Woman With Pot of Boiling Water Shot Dead by Police

[Denny347]

I think you may have a point here.

Those papers listed (which were not peer reviewed as claimed once) tend to look at firing the sidearm in the line of duty as a bad thing. That is a faulty assumption. You have to examine each incident. It might very well be that some incidents needed the sidearm to be fired but the officer failed to do so. This makes not firing the sidearm the bad thing. In such an incident the conclusion would be the opposite of what the paper said. The prior-service candidate would be preferred over the non-service candidate and it would make sense to give preference at hiring.
So by not examining the facts in each incident the authors have rendered any conclusion invalid.

Some departments will go decades without an officer firing their weapon....or even pulling it out...lol. Then some, like mine, it's not uncommon. Were those former military drawn to the busier departments who are more likely to use deadly force? Within THOSE departments, were they more likely to fire than the non military...in those departments only? Without that information, the data is worthless.

 

[phylodog]

So by not examining the facts in each incident the authors have rendered any conclusion invalid.

Precisely what I was alluding to when I mentioned there being too many variables to provide meaningful data. I've read through dozens of these studies over the years, as I mentioned I was a full time trainer for ten years and I'd like to think I did my best to remain aware of as much information out there as I could to provide useful, meaningful training.

At one point I began working with a college professor in an attempt to conduct a truly objective study of our officer's uses of force, specifically those involving firearms. We had several meetings and had all but completed a survey which would be completed for each qualifying incident when we were told that we did not have the support of the people who had to approve so it fell apart. My intent was solely to evaluate and improve firearms training we provided

I'm not opposed to studies nor data but I will heavily scrutinize any claims made in any published studies, especially those which are in direct opposition with my personal experience. Without fail, all of them have been extremely lacking (to put it mildly) when it came to gathering all of the appropriate data.

Studying human behavior is about as complex a topic as can be researched and it is even more difficult to do it in a completely objective manner due to that complexity.

 

[Michigan Slim]

I think you may have a point here.

Those papers listed (which were not peer reviewed as claimed once) tend to look at firing the sidearm in the line of duty as a bad thing. That is a faulty assumption. You have to examine each incident. It might very well be that some incidents needed the sidearm to be fired but the officer failed to do so. This makes not firing the sidearm the bad thing. In such an incident the conclusion would be the opposite of what the paper said. The prior-service candidate would be preferred over the non-service candidate and it would make sense to give preference at hiring.
So by not examining the facts in each incident the authors have rendered any conclusion invalid.

I was thinking the same angle in use of force. Maybe it doesn't get used enough where appropriate and those that get it complain. Like my boy and his tow company. Those that need a tow leave great reviews. Those that get pulled from a handicap spot or a repo leave bad reviews. Maybe vets just use force more where appropriate?

 

[Route 45]

 

[BigRed]

He was rebuked in the name of Jesus....and previously by his supervisor officer....and previously by his military supervisors.

Lady may have been crazy, but seems she may have known a piece of **** when she saw one.

 

[Brad69]

I can vouch for the military side of the house I have been involved in separating lots of soldiers. He did something serious that code is not something you see everyday.

On the police side BBI stated that lawyers would prevent a Police officer data base. I don’t have the knowledge to argue with the LEO’s on INGO.

Let’s say @Denny347 got caught molesting his police Elephant on duty. So he would be fired and comments would be placed in the database. Type in his name bingo not gonna hire that guy.

It seems to me it would be a great way to CYA for huge settlements ?
I do understand that in today’s recruiting environment you take what you can get. Then if they pass you have what you have.

IME you spend a lot more time working with troubled children than the good ones.

 

[Tryin']

This individual should not have been hired if his background was known. And knowing falls on the department. I can say with certainty that he would not have been hired by mine. However, there are some departments near me that might have. I'm not saying would have, but might be tempted. We have seen our rejected candidates pop up in other departments. Sometimes they do well, sometimes they do not.

A compounding factor in their willingness to hire would be that they very well might not find everything in that background. My agency spends dozens of hours on each candidate, including neighbor visits, family calls, previous department visits, etc. We are very thorough and weed out a lot of applicants. That is a luxury in today's recruitment landscape.

We are able to only hire from the top percentages because we are a top agency. We have some of the best pay, crazy good benefits and retirement, the best equipment, low workload, and supportive admin. And yet with all that, we might get 80 "real" applicants in a process. (Hundreds of preapps don't count, it takes two minutes to fill out, and people don't read the requirements for eligibility) 30 will show up, 20 will pass testing, 15 will make it to backgrounds, 5 will pass that, and the merit board will fail another 3. So we will fill 2 of the 5 positions and start another process, in which about half of the applicants are recycles from the previous go-round. And while that is going on, the FTO cadre is busy seeing if the two you DID hire can do the job. We run about 80% retention in FTO over the past four years.

Again, this is under what I would consider the best of circumstances. Pro-police public, pro-cop admin, great equipment, great pay, not getting crushed by call volume. Plenty of time to be proactive, lots of specialty skills/teams, large training budget, the list goes on. But we still can't pull quality recruits like before 2019.

I can't imagine trying to recruit for agencies that can't say those things. Small or large. And it is the dearth of applicants that causes a department to "take a chance", betting THIS time it will be different. But it's not, and so the tailspin continues.

 

[Brad69]

Thanks for the insight @Tryin'

 

[Brad69]

So in his report he felt the rebuke was a death threat.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/06/us/sean-grayson-field-report-massey-shooting/index.html

 

[nonobaddog]

So in his report he felt the rebuke was a death threat.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/06/us/sean-grayson-field-report-massey-shooting/index.html

He will probably learn more about evaluating death threats in prison.

 

[KLB]

So in his report he felt the rebuke was a death threat.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/06/us/sean-grayson-field-report-massey-shooting/index.html

That is one of the stupidest things I have heard of someone saying.

 

[Denny347]

So in his report he felt the rebuke was a death threat.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/06/us/sean-grayson-field-report-massey-shooting/index.html

I have no doubt he did. Unfortunately for him, another reasonable officer, with those same facts/circumstances, would not have felt the same way. Thus why his UoF was unreasonable.

 

[BigRed]

So in his report he felt the rebuke was a death threat.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/06/us/sean-grayson-field-report-massey-shooting/index.html

That's why you shouldn't go rebuking people in the name of Jesus all willy-nilly like.

 

[oze]

That's why you shouldn't go rebuking people in the name of Jesus all willy-nilly like.

I'm trying to cut back, really I am. But the other day I entered my wooden shed and got attacked by a swarm of yellow jackets, getting stung 5 times. I rebuked the **** out of them. In fact, after withdrawing to the garage and then returning properly armed, I rebuked them some more as I mounted my counterattack. Although there were casualties on both sides, that nest is no more.

 

[Brad69]

I can not believe he actually wrote that in his official report.

He might have rode the short bus to the police academy.

 

[HoughMade]

So in his report he felt the rebuke was a death threat.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/06/us/sean-grayson-field-report-massey-shooting/index.html

So that's what he went with...after having time to think it over.

Not, "I thought she said something else", "I thought she made a move"....any number of things.

Well, "I thought being rebuked in Jesus' name was a death threat" is so stupid.....it just might be the truth.

 

[KLB]

So that's what he went with...after having time to think it over.

Not, "I thought she said something else", "I thought she made a move"....any number of things.

Well, "I thought being rebuked in Jesus' name was a death threat" is so stupid.....it just might be the truth.

It probably is the truth, sadly.

 

[foszoe]

That is one of the stupidest things I have heard of someone saying.

Read more of my posts.

 

[KLB]

Read more of my posts.

You have to work much harder to get into that level.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

We are able to only hire from the top percentages because we are a top agency. We have some of the best pay, crazy good benefits and retirement, the best equipment, low workload, and supportive admin.

You guys looking for a slightly dented high mileage LT with investigative experience? Asking for a friend.