Zach S
Member
There's some of the "us vs them" attitude I've heard a few cops bitch about us civilians having.
LEOs, guns and mindset, part 2
- Thread starter badgerw
- Start date
- Status
worthirt_99
Member
+1
Monsieur Genoux
Member
"The lights are growing dim, Otto. I know a career of corruption and heavy-handedness has led me to this sorry fate...and yet, I blame society. Society made me what I am."
CombatArmsUSAF
Member
WOLFGANG - You need to chill out dude. Nobody was banging on our boys in blue.
Last time I checked the OP was discussing the inadequacies of training for our police officers.
Do I think that LEO's should have to pay and train on their own time? Heck no.
If their dept doesn't supply the funds and equipment? Yes they should!!
As I said earlier in the thread, If you carry a firearm, whether it be for personal or professional purposes, you have a responsibility to ensure that you are proficient with that tool.
Comments like this are completely out of line. They serve no real purpose and add fuel to the fire. I am in the United States Military, so how does that make me unqualified or cowardly? I know that the comment wasn't made directly at me, but the context of it points towards all members who aren't LEOs.
Last time I checked the OP was discussing the inadequacies of training for our police officers.
Do I think that LEO's should have to pay and train on their own time? Heck no.
If their dept doesn't supply the funds and equipment? Yes they should!!
As I said earlier in the thread, If you carry a firearm, whether it be for personal or professional purposes, you have a responsibility to ensure that you are proficient with that tool.
Comments like this are completely out of line. They serve no real purpose and add fuel to the fire. I am in the United States Military, so how does that make me unqualified or cowardly? I know that the comment wasn't made directly at me, but the context of it points towards all members who aren't LEOs.
TexasSkyhawk
Internet SEAL
Wolfgang2000 said:
Definitely a small minority of departments that prohibit their personnel from shooting their duty weapons anywhere but the department range.
Wolfgang2000 said:
Problem I have with the militarization of the police is that in most instances, it is not only not needed, but way detrimental to the overall image of law enforcement in general.
I live in a quiet suburb that has never had a hostage situation, never had a gunman running loose, where murders average maybe one every three to five years, etc.
Yet we have a freaking SWAT team.
They're not low-key about it at all. The SWAT youngsters make it a point to wear their tactical BDUs and tactical thigh-holsters and other military-style hardware any and every chance they get in public. Buzzcuts and tattoos and t-shirts with all the cute "gun show wannabe" slogans on them.
And in spite of all that, they're some of the worst shots I've ever seen.
That is where negative public perception comes in.
When is the last time you saw a group of firemen looking like that? And I'll submit to you that a firefighter's job is far more dangerous than a cop's job.
Is it no wonder that the public's overall perception of firemen is significantly higher than it is for policemen?
Wolfgang2000 said:
First, they are on administrative duty or leave. Second, if it's a clean or good shoot, that's the end of that. No civil ramifications or legal crapola--the department/municipality handles that.
If it's a bad shoot, then you have problems. As you damn well should.
Wolfgang2000 said:
I carried a gun and a badge with an eagle on it for over a dozen years. And it was during that time that I formed the opinions regarding many cops that I have today.
What department/agency are you/were you with?
Jeff
Treo
member
I was thinking the whole time I was reading this thread I had to pay 100% of the cost of my gun, I have to pay 100% of the cost of my range fees & 100% of the cost of my amuntion. & I still manage to fire at least 50 rounds every week W/ my primary carry weapon I feel that if I'm going to carry a weapon I had damn well better be profiecent at its use, and I am 100 times less likely than a cop to ever have to actually use it. So tell me why this should be considered such an insurrmountable burden to a cop?
BTW 14 years in the military & now I work with youth offenders I'm not a coward just because I'm not a cop
BTW 14 years in the military & now I work with youth offenders I'm not a coward just because I'm not a cop
Pevey
Member
You have to remember that cops do lots of jobs. Some are very good at other parts of it besides slinging a sidearm. LE Officers use a computer more than a gun, some have researching skills, some have communication skills, ect. Just because someone doesn't sleep with his gun doesn't make him a bad cop or a bad person. He is probably very good at other stuff he does more of.
As for my flavor of feds, we qual quarterly. Shooting once a year for the other guy does seem weak but it's their department. Before Homeland Security we would get a couple of boxes of extra rounds to practice on our own time every quarter and the personal stocks built up quick. Now, if I tell my firearms instructor I need extra to practice, I can get a few hundred rounds but I have to ask for it. I would say about 10 to 25% of the people here like to go out on their own to shoot and would be considered a gun nut.
Most in my business didn't sign on to shoot. Knowing how is just part of it like it or not. Some of the other parts are just as fun.
As for my flavor of feds, we qual quarterly. Shooting once a year for the other guy does seem weak but it's their department. Before Homeland Security we would get a couple of boxes of extra rounds to practice on our own time every quarter and the personal stocks built up quick. Now, if I tell my firearms instructor I need extra to practice, I can get a few hundred rounds but I have to ask for it. I would say about 10 to 25% of the people here like to go out on their own to shoot and would be considered a gun nut.
Most in my business didn't sign on to shoot. Knowing how is just part of it like it or not. Some of the other parts are just as fun.
CombatArmsUSAF
Member
PEVEY- I agree with you completely. Some are very good at other things, and I commend them for that. But their lives and the lives of innocent bystanders don't depend on their "research" skills.
I don't think anyone here sees it as a requirement for our LEO's to be all out gun nuts, but I think I speak for the whole of the forum and society when I say that they should at least be proficient
I don't think anyone here sees it as a requirement for our LEO's to be all out gun nuts, but I think I speak for the whole of the forum and society when I say that they should at least be proficient
Pevey
Member
Thanks for seeing a few of the things I was trying to point out. As for the proficiency, that's why we qualify. Four hours a quarter. Used to be eight but don't get me started on that. The instructors look for problems like looking over the sight, jerking the trigger, flinching, ect.. and work hard to improve the scores. Our course has gotten a little easier but it's still timed with turning targets, left and right one handed shooting, ect. There are no gimme's, the boss shoots with the troops and everyone can count the holes.
I can only answer for where I work but everyone here is proficient. When you spend as much time shooting at the academy as we do, it doesn't take much to stay sharp when you get home.
I agree some officers may not meet that standard but I would like to think they are the exception and not the rule. With the thousands of departments in the US, how would you go about checking everyone? You gotta have a little faith or the world is a cold and dark place.
I can only answer for where I work but everyone here is proficient. When you spend as much time shooting at the academy as we do, it doesn't take much to stay sharp when you get home.
I agree some officers may not meet that standard but I would like to think they are the exception and not the rule. With the thousands of departments in the US, how would you go about checking everyone? You gotta have a little faith or the world is a cold and dark place.
U.S.SFC_RET
Member
I have nothing but honor and respect for the LEO. Regardless the makeup. They represent the thin blue line between civilization and anarchy in many of our societies, some more than others. Low Pay and long, long hours. It takes a special calling. You have the vermin amongst them but they are few. Stop and thank one or two every once in a while for the thankless job that they do. Pressed from the top and hated by the public they entangle, it's a very stressful life and like a odometer is catches up. They need your thanks and recognition. Buy their lunch every once in a blue moon and pay them back for the service that they provide. God bless them.
Mousegun
Member
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2005
- Messages
- 738
Before retirement and moving to America, I lived in PR of New Jersey. I actually belonged to a wonderful pistol club and did a lot of shooting while there. This was actually a police range that I had a large part in the maintenance thereof.
I honored and respected the police I was involved with but I knew I had a lot of maintenance work to do after qualification sessions. There was a lot of stuff shot up that wasn't supposed to be.
I told a LEO friend that I couldn't understand why more time wasn't spent practicing one of the main things that could keep him alive and save other lives. I told him in my profession, safety equipment like gloves, face masks, proper clothing etc. kept me from harm and his vest, combat skills and firearm ability were among the things that kept him going and the only way to achieve proficiency was to practice, practice, practice.
Generally the response was to the tune of we don't really expect to ever need exceptional skills with a firearm. This sounded so much like responses I get from antis that say, "what are the chances it would ever happen to me"?
Even if expenses come from their own pocket, the job itself puts them in harms way more often than most other jobs ever do. How about a higher degree of responsibility to themselves, their family, and the public for which they serve. A few trips to the range on their own would be a positive event for everyone. My expenses come from my own pocket also and I get there two or three times a month (in PRNJ it was every week -- ironic huh?) because I feel the responsibility of carrying a weapon falls on me and my skills that have to be kept sharp.
This in no way diminishes my respect for the police, but I sometimes cringe when antis flog the term, "trained professionals" and demand that only they should be allowed to carry or even have firearms. I always say that a professional is someone who gets PAID doing a job it is not a word that means expert. That went for my profession also and in order to be proficient in it, I had to constantly keep up to date.
I honored and respected the police I was involved with but I knew I had a lot of maintenance work to do after qualification sessions. There was a lot of stuff shot up that wasn't supposed to be.
I told a LEO friend that I couldn't understand why more time wasn't spent practicing one of the main things that could keep him alive and save other lives. I told him in my profession, safety equipment like gloves, face masks, proper clothing etc. kept me from harm and his vest, combat skills and firearm ability were among the things that kept him going and the only way to achieve proficiency was to practice, practice, practice.
Generally the response was to the tune of we don't really expect to ever need exceptional skills with a firearm. This sounded so much like responses I get from antis that say, "what are the chances it would ever happen to me"?
Even if expenses come from their own pocket, the job itself puts them in harms way more often than most other jobs ever do. How about a higher degree of responsibility to themselves, their family, and the public for which they serve. A few trips to the range on their own would be a positive event for everyone. My expenses come from my own pocket also and I get there two or three times a month (in PRNJ it was every week -- ironic huh?) because I feel the responsibility of carrying a weapon falls on me and my skills that have to be kept sharp.
This in no way diminishes my respect for the police, but I sometimes cringe when antis flog the term, "trained professionals" and demand that only they should be allowed to carry or even have firearms. I always say that a professional is someone who gets PAID doing a job it is not a word that means expert. That went for my profession also and in order to be proficient in it, I had to constantly keep up to date.
Bingo. One common perspective I find is people assume anyone who is an LEO or in the military has a deep knowledge of firearms and shooting.
This isn't true. To most of us, firearms are a hobby, passion, or obsession. To LEOs and military they are simply a tool (not the main focus). I remember watching Dallas Swat once, where they raided a drug house. They found an AK clone rifle, and the officer holds it up and sneers "this is an SKS assault rifle... the most feared weapon on the streets!" And I couldn't believe how ignorant this guy was, but then I realized just because he is SWAT/LEO doesn't mean he knows much about guns.
Aguila Blanca
Member
I shoot at a small indoor range. Two people work there, the owner and one part-time helper. Both are always armed. They have a few rental guns there, and a few other firearms on consignment by a friend who has an FFL.
I also do transfers through a gun shop near home. It's owned by two former LEOs (one retired, the other stopped LEOing and became a building contractor before he made it to 20 years). Neither one carries, in the shop or anywhere. Neither one seems to shoot much. The retired LEO says he never shot a handgun except for his annual requalification, and since he retired he has never fired a handgun. He's into shotguns, and he takes one deer per season.
A bad guy would have easy picking in their shop, and could come away with some very nice (and useful) hardware.
Just shows to go ya -- many LEOs are not "gun guys."
I also do transfers through a gun shop near home. It's owned by two former LEOs (one retired, the other stopped LEOing and became a building contractor before he made it to 20 years). Neither one carries, in the shop or anywhere. Neither one seems to shoot much. The retired LEO says he never shot a handgun except for his annual requalification, and since he retired he has never fired a handgun. He's into shotguns, and he takes one deer per season.
A bad guy would have easy picking in their shop, and could come away with some very nice (and useful) hardware.
Just shows to go ya -- many LEOs are not "gun guys."
Wolfgang2000
Member
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2007
- Messages
- 376
I'm glad that my comments have provoked a good discussion. Just some points to clear up.
I never said that LEO's shouldn't be proficient with their weapons. I was pointing out that some Dept's make it really hard. It's a lot more than you think, and it getting worst every year.
AS far as my comments about some people qualifications, It's directed to those Internet commandos that won't go next door to tell the neighbors to turn down the music, but they are going direct police operations.
To the rest of you, don't sweat the small stuff.
Militarization of the Police.
This is the most overblown false fear I hear on the Internet. First ALL police Dept's. are and have always been para-military organizations. If you are talking about special units such as, SWAT, SRT, HRT, TAC, etc., I'm afraid they are a necessity these days, in MOST cities.
I know some small towns don't NEED a special unit. But since 9/11 the Feds have been shoveling big buck at Dept's. to get these teams up and running.
Is there a need? If you do a search you will see the 3 entry teams (5 to 7 people) have been wiped out since 2001.
There is a lot more to it. Such as training requirement for accreditation and such. To be honest I don't feel like typing it all out. The quick version is, the more lawyers and bureaucrats get involved, the worst it gets.
I never said that LEO's shouldn't be proficient with their weapons. I was pointing out that some Dept's make it really hard. It's a lot more than you think, and it getting worst every year.
AS far as my comments about some people qualifications, It's directed to those Internet commandos that won't go next door to tell the neighbors to turn down the music, but they are going direct police operations.
To the rest of you, don't sweat the small stuff.
Militarization of the Police.
This is the most overblown false fear I hear on the Internet. First ALL police Dept's. are and have always been para-military organizations. If you are talking about special units such as, SWAT, SRT, HRT, TAC, etc., I'm afraid they are a necessity these days, in MOST cities.
I know some small towns don't NEED a special unit. But since 9/11 the Feds have been shoveling big buck at Dept's. to get these teams up and running.
Is there a need? If you do a search you will see the 3 entry teams (5 to 7 people) have been wiped out since 2001.
There is a lot more to it. Such as training requirement for accreditation and such. To be honest I don't feel like typing it all out. The quick version is, the more lawyers and bureaucrats get involved, the worst it gets.
weisse52
Member
Wolfgang2000
OK, then clear this one up.
Comments like this do NOTHING but inflame.
Looks more like damage control. I "feel" your first comments reflect your feels on the vast majority of people in general. I respect LEO. I respect the military.
I will admit that on the Internet we are all 6' 4, 220 pounds and nerves of steel. Deadly with both handguns and longguns as well.
I agree with a lot of what you say, but this does help keep the "us vs them" thing going strong.
Merry Christmas to all!
OK, then clear this one up.
Comments like this do NOTHING but inflame.
Looks more like damage control. I "feel" your first comments reflect your feels on the vast majority of people in general. I respect LEO. I respect the military.
I will admit that on the Internet we are all 6' 4, 220 pounds and nerves of steel. Deadly with both handguns and longguns as well.
I agree with a lot of what you say, but this does help keep the "us vs them" thing going strong.
Merry Christmas to all!
CombatArmsUSAF
Member
WOLFGANG - I feel your pain. My Dad is the training officer for the dept back home. Just 2 months ago I was at home checking out the department's range and doing a little shooting of my own. The have a big time ventilation problem and with just me and my dad in there shooting it got really bad. They are trying to get OSHA to come in and inspect the environmental conditions, so OSHA will shut it down.Because then it will be easier to get funding for the necessary equipment to make the range shooter friendly.
Luckily, the Chief and the Mayor are "police friendly" and don't skimp on training dollars. So when they do get a functional range up and running the guys will be able to train like they should.
Luckily, the Chief and the Mayor are "police friendly" and don't skimp on training dollars. So when they do get a functional range up and running the guys will be able to train like they should.
ArfinGreebly
Moderator Emeritus
Life of Crime
. . .
"Maybe not."
It ain't Shakespeare, but it do have a point.
"You're going to be all right man."
. . .
"Maybe not."
It ain't Shakespeare, but it do have a point.
The Deer Hunter
Member
From what I hear most of the local boys only shoot before qualification each year.
I'd say in middle america cops are more likely to be military or "gun people". In large cities cops are many times just people.
The only thing that really bothers me lately about this is "fear". Police aren't getting enough training. You have cops tasering the hell out of suspects rather than interacting or tackling an apparently unarmed person. It seems in most cases it's somebody who doesn't has been properly trained. You don't have to carry to be trained, but you should feel comfortable enough to. And I think there are a generation of LEOs that aren't familiar enough with their weapons.
The only thing that really bothers me lately about this is "fear". Police aren't getting enough training. You have cops tasering the hell out of suspects rather than interacting or tackling an apparently unarmed person. It seems in most cases it's somebody who doesn't has been properly trained. You don't have to carry to be trained, but you should feel comfortable enough to. And I think there are a generation of LEOs that aren't familiar enough with their weapons.
sig226
Member
Bill, your answer depends on where you are and the mindset of the departments there. I was hanging around with a friend of mine who is on a tac team one evening this summer. We watched a sheriff's patrol boat driving up a canal and the conversation turned to an officer killed in Dade County that day. They thought the killer might be heading north, through our county. "Anybody packing?" my friend asked.
Police officers have a lot to do besides shooting guns. Many cops will never draw their sidearm in anger in a long career. Of the ones who do, most of these won't fire it. They have tons of other stuff to do. They have to learn the laws and procedures. They have to be good drivers. They have to know what to do in case of fires, accidents, and deaths. They have to be able to communicate what they saw so that their testimony will be valid in court. They have to know evidence and custody procedures. They have to know what to do in the event of a declared emergency.
Some agencies emphasize firearms skills on top of all of this, but it costs money to provide ammunition and other needed supplies, and the guys want to get paid for something they are forced to do for their job. Some bosses don't emphasize shooting because most of what their officers do does not involve shooting people.
And it is a job. At the end of the day, most cops want nothing to do with police work. Some carry guns off duty because they can, others carry nothing more than a badge because when their shift ends, they want peace and quiet. How many of us want to go home, go out with our families, and then have to go to work?
Police officers have a lot to do besides shooting guns. Many cops will never draw their sidearm in anger in a long career. Of the ones who do, most of these won't fire it. They have tons of other stuff to do. They have to learn the laws and procedures. They have to be good drivers. They have to know what to do in case of fires, accidents, and deaths. They have to be able to communicate what they saw so that their testimony will be valid in court. They have to know evidence and custody procedures. They have to know what to do in the event of a declared emergency.
Some agencies emphasize firearms skills on top of all of this, but it costs money to provide ammunition and other needed supplies, and the guys want to get paid for something they are forced to do for their job. Some bosses don't emphasize shooting because most of what their officers do does not involve shooting people.
And it is a job. At the end of the day, most cops want nothing to do with police work. Some carry guns off duty because they can, others carry nothing more than a badge because when their shift ends, they want peace and quiet. How many of us want to go home, go out with our families, and then have to go to work?
Wolfgang2000
Member
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2007
- Messages
- 376
Weisse52, A lot is said about LEO's here and on other forum are meant to inflame. Nobody seems to care, except the LEO's. Yet I read a lot for Internet commandos on how LEO's "should" handle something. But nobody cares if that makes the LEO feel like the THEY are making it a them or us thing.
The fact remains the reality trumps opinion every time. The problem is getting getting some people to face reality. The fact remains the there are people that are either unqualified, afraid, or just can't be bothered with shouldering the responsibility for public service. OK that is fine, their choice. But how or earth could they logically try to tell someone else how to do that job?
It always amused me at the people that that won't go tell the neighbor to turn down the music, will freely tell others what THEY should sacrifice, or how brave THEY should be.
I'm sorry if you found my statement "inflaming". The fact remains that the reason MOST people don't put on the badge falls into one of those 3 categories. Not flaming, just facts. So if the shoe fits, wear it. If it doesn't, pass it on.
During my life's experiences I've noticed that there are some erroneous assumptions a lot of people make.
If they can field strip a firearm, they are a gunsmith.
If they have a point and shoot camera, they are a photographer.
If they passed the CCW class they now know what it's like to a professional LEO.
This is my opinion. I fully understand that opinions are like arm pits. Everybody has a couple and they usually stink.
The fact remains the reality trumps opinion every time. The problem is getting getting some people to face reality. The fact remains the there are people that are either unqualified, afraid, or just can't be bothered with shouldering the responsibility for public service. OK that is fine, their choice. But how or earth could they logically try to tell someone else how to do that job?
It always amused me at the people that that won't go tell the neighbor to turn down the music, will freely tell others what THEY should sacrifice, or how brave THEY should be.
I'm sorry if you found my statement "inflaming". The fact remains that the reason MOST people don't put on the badge falls into one of those 3 categories. Not flaming, just facts. So if the shoe fits, wear it. If it doesn't, pass it on.
During my life's experiences I've noticed that there are some erroneous assumptions a lot of people make.
If they can field strip a firearm, they are a gunsmith.
If they have a point and shoot camera, they are a photographer.
If they passed the CCW class they now know what it's like to a professional LEO.
This is my opinion. I fully understand that opinions are like arm pits. Everybody has a couple and they usually stink.
worthirt_99
Member
Hey, that sounds like my Ex-Wife!
I love the work that LEOs do, yes some are gun people, some aren't. I might be totally wrong here, but gun profiecent they may not have to be due to the area/department funding and so forth. Example, in one area a LEO may never have to use his sidearm, but does he use a tazer or an asp alot? To me he should be more profiecent on the use of those then on the use of his gun. Should he know how to use a gun, yes, as a just in case. That is what the qualification is for, no matter what the time length. What what I have seen, even the military operates that way. If your job (mine for example) does not require handeling a gun, then we get the minimum training on it. Are we profiecent, probaly not, can we use it if nessary? That is what we qualify for.
Dr. Dickie
Member
One thing that I think should be made clearer and is often unarticulated, is the difference between LEO's and department policy.
I have nothing but respect for most LEO's--there are always a-holes in any business, and generally EVERY business gets judged by the a-holes (that is human nature).
I have a major problem with changes in police department polices over the years (the addition of SWAT to even small towns and the use of SWAT for just about any raid).
However, I think the biggest problem that most people have is not the enforcement of rules, or the officers that enforce the rule (though that may be how it is worded in the statements made) but the shear number and types of rules we are being forced to live under.
A police state is not when there is a ridged and heavy handed enforcement of the rules.
A police state is when EVERYTHING in your life is regulated and there is a rigid and heavy handed enforcement of the rules.
Since (as far as I can see) must gun folks are very pro-enforcement of the rules, and are sticklers for rules, the slow creep of the Fed, State, and local government into our lives is frightening. Think! What in your life is not touched by Federal regulations?
So, while I would agree with you that too often you see cop bashing, if you read what those people are writing, very often you will see that they are really bashing the excessive rules from faceless bureaucracies that are trying to control our lives. In frustration, they lash out at the "face" that enforces those rules, rather than the rules themselves.
Truly, I believe, if we had a set of honest and appropriate laws (instead of the massive micro-life controlling set we currently have), you would find that "gun people"would be the police's most valuable and vocal ally.
If I was to judge you by those statement alone, I would say you might want to consider a different line of work. Sure there are some people like that. There are also LEOs that are first class pr$%ks. So what? Most are not.
If you think most of us are scared, cowering, sheep that need a big bad LEO to come to our rescue, then you need to step back for a moment. The public has been trained and conditioned to let the police handle it, and they were trained and conditioned BY THE POLICE to do that.
With the society we live it, and all those damn rules I just mentioned, not letting the police handle it is a good way to get yourself arrested. So, we let the police handle it (as the law says we should) and you look down on us a sheep, cowards, unworthy of your great stature in society as our hero in shining armor.
Pretty neat scenario: Arrest us if we do it ourselves, dismiss us as unworthy if we do what we are supposed to do. IF I WAS TO JUDGE you by those statements. From reading what you have written, I think that would be un-fair. I don't think you really think that way. But it sure looks like people bashing to meWe who love freedom, are fighting back at the excessive regulations we are being forced to live under. We SHOULD make it a whole lot clearer that it is not the folks who are out there trying to enforce the rules, but the rules themselves we are fighting back against. But with the way things are set today, frustration runs high. Try to see that often the vitriolic words are not meant at the individual LEO, but the enforcement of unjust, un-American rules that are being imposed upon us.
NOTE: I am not suggesting, nor implying that LEOs should only enforce the rules they feel are right or wrong. The job is enforce the rules, that is what you do. We need to change (lessen) the rules. But try to see that most times it is the rules, not the individuals that people are venting about.
At least that is how I see things.
Stay safe Wolfgang2000, just the fact that you are here on the THR means that you are one of 'the good guys"
At least that is how I see things.
I am growing more and more uneasy by the growing rift between LE and us who are very "by the rules" kinda people. I truly hope that that rift does not get to wide.
I suppose we all need to take a look at the other side as well, as a 'trained professional' a LEO also needs to have a fairly extensive understanding of the law. So, I guess the question, I would pose is... would you rather see a police officer have an in-depth understanding of the law, the Constitution and your rights or be a good shot?
Granted, both would be optimal, but considering an officer might need to draw his service weapon only a few times a year, but deals with Fourth Amendment issues a few times a week, I think it might put this conversation into a different perspective.
That being said, from a bulk of the stories that are publicized in the media, it doesn't always sound like their free time is spent mastering the scholarly aspects of the job, either.
Granted, both would be optimal, but considering an officer might need to draw his service weapon only a few times a year, but deals with Fourth Amendment issues a few times a week, I think it might put this conversation into a different perspective.
That being said, from a bulk of the stories that are publicized in the media, it doesn't always sound like their free time is spent mastering the scholarly aspects of the job, either.
- Status