Following the opening ceremonies on the first day of the Symposium — during which we’ll hear remarks from Bobby Henline and Craig Floyd — a handful of sessions will take place. High on my list of “musts” in the agenda are the talk to be given by Henk Iverson (on Gun Fighter Performance) and Col. Danny McKnight (on Courage Under Fire).

The Warrior track will begin with 16 hours of intimate hands-on sessions spanning the first two days, followed by a two-day 16-hour live-fire venue — hosted by Orlando City PD. During this element, attendees will have the opportunity to work with internationally-recognized instructors such as SGM Pete Gould — one of SOCOM’s premiere firearm experts and trainers — and Pittsburg SWAT Commander Steve Mescan.

Training Emulating Tactical Environments I recently reconnected via phone with my friend Chris Ghannam — Chief Technology Officer and Training Coordinator for SARK, who has been working on this event for more than a year — to get a little more information on the upcoming program.

“Right now in law enforcement, if you go to a range they all look pretty similar,” Ghannam began. “Regardless of whether you’re LAPD working in a completely urban metropolitan environment, or if you’re on the Border Patrol and you’re stuck in the Arizona desert with no landscape to assimilate physical structures to assist in range assessments,” Ghannam began.

“The military learned this critical lesson as ODA team members began transitioning between the urban landscape of Baghdad and the mountainous and flat plains of Afghanistan,” he continued. “To the point where ammunition lethality even came under question even though the issue had nothing to do with stopping power and everything to do with the operators inability to effectively gage distance in a completely different terrain. We tend to want to qualify these guys in a very similar shooting range environment, even though real world conditions are grossly different — we’re not looking hard enough at how that can negatively impact authentic demonstrations of gun fighter performance and base line qualifications.”

It almost goes without saying — almost! — that there is obvious value in training/qualifying an metropolitan police officer at least a little bit differently than training/qualifying an officer who patrols the mountains. Yet, at least as it relates to quals, we still look at those spray-painted lines on the square range, delineating the three-, five-, seven-, ten-,15-, and 25-yard line.

Ghannam asks, “If you work in a location that is constantly cold, hot or frequently changing as it tends to do throughout the country, doesn’t it behoove you to qualify in that exact environment? Why do we keep putting our professionals in a climate-controlled indoor shooting facility? What is the real gain beyond some added comfort for the shooter, why are we so bent on making our shooters intolerable of adverse conditions, we really have to decided if we are after pass or fail tests – qualifications or the far more important – personal and professional development.”

That’s a damned good question.

A Variety of Perspectives To address this — and other issues related to tactical training — Ghannam and his fellow conference organizers have brought in experts who deliver a diverse set of experiences and offer a variety of different perspectives. He specifically points out the very unique “resumes” of the instructors working the pistol ranges during the week.

“I brought in guys like Steve Mescan and Pete Gould,” Ghannam stated. “They come from very different worlds, but at the end of the day we aren’t there to teach our attendees how to squeeze the trigger — this is about how to make more effective coaches, how to make more effective range instructors, and how to mitigate those common high-fail errors regardless of what level our attendees are presently working on.”

The program Ghannam and the SARK folks have developed for the Warrior track is fusion of 16 hours of live-fire instruction and 16 hours of hands-on instruction in an intimate setting with world-class trainers. Regular readers of this space know well that I seek to participate in as much hands-on, live-fire training as my schedule will permit. Whether or not I will get the chance to partake in the work being done that week on the range will depend on a variety of factors — for starters, I absolutely insist on not getting in the way of anyone else’s training time.

But you can rest assured that I will do my level best to remember what I see and pass along to PoliceOne readers the highlights of what will surely be an event chock-full of highlights.

We strive to be treated with dignity in return.

All of us wish to die with dignity.

Dignity in the Aftermath of Tragedy Webster’s defines dignity as the quality or state of being worthy, honored, or esteemed; worthiness. The degree of worth, repute, or honor. The goal of this column is to help officers and their families who are living with the sacrifice live with dignity. To make sure they feel honored and esteemed, worthy of our gratitude for the sacrifice they live with, and not feel forgotten.

I receive emails containing inspiring stories from officers who are living with the sacrifice with dignity and courage that bring me to tears.

Other stories anger me because the agencies and communities that officers served and protected are not treating them with dignity.

Many of these officers struggle with devastating injuries and struggle to maintain dignity in the aftermath of losing a career and livelihood, of losing the bond to the law enforcement family, and their trademark as a cop.

I hear the same story from all over the globe from officers and their families struggling to maintain their dignity while battling for benefits. This battle often takes place in open court for all the public to see.

The battle to prove their pain, their loss, their disability.

These battles are just as stressful as battling for one’s life in a gunfight.

We wouldn’t leave a fellow officer to battle alone in a gunfight, now would we?

We provide backup.

So, why don’t we do the same when an officer has been injured?

A Clarion Call for 2012 I challenge the law enforcement community to show their spirit in 2012 and step up to the plate to support injured officers.

Help me fill the Honorable Mention column with stories of how the law enforcement community has risen to the task to honor and maintain the dignity of injured and disabled officers.

In recent years, we have vastly improved how we honor the memories of our fallen comrades and how we treat their families. We need to do the same for those officers, and their loved ones, who live with the sacrifice.

I invite the officers living with the sacrifice to let me know how we can better serve your needs. What are the most important issues you and your family are facing and how can we help?

Remember the definition of dignity: The quality or state of being worthy, honored, or esteemed; worthiness. The degree of worth, repute, or honor.

Let injured officers know they are worthy of your time. Honor them by not allowing them to feel forgotten. Show them your esteem by championing their causes or honoring them within your agencies.

If you are a sheriff, chief, commissioner, or superintendent of a law enforcement agency, use a computer-based calendar program that reminds you to call injured officers on their birthdays and anniversaries of their injuries. That act won’t cost your budget-strapped agency any money. Only the time and effort to enter the information into a calendar program.

The call will go a long way to honor and heighten the dignity of an injured or disabled officer under your command.

In particular, the study group challenges the widely held belief that simply placing a subject face-down in a prone position after a use of force creates a substantial threat to life. In fact, the only subject who died in more than 1,200 consecutive force encounters that the team meticulously analyzed was lying on his side, a position commonly advocated for its presumed safety.

“[S]udden in-custody death,” the study concludes, “has more to do with the features of the individual” than with his or her positioning. Even among suspects supposed to be at high risk--the drug and alcohol intoxicated and those with mental illness--there appears to be no scientific basis for believing that prone positioning is as dangerous as its reputation suggests, the researchers report.

“The true understanding of use-of-force events will come from comprehensive, scientific protocols such as this one, which was carried out under the rigorous conditions of a scientific medical study and supervised by the Institutional Review Boards of the universities involved,” Hall told Force Science News.

“Rather than focusing solely on one type of force or another, the goal of the study is to evaluate all use-of-force events to better understand which subjects and situations may represent particular risk.”

The investigative team was headed by Dr. Christine Hall, an emergency room physician and a medical faculty member at the University of British Columbia and the University of Calgary. An internationally recognized expert on excited delirium syndrome, Hall is also on the faculty for the certification course in Force Science Analysis conducted by the Force Science Institute.

Origin of Controversy Concern about the relationship between suspect positioning and death first arose in the early 1980s after a medical examiner in Washington State analyzed three cases in which prisoners were transported while hogtied and concluded that such positioning was associated with sudden in-custody death because of the suffocating effect on breathing and the inability of the subjects to shift to a different position.

More articles warning about “positional asphyxia” and “restraint asphyxia” followed in medical journals and law enforcement publications and positioning became a widespread training and policy issue.

Hall points out that the medical examiner’s original work on the effects of positioning was shown to be “fraught with methodological errors,” and that other, more sophisticated studies disputed alleged adverse findings. Nonetheless, the debate about suspect positioning “gradually translated into the unsupported idea that any and all prone positioning for any length of time is immediately dangerous.”

Moreover, prone positioning came to be regarded “without scientific evidence” as “particularly dangerous” to restrained suspects who are “under the influence of intoxicants such as alcohol and/or stimulants, experiencing mental distress, or in the agitated, incoherent state known as excited delirium,” as well as those who have been TASERed.

“When a cause of death cannot be found otherwise, positional asphyxia is often suggested to have [played] a role...,” the researchers note.

As the bias against any form of prone positioning intensified, Hall perceived that what was lacking in the debate was a broad-based, detailed examination of real-life incidents to determine exactly what variety of physical positions restrained suspects end up in after force encounters with police and what association there might be between each of these positions and ultimate unfavorable outcomes.

Force Pool With the cooperation of police executives in an unnamed Canadian city with more than 1,100,000 population and nearly 2,000 street cops, Hall and her team collected a vast statistical database across a recent three-year period. (The city is anonymous in their report to protect privacy, an ethical consideration required by the universities involved.)

Without officers being aware of the researchers’ interests, certain study-related entries were embedded in the department’s standard electronic form that must be filled out after any use of force above soft-hand control. Among other things, officers had to specify the apparent cognitive condition of the subjects they encountered and their “final resting position...once physical control had been achieved...and while awaiting further disposition”: i.e., either prone (face-down) or not prone (face-up, side-lying, sitting, kneeling, or standing). The department involved does not specify a favored position in policy, so there was no motive for officers to shade their responses, Hall points out.

Forms involving suspects at least 18 years old and all “general police duty” uses of force beyond merely “a bent wrist or straightened elbow to gain compliance” were then parsed for particulars. “We did not pick and choose between subjects, events, or outcomes,” Hall says, “but included all uses of force over three consecutive years.”

The pool the researchers analyzed ended up being 88 percent males. Some 40 percent appeared drunk at the time of police contact; 10 percent were judged to be drug-intoxicated; 9 percent seemed mentally distressed; and 28 percent demonstrated some combinations of those states.

In all, out of 1,566,908 interactions between police and subjects across the study’s 3 years, force was used in only 1,269 contacts.”[C]ontrary to current suggestion that police use of force is rampant, 99.92 percent of all police-public interactions [recorded by the agency studied] did not involve police use of force,” the researchers report. “This finding did not vary across three years of study.”

Risk Outcomes In terms of positioning, nearly 43 percent of subjects ended up prone in their final resting pose after their force encounter. About 57 percent were not prone. All were handcuffed, but none was leg- or ankle-restrained or hogtied. “[E]ven though prone positioning was very common,” the researchers noted, none of the “hundreds of subjects in the prone position” died.

Indeed, with only one death [a not-prone subject] discovered in the entire study, statistically “there was no [significant] difference in the death rate between prone and not-prone positions.”

Suspects with drug/alcohol intoxication, mental illness, or some combination thereof were essentially evenly distributed between prone and not-prone positioning. Despite the prevalent suspicion that such individuals are at greater risk, “no subject died in the prone position even with a large number of abnormally behaving individuals” in the force pool.

Of the large number of subjects against whom a TASER was used, about 29 percent ended up prone, 25 percent not prone. Again, positioning did not determine how these suspects fared, the researchers emphasize.

The one subject who died during the study “was an individual who was assessed by officers on the scene as having both drug intoxication and mental distress, had undergone a single contact stun exposure with a CEW, and had many abnormal characteristics before and after police involvement at the scene,” the study report says. “This subject was placed in the side-lying position at the conclusion of the use-of-force event, prior to cardiopulmonary collapse.

“[He] displayed multiple features of excited delirium. The details...are strikingly similar to other in-custody death occurrences both in and out of the prone position and...with and without CEW application.”

Bottom Line Hall points out that this is believed to be the “only study to document the incidence of sudden in-custody death across all use-of-force modalities” in a major urban police agency.

Besides dispelling some persistent myths about the risk of prone positioning, she feels the findings are important for confirming the overall rarity of sudden in-custody death. It’s “profoundly low in the real-world environment of police use of force which includes many abnormally behaving individuals in varied circumstances.”

Media publicity of in-custody deaths without an appreciation of their context “results in the presumption of a falsely elevated prevalence” of these occurrences, she writes in the study report. “This, in turn, generates persecution and prosecution of individual police officers and police agencies at great personal and societal cost, fear and mistrust for the police in the public eye, and results in reactionary changes in policy and procedure that may well be based in conjecture rather than fact.”

Recommendations Hall acknowledges that all research studies have some limitations. Because hogtying was not used in any of the encounters her team studied, the researchers could not assess its specific danger to prone subjects, if any, for example. Also, while they were aware that “weight force” was very likely applied to the back of some of the proned subjects, they were not able to determine how often that occurred. That variable will be evaluated in the future.

“[R]egardless of the low incidence of sudden in-custody death, further study is required,” the team reports. Hall’s objective is to “determine what, if anything, can predict sudden in-custody death in order to improve the outcomes for people undergoing police use of force.”

Meanwhile, the researchers caution that suspects restrained in a prone position--any position, actually--should not be abandoned “for protracted lengths of time.” Suspects always bear close observation.

“[T]he best way for non-medically trained pre-hospital personnel to monitor the [well-being] status of any human being is through observation of the face...,” the researchers suggest. Therefore it is “advisable to assign 1 officer to monitor the restrained subject’s face for signs of distress/difficulty.”

This study was funded by the Canadian Police Research Center. The results appear in the latest issue the Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine, under the title “Incidence and outcome of prone positioning following police use of force in a prospective, consecutive cohort of subjects.” Click here for a brief abstract that’s is available free of charge. The full seven-page study paper can be ordered for a fee at that site.

Speaking from a grammatical point of view, the term “objectively-reasonable force” is a much more accurate standard to describe what officers using force should be held to.

The term does not carry the unrealistically-utopian idealism of the term “minimal force.” It also does not give any implication that it describes an exact quantum of force that can be debated for weeks. It does not give the idea that a use of force should be looked at with hindsight to determine if it really was “necessary.”

Indeed, all one needs to do is to revisit our friend Merriam-Webster’s Online Dictionary. The word reasonable (used as an adjective) also has several meanings and synonyms. Included in this list are:

1.) being in accordance with reason, and 2.) not extreme or excessive.

A few of the listed synonyms include: good, rational, logical, sensible, and sound.

When comparing the definitions of the terms written about in this article, would you rather be held to a standard that:

1.) requires absolute certainty and can consider facts that were discovered with hindsight, or 2.) takes into consideration the legal standard used by the Supreme Court of the United States and human performance limitations.

I know the answer is obvious to me.

I realize that some will dismiss this thinking as “just semantics.” I caution those naysayers with the same words one of my trainers told me several years ago, “the law is comprised of words, and those words have definitions.” Please take heed to these wise words as it is for your benefit.

Objective/Subjective Decision — Objective Analysis The word “objectively” is the adverb form of the word “objective.” In this case it is used as a modifier of the adjective “reasonable” to describe the noun “force” (sorry for the grammar lesson…again). Another quick check with Merriam-Webster’s Online Dictionary reveals the definition of “objective” to include, “involving or deriving from sense perception or experience with actual objects, conditions, or phenomena.” Listed synonyms include; empirical and observational.

An officer will make his/her force-option decision based on the actions of the suspect. If the suspect is non-resistive and compliant, the officer will have no reason to have to resort to a force response. So in essence, it is the suspect who forces an officer to choose a force response.

The force option chosen and how it is deployed and used against the suspect can have a subjective component. The officer may have a choice of reasonable options but based on personal preference may lean toward one more than the other. This is where the subjectivity comes into play. The decision made must still be made based on objective facts known to the officer at the time of the force application.

The officer’s force response will definitely be evaluated from an objective standard, as one will clearly recognize after reading and understanding the true legal standard of an officer’s use of force.

The True Legal Standard In 1989, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) handed down one of the landmark decisions regarding an officer’s use of force. The case was Graham v. Connor (490 U.S. 386). This decision created a national standard that is still in place today. In its decision, the SCOTUS made it clear that an officer’s use of force on a free citizen is to be evaluated as a seizure of the person under the Fourth Amendment. Indeed, the SCOTUS said in its holding:

All claims that law enforcement officials have used excessive force - deadly or not - in the course of an arrest, investigatory stop, or other "seizure" of a free citizen are properly analyzed under the Fourth Amendment's "objective reasonableness" standard, rather than under a substantive due process standard.

What is important to the reader for this article is the phrase “objective reasonableness.” How did the SCOTUS come to this term? Perhaps a quick review of the Fourth Amendment can shed some light. The Fourth Amendment protects the people against unreasonable searches and seizures by the government and its agents. Therefore it would logically follow that officers must act reasonably when seizing people.

Graham set forth several evaluation guidelines and factors to be taken into consideration when evaluating an officer’s use of force. These evaluation guidelines include one overarching direction to anybody who chooses to opine about an officer’s force response:

The calculus of reasonableness must embody allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments - in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving - about the amount of force that is necessary in a particular situation.

Once the person that chooses to render his/her opinion understands this overarching direction, they also need to be aware of these guidelines while making their determination of the reasonableness of the officer’s force response:

1.) Judged through the perspective of a reasonable officer a. Officer with same or similar training and experience b. Facing similar circumstances c. Act the same way or use similar judgment 2.) Based on the totality of the facts known to the officer at the time the force was applied a. No matter how compelling the evidence is to be found later b. No hindsight evaluation 3.) Based on the facts known to the officer without regard to the underlying intent or motivation 4.) Based on the knowledge the officer acted properly under established law at the time

In order for an officer’s use of force to be deemed “objectively reasonable,” his/her force response (“what” and “how”) must be reasonably balanced with the governmental interests at stake (“why”). The officer’s force response level (quantum) can be measured by evaluating:

1.) “what” force option was used, and 2.) “how” it was used.

Another way of viewing this would be to ask the question, “What was the reasonable expectation of injury?”

In Graham, the SCOTUS gave law enforcement several factors to examine when evaluating the “why” of an officer’s force option including, but not limited to:

1.) the severity of crime at issue, 2.) the threat of the suspect, and 3.) the level of resistance offered by the suspect.

“Objectively reasonable” is the true — and most accurate — legal standard when both teaching use of force, and/or evaluating an officer’s past use of force. Using any other standard is avoidably dangerous because it is a false legal standard and can be easily misinterpreted or misrepresented — either knowingly or not.

A frantic father stymied by the forces of nature from rescuing them...

Time fast running out...

And then the chance appearance of a police trainer who, in a test of himself and his sidearm, saved the day with unconventional thinking.

Ready for the Unexpected The elements of that dramatic scenario converged after a sedan carrying a ski party spun out of control on a snowy canyon road east of Logan, Utah. The trainer — Chris Willden — had expected nothing more that day than completing a mundane errand, replacing a busted TV set.

His reaction when suddenly confronted with a life-or-death emergency exemplifies two fundamentals of professionalism: Be prepared for the unexpected, and when the odds are stacked against you improvise, adapt, and overcome.

An ex-cop, 35-year-old Willden now operates the Strategic Tactical Group, a training facility in Bountiful, Utah, that specializes in honing the firearms skills of current and former military and law enforcement personnel. For nearly six years, he served on PDs in the Salt Lake City area, working bike patrol, SWAT, and gang crimes, among other assignments. Before that, during nearly nine years with the Air Force Security Police, he logged time on a sniper team and as part of the protective unit for President Clinton aboard Air Force One.

Just after noon last New Year’s Eve day, Willden, his father Bruce (a former reserve officer and firearms instructor for Utah POST), and Chris’s 12-year-old son Derek were in a Dodge pickup heading to Logan on mountainous US 89 from a family cabin on Bear Lake about 40 miles northeast of the city. “Our television conked out the night before and we were going down to Walmart to buy a new one,” Willden told PoliceOne.

Driving in the opposite direction on the steep, twisting, two-lane route in a Honda Accord were Roger Anderson, 46, his two children, four-year-old Baylor and nine-year-old Miya, and Miya’s girlfriend Kenya, also nine years old. They were heading up to the Beaver Mountain ski resort.

Their lives intersected in narrow Logan Canyon about 15 miles east of town, at a treacherous bridge across the turbulent Logan River.

“We came around a curve and saw an SUV skewed on the bridge,” Willden says. “The snow plows hadn’t been through yet after the latest storm and the driver must have hit a slick spot and skidded.”

Behind the wheel of the pickup, Willden’s dad slowed down. “Two women ran toward us from the mini-van yelling something about kids,” Willden says. Then he saw the real problem.

Down about a 10-foot bank from the highway, a Honda Accord lay upside-down in the Logan River. Later Willden would learn that just moments earlier the driver, Roger Anderson, who’d been following behind the SUV, had hit his brakes when the van skidded and had himself spun out on a patch of ice. No guardrail, boulders, or trees were there to stop him, and the car veered off the pavement and rolled down the embankment into the river, landing on its top.

Now the women rushing to the pickup made clearer their alarming cries: Children were trapped inside the stricken car.

Quick Thinking, Rapid Action Willden was out of the truck before it came to a complete stop. Shucking his coat and tossing his wallet, he lunged through snow and brush down the embankment and leaped into the river. “It was 14 degrees out and all I could think was, Oh, this is gonna be so cold!” Willden remembers.

A man Willden later knew as Anderson was clawing at the car in waist-deep water. “My kids, my kids!” he screamed. Stumbling over the rocky riverbed, Willden forced his way toward him through the numbing, powerful current.

Anderson had escaped the car through a shattered driver’s window but then the strong current had shifted the vehicle enough that that opening was no longer accessible. The youngsters, restrained by seat belts and a car seat, were inside, with the water rapidly filling the passenger compartment.

The force of the water kept Willden from opening doors and except for the inaccessible driver’s window all the glass was intact. He wasn’t able to generate enough power to kick out a window under water. He even climbed onto the up-facing chassis in search of an opening there, in vain.

“I had tunnel vision, completely focused on the car,” Willden says. “I was determined to get the kids out, but I didn’t know how, and I was afraid they’d be dead by the time I got to them. Time is life, and time was running out.”

Willden decided his only option was to roll the dice in a desperate gamble.

Whenever he goes into the outer world, Willden habitually carries a sidearm in a leather holster on his right hip. The pistol he had with him that day was a Glock 23. Like most of his body, it was underwater that that moment, but Willden drew it and pressed the muzzle against a corner of the rear passenger window. With the barrel angled down toward the roof of the car resting on the riverbed, he squeezed off a single round.

“I knew the bullet would lose velocity very quickly in the water,” he says. “I just prayed it would break the glass.” It did.

Without pausing to rake the frame, Willden holstered and reached both arms into the vehicle, “feeling around for arms, legs, clothing, hair — anything I could grab that might be people. All I got was handfuls of cold water.”

By now, other vehicles had stopped on the highway and half a dozen men were coming down the embankment into the river, including Willden’s dad. “Someone yelled, ‘We’re gonna flip the car!’,” Willden recalls. “We all got on one side and started lifting.”

Soon the vehicle raised enough that Willden could see a dazed-looking young girl (Kenya) seat-belted in the backseat. “Luckily, she’d been in an air pocket in the car and was still conscious,” he says. He pulled a Columbia River folding knife from his pocket, one of two blades he invariably carries, and cut her free. He pulled her from the car by her shirt and handed her off to another of the rescuers.

Willden then spotted another girl (Miya) “floating face-down in the front seat.” She apparently had been able to release her own seat belt but had been unable to escape further. Willden’s father pulled her out, “but she did not appear to be breathing. She was as grey and blue as can be and as limp as a doll.”

Finally, floating on the rear driver’s side, they found a little boy (Baylor), strapped in a car seat. “I saw that his eyes were open and I thought, Yes!” Willden says. “Then I realized his eyes were rolled back in his head and only the whites were showing.”

Willden cut him free with the same knife and the boy, unconscious, was passed with the girls up the embankment to a crowd gathered on the highway. Among those waiting was a physician who’d happened on the scene en route to the ski slopes.

A Sheepdog in Training By the time Willden — numb, sopping wet, arms bleeding from glass cuts — dragged himself out of the water and up the bank, he felt nearly in a semiconscious state of his own. “I remember a group working on the kids,” he says, “but I can’t tell you if they were men, women, dogs, or aliens.”

His son, meantime, had been thinking ahead. Willden calls him “a sheepdog in training.” He had a blanket ready for Willden to wrap in as soon as he stripped off his wet clothes and he’d turned the pickup truck’s heater up to maximum to create a warm cocoon as a refuge. “I had absolutely no feeling in my feet,” Willden says. But he and his father soon dried off and thawed out with no permanent damage.

The kids from the car survived, too. Miya and Baylor, the most endangered, were resuscitated at the scene, and all were taken to Logan by ambulance, then air-lifted to a hospital in Salt Lake City. They suffered hypothermia but recovered to good health. Willden’s heroic actions were credited for their happy outcome.

Teaching Points Willden offers the following teaching points:

1.) “Regardless of the comfort level, always carry a knife, a gun, and a flashlight. These are three things I never leave home without, and two of them came in very handy that day.” 2.) “Keep your first aid and CPR certification up.” 3.) “Train in the most inopportune, worst weather you can find. If you can accomplish things in crappy weather, it will be so much easier to deal with bad things that happen in good weather.” 4.) “Seat belts are not easy to cut. Even with a razor-sharp blade, I had to saw through Kenya’s. I now carry a seat belt cutter and a glass breaker in my car.” 5.) “I know the Glock people won’t advocate it, but I always wondered if my pistol would shoot underwater, so I tried it about five years ago. Standing in that river, I had full faith that the gun would do what I needed it to do.”

Fellow-trainer John Farnam of Defense Training International adds this observation:

“There were several other well-meaning citizens present, who bravely endured the freezing waters that day. But only Chris was truly prepared. He had the necessary tools at hand and the boldness to unhesitatingly take unilateral, dicey, audacious action, not waiting around for ‘someone else’ to ‘do something.’

“Through preparation and boldness, he snatched victory from the jaws of disaster.”

Traditional less-lethal crowd control measures have been demonized as barbaric. Pepper spray, in particular, has taken a beating. The public has unreasonable expectations of police tactics in public order situations, demanding measures that are pain-free, risk-free, and yet effective in removing people from places they are not allowed to be. Are there any technologies that can meet these challenges?

One possibility that hasn’t been tried on a large scale as yet lies with laser-based “dazzler” devices. Ranging from the size of a flashlight to models as big as a deck gun, these devices emit a beam of light that has to be experienced to be appreciated. I saw one at a trade show some years back, and had trouble just standing upright when it was shone into my eyes for only a second or two. They don’t just temporarily blind the targeted person—the laser light appears to move in a complex pattern that is profoundly disorienting. Many people experience nausea that persists for several minutes after the light is shut off or directed elsewhere.

A U.S. company called Laser Energetics has been selling two “Dazer Laser” products for some time. These are handheld devices that blind and disorient individuals from up to 2,400 meters away (300 meters for the smaller “Guardian” model) so that arrest team officers can move in and subdue them physically. It’s important to note that the effect of these laser devices isn’t to blind individuals in the way a laser pointer shone into someone’s eyes would. The light causes no damage to the eyes. Laser Energetics has available on their website a report from a medical provider that examined ten test subjects after they had been exposed to the Dazer Laser for three intervals of ten seconds each. There was no damage to the eyes of any of the test subjects.

BAE Systems — parent company of Safariland and a major defense contractor — is developing a larger-scale laser device that works on a similar principle, but in this case for use on ships to fend off pirate attacks. Merchant ships operating off the coast of Africa are regularly attacked and occasionally boarded and captured by pirates, who then hold the ships and crews for ransom. Most merchant vessels are prohibited from carrying conventional weapons to repel these attacks, and have had to rely on sound cannons, water jets, and usually just trying to outrun the pirates when they can’t get military assistance.

Both the BAE Systems and Laser Energetics devices have safeguards to keep the lasers from being used by the bad guys if they are captured. Laser Energetics uses a security code that will enable the device for only 12 or 24 hours before it resets, and the operator can reset a device at any time, disabling it until the security code is entered again. BAE Systems isn’t saying what measures it uses.

A laser weapon of this type could be a superior crowd control device. People aren’t usually motivated to continue their activities if they can’t see, and that goes triple if they feel like they’re about to blow chunks. Without doubt, the deployment of a device like this against an ‘Occupy’ or similar crowd will be condemned as inhumane, and someone will claim they were struck permanently blind, suffered an aneurysm, or possibly turned to stone.

It’s got to be better than pepper spray, though. I’ve experienced that, and it truly sucks.

After the Columbine attack, most police agencies trained some form of Rapid Deployment/Active Shooter Response. Some agencies refresh the training annually and have equipped their officers with the weapons, tools and supplies necessary to win such a fight. Many agencies, however, have allowed the skills to become rusty and leave it up to the individual officer to prepare their own “kit.”

So, you should be the one who does prepare a GO bag — or GO vest, as you prefer.

The Fairburn Setup An Active Shooter kit is a balance of enough stuff to get you through a serious fight, but not so much stuff it becomes cumbersome and is left behind in the locker. I’ll go over my recommendation for a GO bag/vest, and then you can send in your comments for additions/deletions. We learn from each other — I’ll bet there are some great ideas out there I haven’t yet heard.

I use a 5.11 brand bag for my prototype GO bag because it is well made and the size I wanted, but you should get whatever works for you. The size I like is what 5.11 calls their Practical Utility Shoulder Hold (PUSH) pack (MSRP $60). Apparently, federal agents also like the PUSH pack because they stocked all three colors at the FBI Academy gift shop at Quantico, Virginia when I visited there recently. I like a shoulder-rig bag because the shoulder strap carries the bulk of the bag’s weight and a Velcro belt loop on the back will secure it on your belt during movement.

Many patrol officers use a tactical vest for ammo and their pistol, combined with a fanny pack for incidental supplies.

Either system has advantages and disadvantages. In particular, a fanny pack with more than a few pounds of gear will droop badly unless rigged to a vest or shoulder straps.

The Ammo The primary thing you’ll need when going to an active-shooter gunfight is ammo for your long gun. If a handgun is all you have for such a fight, then you’re underprepared. A shotgun is better than a handgun, but a patrol rifle is what you need. Many high schools have hallways more than 100 yards long. You need a rifle. You may be up against a scared little punk looking to die in a blaze of glory. Or, you may run into a hornet’s nest populated by a group of terrorists bent on killing as many victims as possible for broadcast on the network news. Prepare for the worst and go in heavy, meaning 200+ rounds of rifle ammo as your combat load. I’ll describe the contents of my GO bag, understanding that a tactical vest/fanny pack combination would serve just as well.

My list starts with six 30-round M4 magazines, totaling a combat load of about 200 rounds counting the magazine in the rifle. I load all magazines two rounds short to make them easier to lock in place when the bolt is closed — so the actual round count for the seven magazines is 196 (close enough!). The PUSH bag has two zippered side pouches which I load with two 30-round magazines forward and a 20-ounce drink bottle aft.

Under the main flap I have inserted a Maxpedition MaxP-9836 carrier that holds my four remaining 30-round magazines. The existing pockets in the PUSH pack will accommodate the same four magazines, but they rattle against each other, a problem eliminated by the insert. Ideally, your gear shouldn’t make much noise even when you jump up and down a bit. Stealth is a good habit to develop. The PUSH pack has a zippered pouch in the very rear which will hold a sidearm, but I think your sidearm/spare ammo should be holstered elsewhere, where it is more quickly deployed if need be.

The Med Kit In the center section of the bag I stuff in a 6.6 Med Pouch, also made by 5.11. This pouch was issued to me when I attended a self-aid/buddy aid Rapid Medical Response course taught by the PROTECMED group (see my January 2012 review of this excellent course).

The Med Pouch contains an Israeli battle dressing, CAT tourniquet, clotting sponges, chest seals, a naso-pharyngeal airway, a roll of med tape, a space blanket and nitrile gloves. Under the Med Kit I store a ziplock bag with a small supply of TP and baby wipes. Alongside the Med kit I stuff in two Clif bars (or whatever power bars you like). In the small pockets in the rear of the main compartment I carry a spare knife, CR123 flashlight batteries, a small waterproof notebook, pencil and ‘Sharpie’ pen, and a police whistle (great for commo/signaling in case of radio failure).

That leaves two zippered pouches on the outside of the bag’s main flap. In the front zippered pocket I carry a couple of 10-foot sections of 550-paracord, a lens-cleaning cloth, a small roll of orange surveyor’s tape, a stripper clip guide, and some band-aids and second skin.

In the remaining zippered pouch on the top flap I carry some insurance I learned from an old chopper pilot when I was in the Army, a 20-round magazine loaded with tracers. In addition to being 18 extra rounds for a worst-case scenario, the tracers allow me to visibly mark an adversary’s position, drawing supportive fire from my compatriots. I have clipped a small military first-aid pouch on the front molle straps of the PUSH pack, which carries an aluminum carabineer and two 10-foot loops of one-inch nylon webbing, which can be used to drag a downed officer to safety. The remaining molle straps securely hold a spare two-cell LED flashlight.

The Bottom Line My GO bag weighs about 12 pounds (fully loaded) and if the load were much heavier, it would work better in a three-day back pack, but that would compromise quick access in a fight. Your kit will be different than mine, customized to your personal needs. If you anticipate deploying into more rural areas, I would add a compass (or better yet, a small GPS unit) a small water purifier, and a fire starting kit (Bic lighter/lifeboat matches and tinder).

Some officers buy a double set of magazines, rotating them monthly to avoid the springs taking a “set.” Another alternative is to replace the magazine springs every couple of years.

How much will all this cost? Well, if you have to buy everything, including the med kit, magazines, and 200 rounds of premium 5.56mm ammo like Federal Tactical Bonded or Black Hills Ammo’s Barnes TSX load... maybe as much as $500.

If you intend to send in a comment complaining about how your department will never provide the bag/vest and its contents, save your time:

A.) we already know they probably won’t, and B.) there’s a $5 fine for whining.

This article is meant to give you some ideas on what to carry in a GO bag/vest if you want to assemble one. If you’re not willing to pack your own “just in case” kit, so be it. About the only thing I’m likely to loan you from my stuff would be a power bar, a sip of G2 and enough from the Med Kit to keep you alive.

But, you really should bring your own stuff.

Amy Peterson-Uribe knows what it’s like to be one of those left to pick up the pieces.

On May 10th, 2005 at 11 a.m. Amy was at home napping after working the night shift at the Phoenix (Ariz.) Children’s Hospital when the phone rang. It was her husband Adam, a second-generation Phoenix police officer, who was currently on duty.

“I think dad has been shot.”

You’re Just in Limbo Adam’s father, veteran PPD Officer David C. Uribe had been shot in the head after making a traffic stop. As news of the shooting hit the air, Adam had been unable to reach his father on the phone and feared the worst. As his commander pulled up next to him, his worst fears were realized. Adam hung up the phone, Amy quickly dressed and a family friend came to the house to pick her up.

Arriving at the hospital, Amy remembers walking a gauntlet of other officers and their family members before coming to the bedside of her father-in-law. She stood with the rest of the Uribe family as they circled David’s bed, knowing that their patriarch would not recover. Officer David Uribe was taken off of life support and pronounced dead three hours later.

David Uribe, whom Amy still calls “Dad,” was buried with full honors and then the family was left to grieve and somehow resume their “normal” lives. Amy, a military veteran and mother of three, channeled her grief into dealing with the aftermath of her father-in-law’s murder. She began working with coordinators of memorial events — she wrote notes to well-wishers and attended meetings held by Concerns of Police Survivors and The 100 Club of Arizona. In May of 2006, the Uribe family attended National Police Week in Washington, D.C. and then returned home — one year had passed since David Uribe had been gunned down.

“It gets critical after the first year” Amy recently told me on the phone. “After that first year, you’re just in limbo.”

The TAPS Foundation is Born Grief can do terrible things to a family, and people are rarely the same after such a traumatic loss. Adam and Amy ended their marriage in 2007. By then, Amy had already begun counseling survivors and working with The TASER Foundation for Fallen Officers. She was asked to sit on the CEO Advisory Board for The TASER Foundation to make sure all survivors were properly notified and their voices would be heard during events and fundraisers. It was during that year that she developed the concept that would eventually become The TAPS Foundation.

As a survivor and as someone who had already heard countless other line of duty death stories, Amy began to notice the lack of knowledge and consistency regarding benefits for the fallen. As she researched the issue, she also learned that this wasn’t unique to the police profession — fire and military had similar issues. She saw tragic circumstances where wills weren’t updated accordingly, families weren’t aware of grants to assist in such things as school expenses and Police Week travel, and so often neither the families nor the agencies were aware of the support services available. Because she is uniquely tied to all three professions, Amy decided to do something about the oversight she continued to witness, but first, she had some personal work to do.

As the now-single mom of three, Amy felt she needed to find out who she was as an individual before she could continue to help others. She also needed to lick her wounds and heal and needed to regain her confidence.

“I didn’t want to start this foundation with doubts in myself. I was constantly second-guessing my decisions. I needed to finish my own grieving.” She packed up the kids and moved to the Houston (Texas) area and began to lay the groundwork for the TAPS Foundation, whose mission is to educate and assist all first responders — police, fire, and military — as well as their agencies and families in learning about the benefits and resources available to them in the event of injury or death in the line of duty.

The TAPS Foundation — named for the mournful song that no family ever wants to hear — became an official non-for-profit organization in the Fall of 2011. Amy is the CEO and handles military and police agencies. TAPS President Felicity Rose Harris primarily handles fire and EMS agencies. Grief counseling is handled by Amy, as are in-service training seminars and public speaking engagements.

The Foundation’s goal for 2012 is to increase awareness for organizations that benefit survivors, increase the number of first responders who have updated their information and have advanced directives / wills in place, and eventually be able to give grants to the children of first responders who are in need of counseling following a traumatic event. Amy works with other organizations such as C.O.P.S. as well as with individual agencies and corporate sponsors. As she told me, “TAPS doesn’t want to compete with anyone, we want to enhance what they do and help to inform the right people.” TAPS is also planning its first annual gala — my husband and I will be there — in March.

Amy’s enthusiasm for the TAPS Foundation is incredibly infectious. She laughs easily but has a touch of that humorous cynicism typical of first responders. She’s a dynamic speaker and a tenacious advocate. She also knows her stuff. As I threw scenario after scenario at her she was able to provide answers with confidence, and more importantly, without condescension. Amy is a survivor, but she’s also a warrior, and she’s fighting for police, fire and military families everywhere.

There’s another cop in that group besides yours truly. This guy is an active duty sergeant —a real nice guy who attends with his wife, too. He knows I used to be on the job and we get along well. While our trainer was explaining the physical benefits of the Turkish Get Up from a muscle building perspective, another dude in the class, a “non-cop” wanna-be kind of guy I’ll call Murray, decided to inject his two-cents worth into the discussion on how, in his opinion, the TGU relates to law enforcement tactics. Murray’s two-minute verbal thesis centered on how a police officer — who’s down on the ground — has to get up from a supine position onto his feet to keep a bad guy at bay (what the hell does “at bay” mean, anyway?) while at the same time holding his gun with one hand pointed at the suspect in case he needs to shoot.

At about this same time, the active duty street boss kind of looked over to me as if to say “Hey, LT, is this idiot serious?”

The I.D.I.O.T. Factor Now, I’m not sure if the “wanna-be” is an actual moron or not from an IQ standpoint, but after our workout, my wife and I were talking and I brought up the old acronym we learned at the academy, I.D.I.O.T. For the newbie out there, it means Idiots Do It On Television (a.k.a. Law and Order training).

During the drive home, I told her “officers are taught that they don’t have to get up off the ground to fire their weapons. Guns will work in any position, right side up, on their sides, even upside down.” Which brings me to the point of this article.

I’m sure we all accept the second part of that last statement; “Guns will work in any position” as accurate. But, how about the first part? Are we all training to fire our weapons from positions other than right side up? Oh, sure; I’m sure we know about the standard TRC or PPC courses of fire, i.e., sitting, kneeling, prone, blah, blah, blah. But how about shooting from some of those other-than-normal positions we might unfortunately find ourselves in?

Downed Officer’s Course Developed by a buddy of mine, the late Jim Cirillo, NYPD (retired), the “Downed Officer’s Course” was developed to refute exactly what Murray the Moron was spouting during our recent TGU exercise; that cops can only shoot while standing up and while their guns are in an upright position. Jimmie designed the DOC to teach just the opposite; that officers’ can shoot, and in fact, MUST learn to shoot — accurately — from any position. But first, some background.

Many years ago, two NYPD officers were assassinated by members of the Black Liberation Army on a sidewalk in NYC. The two suspects got into a gunfight with the two officers and fired their guns dry. The first officer was killed immediately, and the second was down, but not out. Still conscious — albeit paralyzed from the waist down — the officer was desperately trying to right himself up into a sitting position to fire at the fleeing BLA assailants.

The suspects, both with empty guns, were running away. But one looked back to see where the officers were, and in doing so, saw the second cop struggling to get himself into a sitting position. That suspect snuck back, armed himself with the first officer’s revolver, and summarily executed the second officer with a shot to the head.

Hence, Jimmie Cirillo’s “Downed Officer’s Firearms Defense Course” was born. In later years, Jimmie would go on to teach this course across the country as well as at FLETC down in Glynco, Georgia.

Sight Pcture and Sight Aignment The focus of Jim’s Downed Officer’s Course was the old tried-and-true axiom of firearms accuracy, sight picture and sight alignment. In sum and substance, as long as your front and rear sights are in proper alignment and properly superimposed on the target, you’ll probably hit that target. Shooting accurately does not depend in any way on your internal body compass. Jim’s program stresses a lot of shooting from these awkward positions — on your right and left sides, or the supine on-your-back position with the sights upside down.

While many civilians believe that guns must be held upright to work, police officers know differently. But we almost never practice or train in those unusual positions. We all know what an officer does during training he or she will do on the street. Law enforcement history is replete with stories like the NYPD/BLA incident or the infamous CHP/Newhall “brass in pocket” incident. Sadly, we learn from tragedies like these. But as most trainers know, a lack of funds or time sometimes dictates our training programs.

The “Downed Officer’s Course” is not something your officers will learn during basic recruit school. Most state POST firearms programs are crammed with just the basics (hence the name basic training). With a little history about the NYPD/BLA incident and some lessons from the mind of a firearms training legend, you can work some of the exercises from Jimmie’s “Downed Officer’s Course” into your next in-service.

Author’s Note: I first met Jimmie years ago during one of the Calibre Press Street Survival Seminars I taught in Atlanta, Georgia. He had retired from the NYPD in 1976 and had taken a teaching post at FLETC, a position he held for 10 years. We last spoke on the phone back in late 1991 after he contracted Lime’s Disease during a hunting trip. He eventually recovered, but was killed in a freak car accident in July 2007.

Rest in Peace, Jim.

In a cop’s world, experience is closely aligned with the word ‘experiment’ and it’s the experiments that often make the job as a cop fun, interesting, and sometimes downright amusing.

Here are a few examples of some experiments that helped me during my illustrious career as a crime fighter:

1.) As a young Army Military Policeman at Fort Benning, Georgia, breaking up fights at the NCO (non-commissioned officer’s) Club were fortunately only a rare event but after a couple of major brawls at the club it got old real quick. When I say ‘fortunately’ I mean thankfully in the highest regard because some of the soldiers involved in these brawls could make top UFC fighters look like Urkel nerds complete with suspenders, glasses, braces, and severe acne!

My experiment went something like this: police radio squelches out “fight in progress at the NCO Club.” I would then drive my patrol car to the NCO club, looking both ways after stopping at every stop sign (making sure the brawlers had ample time to get fully exhausted). Upon my arrival I made sure I armed myself with my most important weapon: the nickel-plated Acme Thunderer metal whistle!

Once inside the club, I quickly evaluated the best place to stand so I wouldn’t get trampled because the next thing I did was blow my whistle loud and clear, yelling out as loud as I could “your Sergeant Major’s enroute!”

Nobody — not even a Butter Bar — would want to face his wrath! I then stood back and watched as the brawlers and onlookers were all elbows and assholes trying to get out the door and disappear!

No arrests. No paperwork. No Sergeant Major, not even a First Sergeant... Just me and my Acme Thunderer!

2.) Occasionally a police officer will get the opportunity to arrive on a scene before a suspect actually has time to flee or escape. This happened once when a daytime burglar was hiding inside a second-floor two-bedroom apartment. With the building perimeter set up and only one way in and one way out, our hiding crook had no place to go. My experiment unfolded as follows: I made a voice command to the suspect from just outside the front entrance of the apartment for him to come out with his hands up. I also made the command that he only had ten seconds to do so or I was letting (non-existent) K-9 dogs loose into the apartment. As I started to count to 10 — trying to keep from laughing — two of my patrol buddies started barking and growling viciously as if they were two ferocious German shepherds being held back by their handlers before a brutal assault!

By the time I hit seven our burglar made himself visible, crying out that he didn’t want any part of the K-9s and was giving up. The perp was cuffed and led to the front door of the apartment. The whimpering suspect was cautiously looking around for the K-9’s so as not to get bit and said “where are the dogs?” I said “what dogs?” Our burglar’s reaction that he had just been hoodwinked caused us all to burst out laughing!

One arrest and three Academy Awards Nominations in ‘best deceptive voiceover sound effects’ category!

3.) While on routine patrol in the wee hours of the morning, a strong-arm robbery call went out over the radio. A lady had her purse and wallet taken while loading groceries into her car at a 24-hour grocery store.

A few blocks away, I saw a possible suspect ‘cool walking’ away from the store. I stopped him, ID’d him, patted him down, and put him in the back seat of my patrol car. I told him I was taking him back to the grocery store for identification purposes.

When I pulled up in front of the store, I got out of my patrol unit and opened up the back door and jokingly asked (experimented) the suspect if he could identify the person he had just robbed and he said “yeah” pointing to the lady. “I just took $30 bucks from her purse and wallet and then tossed em.”

After the perp showed me where he trashed the purse and wallet, I booked him for robbery. I would have also charged him with being stupid in a no stupid zone but I guess that goes without saying!

Some criminals are smart but most are not. Cops have to outsmart the criminals all the time. Sometimes outsmarting criminals means thinking outside the box. What are some examples of how you or someone in your department has thought outside the box?

One investigative resource often underutilized as a source of good information, is our correctional system. I know many investigators who have had — and continue to have — great success tapping into this wellspring of information. Correctional facilities offer a few different resources for us to take advantage of. Inmate communications within a correctional facility is an area that offers a vast array of information worth exploring.

“Jail mail” is one form of inmate communication. Within this category, I include mail sent via the U.S. Postal service to and from an inmate as well as correspondence sent within the jail from inmate to inmate — also know as “a kite” or contraband letter. Written communications can be a great source of information. In several cases inmates used this as their preferable means of communication rather than talking on the telephone due to concerns that telephone calls were being recorded. Information including knowledge of a crime, presence at a crime scene, other people or locations that may be involved, weapons used or hidden, and confessions are examples of what can be obtained by examining inmate jail mail.

Make a Specific Request The legal requirements of each jurisdiction will vary, but many places simply require a court order or subpoena to obtain copies of an inmate’s postal service mail. Access is usually granted for a specific but limited timeframe (30-60 days on average) but can be extended in some cases or re-applied for in others where additional time is needed and good cause is shown. Be sure to specify the inmate’s name, identification number, as well as the desired span of time and that you wish to examine both incoming and outgoing mail.

It may take the correctional facility a short time to respond to your request but once they comply, investigators should receive copies of all the inmate’s mail to review for case relevance.

With regard to inmate-to-inmate correspondence or “kites,” investigators will need to contact correctional staff directly. Some correctional facilities have specialized units, such as Intel or Gang Units that may be particularly willing to lend a hand in intercepting communications sent between inmates because they are also interested in the content. Often, correctional staff are able to “toss” an inmate’s cell — on the basis of probable cause — but without a search warrant or prior warning.

Check with your local jurisdiction to see if this is possible, if so it could reveal some interesting Intel for you to consider.

Inmate-to-inmate correspondences are sometimes discovered written in code. Therefore, don’t be quick to dismiss a seemingly benign note or letter from one inmate to another — it may contain a coded message. Other notes will be more obvious coded messages because they will be difficult to read. These types of notes usually require “a key” to decipher the code (although some inmates have it memorized). The “key” also might be discovered during a search of an inmate’s cell. Gang or jail codes can be challenging but think of it like any other investigation ...it’s a puzzle that needs solving.

Pictures Are Worth... Tattoos and graffiti are a more subtle — yet significant — source of inmate communication worth examination. Personal tattoos, depending on the number, can be helpful in learning a lot about an inmate. There are the tattoos we know to indicate gang affiliations and weapons of choice, but tattoos may also indicate inmate aliases, as well as names of family, friends, or associates. They may show areas where an inmate lives, lived, or frequents, as well as past crimes committed and/or prior incarcerations.

If the proper time is taken to scrutinize them, some of the more heavily tattooed inmate’s tattoos can tell quite a story. Most tattoos have a meaning to the person they are on and it is just a matter of determining what that is and whether it is meaningful to you and the case you are investigating.

Graffiti can provide investigators information similar to that gleaned from tattoos and like tattoos, graffiti usually has underlying meanings and requires some time and a discerning eye to understand them. Most graffiti contains scripts and symbols that are hard to figure out but if an investigator looks at it long enough or in sufficient quantity, he or she will be able to decipher and understand, perhaps not all, but a lot of it. If you have trouble, I would recommend consulting a correctional or gang investigator who is accustomed to interpreting graffiti. Some of the things we can learn from graffiti are gang affiliations, a “roll call” of gang members (usually street names only), gang territories, rivals and elements of a story.

This Call Is Being Recorded Inmate’s telephone calls and visitations within many correctional institutions are recorded and for investigators this can be an evidentiary goldmine. Most facilities that record inmate’s calls or visitations play a preliminary recorded message informing the inmate that their call or visitation will be recorded.

One would think that this would eliminate any references to criminal acts, actions, knowledge, or involvement. Despite this very clear warning to the inmate, they still talk! I cannot begin to describe for you the amount of evidentiary information that has been obtained from this means of inmate communication. I suppose that this is a lot like the Miranda phenomenon, despite the warning, confessions are still regularly obtained.

Here are some circumstances that I have experienced from inmate phone calls or visitations: In several instances inmates get wrapped up in their conversations and forget the call or visitation is being recorded. In others, inmates who are scared try reaching out to anyone they can and in their haste while trying to seek help say something meaningful. It might be an inmate asking someone for an alibi to cover their tracks or hide potential evidence, it could be an “apologetic” confession to a parent, relative or boyfriend/girlfriend, it could be an argument between an inmate and someone else where the inmate says something valuable in the heat of the moment or it could be some disparaging remarks about the police investigation. Whatever their motivation and despite the given warnings, I assure you inmates talk and as an investigator, if you are not taking advantage of this investigative resource, you really should!

If you do not have direct access to your local detention facility (in some locals, investigators can gain access from their work computers) then your local correctional facility should be able to provide you a recording of the calls that are relevant to your case. The only downside of this investigative resource is time. Many of these calls need to be listened to in “real-time” so that nothing important is missed. The average length of a jail call or visitation is 30 minutes. Consider the inmate who while incarcerated does little else but talk on the phone — this can translate to quite a time commitment for an investigator.

Two other points are worth noting with regard to jail calls: First, in order to introduce the calls as evidence in court, you or your local prosecutor may need to have the calls certified by the correctional institution’s telephone service provider. Second, due to attorney/client privileges, investigators are not permitted to listen to or use any correspondence between an inmate and his or her attorney. Some correctional institution telephone service providers have the ability to program local attorneys telephone numbers into their phone system and blocked them to the extent that inmates can still speak with their attorneys but law enforcement will not have access to those calls when scanning or scrutinizing recordings.

Don’t Forget HUMINT Just as important as what an inmate says is who an inmate is calling or who might be visiting. Like cell phone records, when examining the incoming and outgoing phone numbers associated with a particular inmate, jail and visitation calls as well as visitation logs can help investigators link other people and locations to the inmate or a particular crime.

Some correctional facilities have more elaborate phone systems than others. The size and sophistication of your local system will determine the extent of the information you can obtain and the speed in which you can access it. Obviously, not all correctional facilities have the ability or system in place to record inmate calls or visitations. Those who don’t should really consider the investigative and prosecutorial benefits.

One last resource worth mentioning is the correctional staff within your local detention facility — the human intelligence, or HUMINT — you can develop. Correctional staff are in the unique position to speak directly with inmates or “jailhouse informants” and/or overhear and intercept a variety of inmate communications. As good investigators, we should always be looking to establish those relationships that have the potential to provide good case information. Getting to know the correctional staff in your jurisdiction is another great way to generate or obtain investigative leads.

Inmate communications are too often underestimated and sometimes overlooked during an investigator’s quest for information. I encourage all investigators to make this invaluable resource a regular part of their investigative repertoire.

I wish you all a safe and successful 2012.

Franklin Armory is a manufacturer of quality carbines based out of Morgan Hill (Calif.), which is about an hour south of the PoliceOne headquarters. You’ll hear more about Franklin Armory products when I review products from ERGO Grips in a month or so.

There are plenty of drills appropriate for using a sub-caliber conversion. These drills all have a common goal: trigger time. Combined with deliberate dry-fire training, trigger time (or time on trigger) is the way to achieve competency levels necessary for lethal engagements. For a great discussion on dry firing with a handgun, see Ron Avery’s article on high-performance dry-fire training concepts.

Cheaper by a Bundle With a sub-caliber training device, an officer can shoot a whole day for the price of a box of bullets. Recoil is significantly reduced and shooters can concentrate on skills drills. The more time on trigger, the better the shooter becomes.

Shooting statistics show that when officers shoot under time pressure, their accuracy diminishes, at least with the things we know about field shootings with handguns. If we were to compare shooting qualification rates with actual shooting hit rates, which include time- and emotional-pressure, there is a severe disparity. However, training data in any agency can consistently show that trigger time improves accuracy and the ability to deliver accuracy faster. If combat accuracy numbers are a subset of training accuracy numbers, it is a logical step to increase shooting speed and accuracy by getting trigger time. The next step in logic is the fact that agencies almost cannot afford to employ sub-caliber training.

I do very simple drills with sub-caliber AR-15s. A couple of weeks ago, I used a 25-yard range with an open floor and target stands I could rearrange. I put two stands seven yards apart, one in front of the other. Using good movement techniques, I approached both stands, firing controlled pairs at the front target, then sliced the pie into the second, finishing with a controlled pair. In another drill, I use the front stand as a barricade and fire left and right side, under and prone in smooth transitions. Last, I practiced moving and shooting, transitioning to my handgun.

One can shoot at a faster cadence with a sub-caliber trainer, which offers powerful psychological reinforcement.

Sub-caliber training should be deliberate, with the focus on smooth techniques. These drills cost me about a dollar in targets and two dollars in bullets for three hours of practice. I have three bricks of .22s in my closet (1,500 rounds) so I anticipate that I may spend a little of my time off this week behind my Franklin HSC-15.

Conversion Kits CMMG makes .22 LR conversion kits for gas-impingement type AR-15s. The drop in kits can generally convert a duty AR-15 to a .22 LR in less than a minute, provided the user selects the correct conversion and follows the instructions carefully.

The CMMG conversion, and most similar products, uses a replacement bolt that engages the chamber, and a bolt group, which replaces the original bolt carrier group. It is essentially one-piece and field strips the same way. The sub-caliber group turns the gun into a blow back set up. It uses a magazine which operates in the well, with a smaller inner body and follower. I recommend that the agency purchase several magazines for realistic training. I didn’t experience any failures, except my ability to X the target.

There is no more a couple thousandths of an inch between the bullet diameter of a .22 LR and .223. The .22 LR bullet diameter is .222 and the .223 (and 5.56) diameter is generally .224. Although a .22 LR generally needs a slower rate of twist than the larger cartridge, generally around 1/16 (see Dennis Hayworth’s discussion on twist rate), the 25 yard training distance for a sub-caliber trainer is forgiving enough for most variations in twist rates used by LE. With my set up, I could easily shoot 1/2-- inch groups at 25 yards, exactly where the .223 bullet would impact, regardless of the 22LR bullet.

I recommend using plated .22 LR bullets, simply because they will respond to the same cleaning agents as the .223/5.56 to which the gun is accustomed. No user has ever reported a leading issue or any concern with fouling of the LE firearm.

Three Alternatives There are three distinct routes to sub-caliber training: Drop in conversions, dedicated uppers, and dedicated firearms. I prefer the dedicated upper that fits on the officer’s lower without modification, provided the same optics and fixtures are on the sub-caliber trainer. Most agencies cannot afford to duplicate the optics and fixtures on a dedicated upper and will likely use a drop in conversion.

Regardless, use the closest thing to a set up to the actual duty firearm. It would be foolish to train in the saddle for years and go into battle riding a different horse.

I viewed some of the forums about drop in conversions before beginning my research on this article. Many users, including LE agencies, report that companies that make sub-caliber conversions are notorious for marginal customer service. I don’t know if this is true, but I can attest to the fact that two of the companies have not returned calls, despite six messages, followed by emails over several weeks.

I know a solution for this: Brownells sells a variety of conversions and AR-15 parts, answers customers questions promptly and is the “LE-friendliest place around. In fact, they even have an address just for us: www.policestore.com.

One final thought: Now that PoliceOne Senior Editor Doug Wyllie knows that there is a carbine manufacturer within an hour of his office, I expect he’ll want one too, since he has a penchant for fine carbines. I’ll meet you there Doug!

Considerations and restrictions I have seen both articles and advertisements for such holsters that indicate that there are “few” clothing restrictions regarding them but I’m afraid that I must disagree. For not only must the wearer have the body type to allow for the comfortable carrying and unencumbered production of a firearm in this location but they must also wear clothing that will not let the gun be seen (generally “printed” or observed) thru it and they must wear clothing that is capable of allowing the gun to be drawn from under it. And as we have seen elsewhere in our study, sometimes that can be easier said than done.

Thin, lightweight and even light-colored fabrics can be problematic in this regard; so can flat-paneled garments or clothing that “lies” rather than “drapes” across this region. Fuller cut or pleated pants for example, might be better in this regard than something more body-hugging or shape-defining. Straight-line or pencil skirts might be “out” as well. What I am talking about here is not just a matter of the pant or skirt being tight-fitting but a matter of its shape being incompatible with concealing an object carried underneath it. Once again, it’s something that requires that you think ahead and not just consider the holster alone.

The drawing technique is also something that takes some thinking ahead of time. For not only must one be able to expand the waistband away from the abdominal area in order to reach the firearm, but one must also make sure that any clothing tucked into the waistband is behind the holster and that nothing is present that will snag the gun upon removal.

Furthermore, the user needs to safely practice with an unloaded firearm or a firearm simulator (a good practice anyway) until they are not only sure of the movements but also of the muzzle so that at no time are they covering their support hand or arm with it or are they turning the gun into the legs, groin or torso. This is especially true as the support hand normally continues to hold the waistband open while the master hand removes the gun not only from the strong side of the holster in which it is carried but also from the groin and waist area as whole.

Worth the trouble All of this sounds complex and one might wonder if it is worth the trouble. Like much of what we have discussed so far in this series, it’s often easier to do than describe and in any case, I would tell you that at least one friend of mine, who uses this type of holster all the time, certainly believes it is. He (yes, a male) and many others think that getting used to a holster worn in this location was no different than any other holster they have used and that it allowed them to dress in ways that other, more conventional holsters would never do.

And while I might be at odds with some of the manufacturers about clothing concerns, I do agree with some of them that one of the biggest mistakes people make with these designs is that they wear them too high; almost as a waistband holster and not as the groin/lower abdominal configuration it really is. Worn at waist level, these devices are neither comfortable nor concealable. But dropped down several inches into the groin (but still supported by the straps, which are generally designed to ride along the hip structure) these holsters can permit, if one’s physique and wardrobe allows, small-to-moderately-sized weapons to be carried comfortably and generally out of sight.

The manufacturers all have their own ideas about the product itself and how it should be designed and constructed. For while most of these lower-abdomen (groin) holsters look to be the same (to the casual observer anyway), there are some very subtle differences between them and I’ll try to hit at least a few of the high spots in that regard here.

Try these three There are at least three well-known companies that make these holsters. Thunderwear is probably the best known and their time and experience in the business has made their name something of a generic title for all of these concepts. But these days people also buy such rigs from SmartCarry and Lightningwear. All three are designed to work in much that same manner but all approach the matter a bit differently.

Thunderwear draws from a patent granted back in the 90s and is available in three sizes to accommodate a wide range of firearms and in either a two or three pocket configuration to better facilitate one’s needs and what else might need to be carried along with the gun. They use a soft denim double wall for comfort and abrasion resistance. And the holster contains a moisture barrier as well; something that is very important in a design that is intended to be worn so closely against this part of the body. They make them to order and the hip strap is cut to allow for 4” of adjustment on either side of the nominal dimension (for an 8” total adjustment).

SmartCarry claims a patent as well and they say that it allows for a more snag-resistant construction to help facilitate the draw. They also claim a perspiration-resistant back wall and achieve it thru the use of Cushmax®, a rugged, breathable and wicking fabric that has proven itself in other industries before being applied here. SmartCarry Holsters are also available in two of three pocket versions and in sizes to fit just about any gun and waist size to come along. They can also be ordered in white with a more discrete labeling so as not to be seen through certain lighter materials or covering colors.

Lightningwear also offers white. And black. And they make their holsters from a nylon material, which is lightly padded on the front to minimize printing and a bit more heavily padded on the rear for comfort. It is offered in a single size with an elasticized and hook-and-loop waistband.

I used to openly dismiss this concept but if the holster is correctly designed and matched with proper clothing, body type and gun size, I can now see its value. But not only must the potential user be objective about these points but they must also recognize any potential issues such as the wearing of a firearm against the pubic structure in the case of a blow or a strike to that region. Again, like so many of the things that we have discussed in this series, I emphasize that you employ a big picture approach if considering something like these lower abdominal designs.

Next time, we'll move a little further down the line and look at thigh holsters.

It seemed important to have a way to both summarize the approaches, as well as, remind both cadets and officers to maintain a situational awareness and an effective approach to interpersonal engagements. The acronym TACT seems appropriate and useful, as in “using tact” in an interaction or acting TACT-fully.

The word TACT, of course, refers to the quality (and skill) of being able to interact with others in a productive manner by recognizing what is proper and appropriate behavior. Further, TACT is the root of both the words TACTful and TACTical, the full spectrum of police interactions. As an acronym, TACT stands for Think, Aware, Courteous, and Tactical.

Think The first T — Think — is the general reminder to “use one’s head” during a response. Think also refers to making use of the other three components of TACT; to Think about your Awareness, Courtesy and Tactical readiness.

Aware The A refers to situational awareness. It is the need to integrate all the information available to an officer before and when arriving on scene. While some situations do not allow for “thoughtful analysis” of the situation, even here it is important to mitigate the impulsive behavior that can easily occur with a raging adrenaline dump. Action without a consideration of options and a back-up plan can be problematic. Awareness promotes a reasoned and appropriate response.

Courtesy There are very few — if any — situations in which initial courtesy would aggravate matters and not have the potential to defuse more intense behavior. Being courteous is not inconsistent with being firm or presenting a command presence. If an officer’s courtesy is rebuked, that will:

A.) be obvious very quickly, B.) provide valuable information about the subject’s state, and C.) indicate that more direct and forceful action will likely be needed.

Tactical The last T refers to always having a tactical plan should the situation so warrant. Even with a subject who appears to respond to courtesy, an officer always needs to maintain an on-guard mindset with tactical action to back it up until a situation is totally secure or concluded.

TACT is in no way meant to minimize the importance or time that should be allotted for training a psychological knowledge base and interpersonal skills in police work; especially in such areas as interacting with special populations. A greater understanding of human behavior enhances the components of TACT and makes an officer more effective and secure.

Interestingly, cadets and trainees are very similar to another group of respected professionals — medical and surgical residents / doctors in training. Both cadets and residents are a highly-select group of individuals. Both have high forms of respective intelligence. Both have a duty to serve. Both can work in highly-stressful situations. Both make decisions and take actions that transform people’s lives. And residents, like cadets, while respectful of that “psychological stuff,” are also action-oriented and would rather be learning and practicing how to stick a medical device into some part of your body.

But the doctors, like graduated cadets, would come back after a year or two on the job being much wiser, experienced, and more respectful and appreciative of the frequency and importance of the psychological aspects of their work.

Beyond TACT, there is a specific behavioral science knowledge that is essential for a successful encounter and cadets and officers need that knowledge. It is important to know that sharing something about yourself may build rapport with a depressed individual, but will likely be manipulated by a borderline personality. Or, that the use of well-timed, appropriate humor can defuse a tense situation, but probably will inflame it if the subject has a paranoid disorder. Or, that a gentle touch on the shoulder can be reassuring to a person in crisis, but potentially threatening to an individual with a history of abuse. But, using TACT or approaching individuals TACTfully can be a blueprint for implementing any and all the skills and knowledge an officer possesses.

On Sunday January 23rd 2011, Lamar D. Moore calmly walked into the Detroit Police Department’s Northwestern District station just after shift change, and approached the front desk.

Concealed from view was a pistol-grip shotgun.

37 Seconds Within moments, he began firing, striking officers with his shotgun at point blank range. The calm Sunday morning at the desk turned into a gun battle in an instant. Moore ambushed the DPD precinct while officers went about their Sunday morning routine.

Commander Brian Davis stopped into his precinct to check on his officers that morning and to get a briefing on an unrelated incident which had occurred the previous night. He was wearing his church clothes with a small backup weapon strapped to his ankle. The officers working the desk were going about their business as they normally do on a Sunday morning — until Moore approached the desk and ambushed those officers.

Moore had been implicated in the kidnapping and sexual assault of a runaway teenage girl. She escaped Sunday afternoon from Moore’s house and police responded — it was after this that Moore shot up the station.

Moore walked into the station and approached the desk. Before anybody could even greet Moore, he pulled his shotgun and starting shooting at officers from a distance less than six feet away. Commander Davis, Sgt. Ray Saati, Sgt. Carrie Schulz, and Officer David Anderson dropped to find cover behind the desk. Two of these officers had already been struck by Moore’s shotgun fire.

Moore took a couple steps back toward the door as officers started to return fire, but in an instant, Moore charged the desk and leaped over the high counter like something straight out of a Hollywood movie. Commander Davis couldn’t believe what was happening — after all, it was just another Sunday morning.

Moore was now behind the police desk shooting at the officers. Commander Davis took a handgun from one of his injured officers lying next to him. He then engaged Moore in a gunfight that lasted 37 seconds from the time the first shot rang out — at a distance starting out around fifteen feet — until the finally volley at each other barely two feet away. As Moore stood up and continued to shoot at the officers lying on the floor, another officer covered Commander Davis to protect him. That officer fired upon Moore, until Moore shot him.

“Prep him...” Moore approached Commander Davis’s position behind a small partition, Commander Davis stood up and greeted his adversary with the desire to neutralize his threat at all costs. He found himself only a couple feet from the shotgun barrel Moore was pointing at him. The two engaged each other and both were struck by bullets.

Davis fell back, and Moore ran around the partition and continued to shoot Davis. Commander Davis even threw a trash can at Moore as he fell back onto the floor. Shortly after the two fired upon each other, Moore fell to the ground mortally wounded.

Four of Detroit’s finest laying wounded from shotgun blasts, clutching the will to survive. Commander Davis was hurried to a chair in an adjoining office. As officers checked Davis for wounds, they found his hand had been shot up and a finger was destroyed. Then, all of a sudden, the officer checking Davis for injuries yelled for another officer to help him. They whisked Davis out of the office — still sitting in the chair he’d been sitting in — and outside to a patrol car.

Davis, still in shock, wasn’t clear on the need to hurry and wondered why his officers were driving so fast to the hospital. Once in the emergency room, as the medical staff was frantically working on him, he eventually overheard the doctors commands to “prep him for surgery.”

Davis asked a nurse “Why am I going to surgery?”

She replied that he had been shot in the back. He later would learn that there was a hole the size of a softball in his back from one of the shotgun rounds.

The Cornerstone to Survival I am happy today to report that all of the DPD officers and Commander Davis survived the ambush that day in January.

Commander Davis embraced his warrior spirit as his adversary sought to kill him and his officers. That spirit is the cornerstone to survival in an era when more officers are ambushed than in recent history.

I believe strongly that the will to survive is embraced by some officers and is nothing more than a statement to others. Tactical self talk can help you in such an ambush — as well as its aftermath.

Try living this statement as you patrol the streets of your city:

“Through practice and repetition I will survive and I am in control.”

Training your mind to battle an ambush provides the necessary information that your brain will seek in that short instant you’re compelled into a fight for your life.

Repeat this statement every day — often — until the day you get your retirement watch.

When it’s Time to Fight, Fight! There is an element in many humans that chose flight over fight. Time and time again I watch videos of officers being confronted by an armed suspect and they choose dialogue first over lethal force. The fact is that many police agencies have plenty of officers who — for various reasons — will choose dialogue first and combat second. While conducting Close Quarter Battle Tactics training over the years, I’ve observed an increase in the number of officers yelling for their adversary to “drop the gun, drop the gun” during a scenario in which the bad guy has a gun pointed at the officers. The target is clearly a deadly threat, and yet too many cops are choosing to yell “drop the gun, drop the gun” before they engage and shoot the target. That apprehension clearly gets officers killed.

I understand the various components that create apprehension in an officer’s mind. Law suits, criminal charges, disciplinary actions and the media all lend to the desire to verbally resolve a conflict. Let’s be clear about one thing, when an officer is confronted with a deadly force situation he/she must respond quickly and decisively with deadly force to swiftly neutralize the threat. That means, in some cases, you must neutralize your threat immediately which means there will be no time to yell “drop the gun”.

The point I am trying to convey is simple. Your mindset should be to fight when it’s time to fight, talk when it’s time to talk, and — when needed — transition from talk to fight quicker than your opponent can comprehend (much less respond to).

Come to terms with the fact that we can’t talk every situation into a successful resolution. Train yourself to strike quick and decisively. We always speak of the fact that your adversary has to process through the OODA Loop. Well guess what, so do you. You must process the information and respond quicker than your adversary. This alone will increase your chances of survival.

Commander Davis chose to strike his adversary quick and hard. He didn’t hesitate to obtain an injured officer’s gun, or stand up in civilian clothes and shoot as many times as he could at a man wanting him dead. Imagine the confusion as the battle instantly unfolded and then consider how long it would take you to process the information. You must be able to react as Commander Davis did or you may end up on the losing side of this fight. After all, any hesitation from him that morning most likely would have enabled Moore to murder those officers lying on the precinct floor that quiet Sunday in the Motor City.

As we patrol the streets in 2012, let Commander Davis and the men and women of the Detroit Police Department remind us that the will to survive is the cornerstone to survival in an ambush that sadly, some unsuspecting officer(s) will face in this New Year.

“An Army stronger in soul, will be victorious over the army of lesser...” — Unknown Greek Army General

Stay Safe, Sgt. Glenn French

For some reason the conversation turned to the topic of clothing. Specifically, clothing that has the base material interwoven with fabric that contains the ability to reduce the development of microbiological agents that cause us to offend. That is to say, our clothes sometimes make us stink, and some companies are working to fix that issue.

Several clothing companies at the SHOT Show use this type of process but one company, DRIFIRE, was mentioned and this was fortunate because this led me to the discovery of their flight suit.

DRIFIRE manufactures a variety of fire-resistant garments with odor-resistant properties for the Military and Law Enforcement. DRIFIRE’s product list covers both men’s and women’s clothing — from undergarments to headwear, from base layers to outerwear.

I was particularly interested in their line of combat and flight apparel. All of the products utilize drirelease, a trademarked and patented technology for wicking away moisture and drying the material. In fact, James Warrick, the Air Force Sales Manager for DRIFIRE, conducted a demonstration of the DRIFIRE’s drirelease wicking and drying process. Warrick took the cap from a 16oz water bottle — filling it halfway with water, pouring the water onto the inner liner of a DRIFIRE fleece jacket. The water was absorbed into the fabric leaving a wet moist area. In less time than you could imagine, the water was wicked away from the inner fabric area leaving it dry with no indication of the water.

Then turning the fleece to view the outside layer, there was an observable wet moist area — showing the water was clearly wicked away from the inside. What was important (to me at least) about the demonstration was the same drirelease technology is used in their flight suit being introduced for 2012.

Warrick explained DRIFIRE has combined the drirelease technology with a new fiber blend called Fortrex, which is a proprietary product and is patent pending. Fortrex is a blend of modacrylic and nomex along with other fibers that resulted in a stronger more durable and lighter flight suit. Warrick said the Natick Labs tested the flight suit in Massachusetts and the flight suits meet Mil Spec 83141A and NFPA 2112. Warrick mentioned an additional four-second-pyro burn test was done in North Carolina and Fortrex material passed satisfactorily — if a flame did occur, the material would self extinguish. It should be noted that the DRIFIRE flight suits are Fire Resistant and certain types of flames and extreme heat and fire can over come any type of material.

According to Mike Pena, DRIFIRE’s Director of Federal and Defense Contractors, several Federal Agencies are currently using their flight suit: the Drug Enforcement Agency, U.S. State Department, and the U.S. Coast Guard.

Currently the U.S Customs and Border Patrol are under going wear test trials. DRIFIRE has both one piece and two-piece flight suits and the price varies from vendor to vendor. Combing DRIFIRE’s flight suit with DRIFIRE’s undergarments will enhance the drirelease action for wicking away moisture and will increase the fire protection of the wearer. Further information can be obtained at the DRIFIRE website.

Being a pilot and experiencing the results of the standard nomex flight suit after a long day of flying, locating the DRIFIRE flight suit was one of my best finds of the SHOT Show 2012. If the drirelease (wick water/moisture/sweat away) technology and the Fortrex (FR material/durable/stronger/lighter) work to full extent possible, then flying will be more enjoyable. Most importantly, it will be safer.

No matter if you work for a three-officer police department or a 3,000-officer department, it’s vital to have a good working relationship with your co-workers. Working the beat day-in-and-day-out is quite a bit different than working in corporate America and standing around the water cooler with Joe Blow from the accounting department.

You may have to save your partner’s life, or vice versa. Having a strong, trustworthy, working relationship with your peers on the beat ensures your safety and their safety, not to mention it creates quite a brotherhood. Camaraderie however, should never — at any cost — be construed as covering up a wrong done by another officer. You can see from the Rodney King incident in Los Angeles or the Danziger Bridge incident in New Orleans where that can get you.

Rumors about non-work related things and unhealthy “stabbing in the back” should be avoided at all cost. Keep the “conversations about so-and-so” for after work over coffee or dinner.

Going out on a disturbance and stepping in and taking a knuckle sandwich to the face for your partner will build trust and camaraderie, believe me. Talking about another officer’s personal problems with other officers behind his or her back will not. Volunteering to take that report call so your buddy can finish his lunch break is a favor you will find returned back to you, avoiding helping another officer could label you as an outsider.

In fact, if you build trust with officer’s who are going through struggles, they may very well confide in you when not at work, because they trust you.

Not to be religious or anything — strictly from a good lesson point of view — as a officer I like to take the approach from the biblical parable that said, “Take the log out of your own eye before you try to take the splinter out of mine.”

When a patrol platoon or shift is meshing together in harmony, people notice, including superior officers — sometimes even top brass. A group that gets along will consistently have less complaints and higher accomplishments than do groups of officers that can’t trust each other with the little things — much less their lives. And before you know it, you may just develop lifelong friends that know you better than anyone else, and having to call for back up won’t be necessary, because they will already be standing by your side...

The greatest allies any politician can have are members of the public safety community. Law enforcement officers are especially adept at reading people and situations, and they can instantaneously size up both. They quickly hone in on the sincerity of politicians’ promises, discern the essence of the philosophies they profess and readily recognize if the broad spectrum of public safety needs will be addressed and actually fulfilled.

For politicians who have already proven themselves in the public sector and, particularly, those who have previously served in a public safety or law enforcement capacity, they have a sharp edge in gaining the approval of cops nationwide. In fact, some of them even serve as exemplary role models for public service and inspire those around them to desire to excel and continue to pursue their professional ambitions.

A Proven Entity Former Prince George’s County Maryland State’s Attorney, Glenn F. Ivey, is an ideal example. He served as the top prosecutor in the Maryland County within the National Capitol D. C. Region from 2002-2010. Prior to that, he was an Assistant U. S. Attorney in Washington, D. C., had extensive experience on Capitol Hill and was the Chief Legal Counsel to Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, the Senate Whitewater Committee under Senator Paul Sarbanes, and Senior Legislative Aide to Congressman John Conyers. He was also the Chair of the Public Service Commission.

Ivey, as State’s Attorney, was approachable, and his door was always open to welcome his employees, cops from his jurisdiction as well as the surrounding region, other public servants within the criminal justice system and residents in the community. Extremely personable and down to earth, highly intelligent, street savvy, always willing to listen, as well as be fair and objective, Ivey quickly secured the confidence and trust of the law enforcement community. Cops recognize his sincerity. They realize that what they see is what they get with Ivey. In addition, his devotion to issues and the causes he sincerely believes in, coupled with his proactive efforts that accompany them, serve as demonstrable proof that he is a mover and a shaker in the public service sector.

A popular public servant with national recognition, Ivey chose not to run for a third term as State’s Attorney in Prince George’s County, Maryland. He set his sights higher and announced a run for the United States Congress in November 2011. Unfortunately, on January 11, 2012, he withdrew from the race due to inadequate fund raising in a tight economy. “With the April 3 primary fast approaching and the ever increasing costs of Congressional campaigns sky-rocketing, it would take a very substantial amount of money to get my message out to voters in two very expensive media markets. A tough economy and a compressed time frame have made it tough for my campaign to raise enough funds to move forward….While this has been a challenging endeavor, it has been a learning experience,” Ivey said.

“It’s easy to become cynical in the hustle and bustle world of 2012. Don’t lose your focus. Remember why you chose to enter law enforcement, a sense of duty, a commitment to public service and a chance to make a real difference. The same is true in the political process. Choose leaders who understand that police are the men and women who run towards danger and not away from it. Be involved with legislators who understand that effective laws make policing our communities better for all of us. Stay in touch with your political leaders so they know the importance of a new communications system, the need for more officers on the streets and on the Federal level, the ability to tap into resources such as labs, computers and databases,” says Ivey.

A Positive Impact In his role as State’s Attorney, Ivey demonstrated his passion to make a positive impact in the arena of intimate partner and domestic violence. He established a dedicated Domestic Violence Unit (DVU) within his office formerly staffed with a Subject Matter Expert and other professionals to provide direct and immediate services to victims of domestic violence. He considered victims of domestic violence a priority of his administration, and he proved that throughout his tenure in office.

Inspired by a staff member of his DV unit, Ivey took the lead to initiate a move to repeal the Spousal Privilege Law in Maryland in which legally married domestic violence victims had a one-time option to drop charges — no matter how egregious or violent the case. He recognized the numerous pitfalls of this option that included the victim returning to a violent and potentially lethal situation, victim/witness intimidation factors, lack of offender accountability and, ultimately, having no positive impact on the community.

Moreover, Ivey understood that cops could potentially become jaded after sitting in court for hours awaiting their case to be heard only to have the victim exert the privilege. Subsequently, within a short time span, the same officers would receive a call for service to respond to the same household for the same victim and, again, would repeat the same process. Proactively, Ivey had legislation developed, obtained necessary sponsors and he, as well as key staff members, testified before the Maryland General Assembly in support of the bill. Though it did not pass, on more than one occasion, Ivey tenaciously pursued the fight until he left office.

He also actively participated in the development and evolution of “Project Safe Sunday” that was held yearly during Domestic Violence Awareness Month in October. Ivey recognized that the faith community was lacking knowledge about key issues surrounding domestic violence. He was also aware that many domestic violence victims in various congregations attended church and were reachable with a pertinent message. Additionally, when victims did have the courage to approach their pastors requesting assistance, Ivey understood they were often sent home with nothing other than a comment to live with it ‘for better or worse.’ Consequently, through “Project Safe Sunday” Ivey and his staff became very proactive with efforts to provide training to pastors in the region about critical domestic violence issues that would enable them to reach out to victims through sermons, enable them to offer more practical and appropriate advice and provide information on necessary referral sources for their safety.

Ivey’s passion to make a difference for domestic violence has not faded and, if elected to Congress, he plans to continue to be a voice for victims of domestic violence and for providing law enforcement officers the tools o f the trade (i.e. body armor) that they need to not only respond to DV calls but other dangerous calls as well. His vision includes enhancing “Project Safe Sunday” to a national network. “It would take off; you don’t need extra money from the government. Share the expertise, the trial and error hit of it and get the information out there,” Ivey says.

Ivey also recognizes the need to streamline federal and state prosecutions. “Sometimes, it can be challenging — you have federal and state law enforcement working on the same case,” Ivey says. He understands the voices of prosecutors are not represented. Equally important, Ivey understands that, oftentimes, victims are an unrepresented voice. Consequently, he perceives the ongoing need for and importance of victims’ rights.

A Strong Advocate “From crime scene to courthouse, I have worked closely with police and prosecutors to seek out justice for victims. As an Assistant U. S. Attorney and elected State’s Attorney, I have an intimate knowledge of how the criminal justice system works. I believe I have earned the respect of rank and file law enforcement. By prosecuting cases that were difficult both forensically and politically, I have gained the trust of police leadership. My ability to make difficult decisions based on the facts and openness to hear all sides of an argument will allow me to advocate effectively for the law enforcement community. I believe my balanced approach to law enforcement will be an asset in Congress,” Ivey says.

Ivey is a strong advocate for officer safety, and he takes no lenient stance on cop killers. “Law enforcement professionals and first responders risk their lives every day. We should honor their service and their lives by seeking out the strongest punishment possible when bad guys kill or hurt those who protect us,” Ivey says.

Ivey has a compelling work ethic and strong passion for the tenets of law enforcement professionals across the country. His desire to become a prosecutor and enter the public safety sector was not an accident. “I knew from an early age that I could make a difference. But it wasn’t until later that I realized victims of crime needed someone to stand up for them. It was the sexual assault of a friend while I was at Harvard Law School that solidified my pursuit of justice for victims, putting me on the path to be a prosecutor. My first hand experience with leaders on Capitol Hill showed me that we can truly be responsible for and responsive to the needs of the people — this is, in large part, why I am running for Congress,” Ivey says.

Ivey has proven to be a public servant of genuine quality whose direction is motivated by a true sense of justice and doing what is right. His work ethic, his professional conduct, and his demonstrated behavior have proven that he is fair, objective, and he does not compromise his principles, integrity or character for anything that is less than honorable. Though he will not be currently involved in the political process by seeking higher office as he planned, he will not lose sight of the vitally important role of law enforcement officers in communities across the nation. As an ardent advocate for victims of crime and passionate about making a concrete and positive difference in significant areas of public safety, Glenn Ivey is the closest thing a former prosecutor and politician can be to a “cop’s cop.”

The QR (Quick Response) Code is another type of symbol has recently become commonplace in our everyday lives, but some people don’t yet know what they are or how they’re used. The QR Code is typically a two-dimensional symbol shaped much like a postage stamp. It can be generated in different sizes and can be read by a camera-enabled mobile device with a program (app) that allows the device to interpret the data provided in the QR Code.

The symbol is much like the code that is printed on the back of many current drivers’ licenses in the United States and some other countries. It contains vital information for the person who it is issued to. The QR Code is generated to link the scanning person to a website.

Developed Almost 20 Years Ago The QR Code was originally developed in 1994 by a company owned by the Toyota Corporation to help workers track parts for vehicle manufacturing. Although almost twenty years old, the symbol has only recently emerged to be included in many advertisements we see throughout our everyday life. Nowadays, QR Codes have various purposes and require the particular application to link or to properly interpret it. Simply put; once the code is scanned, the scanning device will respond by opening up the correct application to appropriately handle the encoded data. This is accomplished by so-called “Application Identifiers” embedded in the encoded data.

Various types and sizes of this code are currently utilized in the medical industry and package delivery industry, for just two examples.

I recently took the plunge, upgraded my cell phone to a Smartphone and found I could scan and interpret UPC and QR Codes. I have found this very convenient when comparing products at stores. Of course, your Smartphone may already have the application (explanation saved for another article) installed to scan the code.

I’m sure you’ve seen a QR Code in magazines you read, while shopping, or even on an advertisement on a city bus or billboard. Once scanned, the code will ink you to a website, video, or other information. If PoliceOne Senior Editor Doug Wyllie has ever handed you his business card, you’ll have seen the QR Code on the back — scan it and you’re taken to his columnist profile page.

QR Codes are easily generated and are robust because the QR Code contains not only the information programmed into it but also contains its own error-correction data, internal-orientation calibration, and self-alignment markers. This allows the scanner to read the QR Code whether it is upside down or wrapped around a curved surface.

Symbols Like “Snowflakes” The QR code is much like a fingerprint — no two are alike and differ on how they are read. As I mentioned above, QR codes have different purposes. The code can be generated to link the person scanning the code to a website or automatically call a number contained in the code from a Smartphone. In industry the code may give delivery instructions, hold vital patient information or any other information coded but that industry must write an application to interpret that particular code.

Just like any other web based technology there can be risks. QR Codes maliciously combined with a permissive reader can put a user’s privacy at risk much like a computer virus can enable the virus developer to view private files stored in your computer and or Smartphone. So be careful.

As I mentioned above, QR Codes have many purposes. Recently here in the Seattle area QR Codes were printed on taxi cabs during the holiday season to allow those who may have overindulged to scan a QR Code to automatically call a cab for a safe ride home.

QR Codes may not have an everyday purpose in police work but I am sure that QR Codes are currently utilized in some larger police agencies to catalog evidence or other purposes. Just imagine if your agency website has a QR Code within the web page generated to link a person scanning it to other websites that provide information on crime statistics or other community based information.

Stay Safe.