainee, Andrew Slaughter, were dispatched to the scene. Officer Charles Spence arrived shortly thereafter in a separate car. When the officers reached Patel, he was on the street’s sidewalk on public property.

    “As Parker spoke to Patel, the dash-cam video showed, it became apparent that Patel spoke no English. Parker asked him for I.D., where Patel lived and what his business was walking around the neighborhood.

    “Eventually, Patel’s hands were behind his back due to Parker holding his hands. At the critical point of the video, Parker slammed Patel to the ground, hitting head and torso first, unable to brace his fall.

    “‘He don’t speak a lick of English,’ Parker said at least twice during the encounter after he tackled Patel.

    “Two officers attempt to help Patel walk, in which point he crumpled, unable to support his own weight.”

    Quoted from: http://www.madisoncountyrecord.com/2015/02/12/madison-police-officer-arrested-for-assault-on-sureshbhai-patel/

    Since that time, Patel has had to have spinal fusion and is reportedly partially paralyzed. Parker has been fired and arrested. The Governor of Alabama has apologized to the government of India for the incident. See: http://www.npr.org/blogs/codeswitch/2015/02/18/387259235/alabama-gov-apologizes-to-indian-government-in-excessive-force-case

    This would appear to be an incident in which an officer’s expectation of obedience has gone very wrong for the officer. But is the officer in fact a criminal or a scapegoat?

  40. Dennis: Yup, that’s the guy.

    Dave: Reasonable belief standards don’t put the mentally disabled at risk; their mental disability does. In the link you provide, neither print story nor TV narrator identify whether the SIG-like replica in the picture is the one in evidence or a generic file photo. A truculent, non-compliant kid (or adult) shouting “It’s not real” is not to be taken seriously when holding what appears to be a deadly weapon. (Believe it or not, criminals and crazy people are both known to lie.) And, as you know, I don’t pass judgment on people in active cases until the facts are out on both sides and, ideally, the matter has been adjudicated.

  41. Mas said:
    > In the link you provide, neither print story nor TV narrator
    > identify whether the SIG-like replica in the picture is the
    > one in evidence or a generic file photo.

    The box is the giveaway. If you’ll look at the crease in the box, where the lid hinges onto the side of the box, behind the replica gun in both instances, part of that crease is fairly sharp and part is flattened. The same pattern can be seen in the same place in both the photo in the article that you linked and in the video in the article that I linked.

    Mas said:
    > Reasonable belief standards don’t put the mentally disabled at
    > risk; their mental disability does.

    That’s a glass-is-half-empty/glass-is-half-full point of view. The question is whether we, as a society, are more willing to craft our legal standards in a way which more protects the average citizen or more protects those who impaired in their ability to help themselves. (How one answers that question could, I think, define whether the one is a liberal or a conservative.)

    Mas said:
    > A truculent, non-compliant kid (or adult) shouting “It’s not
    > real” is not to be taken seriously when holding what appears
    > to be a deadly weapon. (Believe it or not, criminals and crazy
    > people are both known to lie.)

    Mas, I truly like and respect you, but I don’t know how to respond to that. It seems to completely miss the point of what I was saying. Of _course_ they’re not to be taken seriously, but the question is how do you both not take them seriously and also take into account the possibility that they’re just a goofy kid (or a mentally handicapped person or a senile old person or a non-English speaker). Your statement seems to imply that it’s black or white, kill or be killed, and as I said above it is indeed sometimes that way, but it’s not _always_ that way and there are often things that can be done to help to prevent it being that way without putting blue lives at risk.

    Mas said:
    > I don’t pass judgment on people in active cases until the
    > facts are out on both sides and, ideally, the matter has been
    > adjudicated.

    I presume that’s in reference to my post about the Patel/Parker matter. I certainly understand your need to reserve your possible opinion as an expert witness, but there are other LEO’s and ex-LEO’s here that might want to weigh in, along with a lot of savvy civilians.

  42. All are welcome to weigh in here, Dave; that’s why your comment is here in black and white.

    The issues, however, are not so black and white. Cop or “civilian,” we cannot know whether the person pointing the gun at us or those we must protect is crazy or sane, whether his gun is real or replica, and whether it’s loaded with live ammo or cobwebs. Neither madness nor immaturity gives a license to murder.

    Dave, I’d like to see YOUR syllabus: how would you change the legal standard, keeping innocent victims safe while somehow protecting those who do crazy things with weapons which jeopardize the lives of the innocent?

  43. Mas, I don’t know all the answers. I think that they have to be worked out in a dialogue between those who are genuinely concerned about the issues on “my” side and those who are genuinely concerned about the safety of LEO’s. The starting point, however, at least from my point of view, is to set standards — rules of engagement, if you will — for LEO’s which minimize confrontation whenever possible without compromising the safety of either side or the public. A second subsidiary question is whether those standards should merely be best practices reinforced through training, should be matters subject to internal disciplinary measures, or should be codified into law (and, if so, whether civil, criminal, or both).

    But the key to coming up with standards that work will be dialogue between people who have one primary interest, but are also sympathetic and understanding about the needs and concerns of the other side. There are other issues as well — use of excessive force, handling of prisoners in the field once in custody, perhaps others — but in my opinion they’re not _nearly_ as important as limiting confrontation to those situations where it’s really necessary (and figuring out and defining what “really necessary” means would be a large part of the discussion).

    Anything I could say about the _details_ of those standards — that is, my syllabus — would only be either overly general or too much just a starting point. Before I could form such a syllabus, I’d want to be better informed from the LEO side about how they see the issues involved in the confrontation question.

  44. I hesitate to inject myself into this discussion, since my computer is acting up, seems to have a mind of its own, responding to my input slowly and sometimes not responding at all. Since it is not likely to kill me, I’m going to attempt to finish this post. There is no pressing reason to continue, I could just walk away, hope that it heals itself, and, if it doesn’t, discard it, buy a new one and hope for better results in the next encounter with a keyboard.

    Police, and civilians for that matter, who find themselves in a potentially deadly encounter, hope that their training and experience will have them prepared for any situation they may face. It is not unreasonable to expect police officers to be better trained and thus better prepared for potentially deadly force encounters. It is unreasonable to expect police (or anyone else) to be totally correct in every action they take as a deadly force encounter plays itself out. Every encounter in life, not just deadly force encounters, are fluid. Those involved are reacting to stimuli coming from the other. In everyday encounters, we have the luxury of time to evaluate and even ponder what our responses will be, we don’t have that luxury when we are encountering a deadly threat.

    Consider a pitcher in a ball game. He is hoping the pitch he has chosen to throw, combined with his throwing skill, will successfully fool the batter. The batter is trying to guess what pitch is going to be thrown, where this pitch will be at the time it gets to him, and hope that his bat will meet the ball at the correct moment to get a hit. He must make up his mind within hundredths of a second after the ball leaves the pitchers hand or he will have no chance of connecting.

    My point, I guess, is how much time can you spend trying to analyze the intent of the of the person posing a deadly threat to you? The pitcher could be throwing a “whiffle ball”, the batter can wait for it to get to him to find out. That’s just one pitch in 9 inning ball game. He will have numerous tries to get it right. Not so in a deadly force encounter.

    Hope my ramblings haven’t confused anyone. While wrestling with this recalcitrant laptop, having to go back and correct those mistakes made when it didn’t respond the way I wanted it to, it occurs to me how great it would be to have that ability in encounters I’ve had going through life.

  45. I suppose the best (and sometimes only) way to identify a replica gun is when you pick it up.
    While modern guns may have orange tips or even little flags on them I have owned numerous true replicas that looked exactly like the real thing and I have no reason to believe that there aren’t a lot of those still around.
    If a policeman requests that you drop your “fake” gun the best choice is to just do so and not argue about it. Anything else is just stupid if not suicidal.

  46. Very Scary & enjoyed reading the comments too!…On the pink guns thing….agghhh..I am a girl and I love pick. I really hate those pink guns & hostlers etc. No thank you…My all black & stainless steel goes with everything.

  47. Dennis – please don’t hesitate to post – you always put up such good stuff! The baseball analogy reveals so much shared psychology between the criminal mind trying to fool the LEO, and the pitcher trying to fool the batter. If only the worst case scenario in a lethal force encounter wasn’t so….lethal! All of this “analyzing danger/threat levels,” and the “less lethal” absurdity being foisted on the Ferguson police PD, etc. – is only going to accomplish one thing – get more officers wounded and killed.

  49. Check out http://www.pyramydair.com.
    They have a BB CO2 powered SP2022 (and lots of others) that is remarkably detailed and authentic looking. Even has ‘SIG Sauer SP2022’ written on the slide.
    Seeing that, in someones hand, out on the street, would raise my readiness status.

  50. Dennis – when I opened the link you provided, it was only fitting I should see Diblasio & Sharpton cuddling up to put me in the right mood. Then, David Muir comes on my tv and tells me about the ISIS threat in NY! What a great opportunity to try the new methods they are teaching in NYC! I wonder what their suggestion would be if one of the ISIS zombies had a knife to THEIR neck and there was an LEO putting the crosshairs on the bad guy. “Now, slow down, officer, breathe deep – are you sure you want to shoot this guy?” CAN this get any worse?

Newer Comments »

Comments are closed.