Criminal Control: the only viable option in a free society.

Popeye was famous for saying, “That’s all I can stand, ’cause I can’t stand no more!” That’s about where I am right now. I can, from memory, think about shootings that resulted in the murders of a dozen LEOs in the past 24 months. If I searched on the internet, I could name the incidents.

Last week, it happened again and police administrators, politicians and newscasters started screaming for gun control to stop the violence against LEOs. It is a common call to action, sounds good on the news and represents the most misguided waste of resources in history.

My challenge here is to avoid writing a long article. I would love to, but that would mask the simplicity of the solution to this problem. So, for all the politicians, “policy experts” and others who sit behind a desk all day, here is the simple solution. When a person manifests an intent to violate the laws of our states and our country, especially through acts of violence, remove them from society. There is no amount of gun control that will prove more effective and pro gun ownership statutes have undeniably led to a decrease in violent crime. Behind these statistics are thousands of private citizens who are alive because they used a legally owned firearm to protect themselves and their families.

My final thought is directed to LEOs who embrace gun control laws. The very individuals and groups who seek to keep private citizens from owning and carrying firearms do not believe LEOs should possess firearms either. There is one defined group in our country that can be disarmed quickly with the stroke of a legislator’s pen: law enforcement. Think it can’t happen? Look at LEOs in Europe.

Ask a gun control advocate or politician why we cannot keep criminals out of our free society and you will hear, at the root of their argument, that the cost is too high. Keeping our society and citizenry free from the oppressive effects of crime is the constitutional obligation of government. As to the cost, I have been to enough LEO funerals to know the costs. It is cheaper to keep criminals in prison.

Stay safe.

What Part Of Less Than Lethal Do People Not Understand?

I woke this morning to find an email from PoliceOne about the recent shooting in San Francisco of a man in a wheelchair who stabbed a LEO. Yes, he stabbed a LEO. The article explained how San Francisco Police Chief George Gascón intends to request TASER® devices for his officers, again. He requested TASER® devices to better protect his officers and provide more force options for them. It appears that policy for the San Francisco Police Department is set by the San Francisco Police Commission and the Commission must approve the use of TASER® devices. You can read the article here and see video to reach your own conclusions. From my view, it appears that the use of an XREP while other officers remained ready to deploy firearms would likely have changed the outcome in this case. As always, I welcome your comments.

I am happy to report that the readers of bluelinelawyer.com represent a diverse group. While most are LEOs, some just find the blog while researching issues on the web. Others, mainly my friends, are just hoping that I will post the video of my TASER® exposure for their enjoyment! I see this as a tremendous advantage. Whether you are a veteran LEO, concerned citizen or casual observer, there is a simple truth about TASER® devices. While they are not a solution to every situation, they present, like many other devices, an option for LEOs who are attempting to apprehend a perpetrator. By an option, I mean something between “Please put these handcuffs on and get in the police car” and the use of deadly force. Every method including batons, pepper spray, bean bag rounds and fists and feet comprise an “arrow in the quiver” of a LEO for the overwhelmingly likely event that a perpetrator will not comply with a verbal request to submit to handcuffing and arrest.

Now, a strike with a closed fist, a baton strike, a bean bag round and pepper spray are all intended to obtain compliance and control over the suspect. However, each of these methods can also cause serious bodily injury and, in rare instances, fatal injuries. So, the issue is NOT whether a TASER® exposure could result in a serious injury or death. The issue is the likelihood that a TASER® exposure will result in serious injury or death as opposed to the use of a firearm. Now I have been exposed to the TASER® device, and it was quite unpleasant. However, I am still here along with thousands of LEOs who were exposed to the TASER® and thousands more perpetrators who were on the receiving end of a TASER®. In sharp contrast, people who are shot with a firearm expire, more often than not.

As I stated before, intermediate weapons, including TASER® devices, have a place in law enforcement. You can read my blog post regarding this issue from last summer. I am passionate about this topic because the decision to provide TASER® devices to LEOs is more than a money or public relations issue. The LEOs and the suspects are real people. The encounters that lead to any use of force are over quickly, most often occur without warning and are difficult to “reconstruct.” The LEOs who are called to a scene and required to use force to effect an arrest or protect themselves or others can only act on their perceptions and the reality before them as it unfolds. A video taken from across the street hardly provides sufficient evidence to condemn.

The absurdity of allowing citizens to set police policy should be obvious to everyone, but apparently that is not the case. I am always baffled that people who call LEOs to respond to dangerous situations because LEOs possess the skill, training and courage to protect their communities will spend countless hours second guessing those LEOs even when they do not have a sufficient base of knowledge to properly evaluate the actions of those LEOs.

Several months from now, a group of citizens will likely gather in a grand jury room to judge the actions of these San Francisco LEOs. The LEOs will wake up that day wondering if they will lose their careers and their freedom. I have been honored to represent LEOs in this situation. It takes a toll on the LEOs, their spouses, their families and their departments. The grand jury will review the video, citizen reports, sworn statements and live testimony. The grand jury will decide whether the LEOs should face criminal charges for their actions. However, the grand jury will meet in a secure environment, with time on their side under the protection of LEOs who provide security at the courthouse.

I hope that politicians and others in charge of LEO budgets and policy learn that the politically correct decisions that limit the force options of LEOs have real consequences. Use of force is a complicated issue. Perhaps the decisions regarding use of force should be left in the hands of the LEOs and not the folks who call for help.

Stay safe.

Officer Down:more than just a news story

It just never gets easy to hear. In my city, my state, my country or elsewhere, the news stories about LEOs killed in the line of duty chill my blood and stop my heart. From traffic stops to domestic disputes to stand offs and active shooters, LEOs give their lives far too often in defense of the innocent. LEOs form the first response and the last line of defense.

Since the murder of Georgia Trooper Chad LeCroy, I received numerous emails from friends and LEOs that contain calls to action. Trooper LeCroy’s murderer is a career criminal who showed no sign of stopping his criminal pursuits. People have asked me, “Why he would shoot a LEO? Was he afraid of going back to prison?” I am confident that he was not afraid of returning to prison. Given his treatment in the criminal justice system, he would have no reason to fear that result. The truth behind Trooper LeCroy’s murder will likely remain unknown. Every LEO reading this knows that you will never really get the truth from a criminal. Looking for the truth in the words of a cop killer is a pointless exercise.

I never forget the LEOs who put on their uniforms and went to work hours after Trooper LeCroy’s funeral. As always, you are all in my thoughts and prayers. For many LEOs, it is the focus on the mission that keeps all of us moving past such tragedies. For most, I suspect, it is our faith in God. Whatever the source of our strength, LEOs continue to rise to the challenge and remain true to their pledge to uphold the law.

What can we do to move forward? I encourage all LEOs to remain focused. Get involved. Rest assured that you are not alone. Visit websites devoted to LEOs to share your opinions and find kindred spirits. I enjoy www.officerresource.com, the national and Georgia FOP websites, and BLUtube. Meet with your local, state and national legislators. Keep them informed. Sponsor and support legislation. You will find support for your causes. For instance, Trooper LeCroy’s murderer was placed on probation several times even after arrests for possession of a firearm in the commission of a felony and being a felon in possession of a firearm. The National Rifle Association has pressed for mandatory prison sentences for these crimes for years.

I will write in future articles about some efforts to change Georgia law to keep us all safe. In the meantime, stay focused. Be strong and know that the public supports you. Find strength in the courage and strength of others like the family of Trooper LeCroy who greeted an endless line of visitors in the funeral home. Remain steadfast in your conviction that your efforts are selfless. Your efforts change the lives of others.

I looked into the eyes of Trooper LeCroy’s youngest son at the funeral home as he stood at attention wearing gray pants, a blue shirt and Georgia State Patrol collar insignia. His courage inspired me and it was an honor to meet him. I know he will one day understand what it means to be the son of a hero. In the interim, we will all work to prevent our LEO family from losing another warrior.

Stay safe.

Tased … and confused!

I attended an instructor course put on by TASER® International at the end of 2008. This is part of my commitment to seek out training to stay current in high liability areas for LEOs. As I prepare to recertify, I thought it was appropriate to comment on the TASER® and the training.

First things first. I have been a trainer for about 28 years, and I have been training LEOs for about 20 years. This class was excellent. The materials were professional, master instructor Ron Kelly was excellent and the class was invaluable.

Second, the TASER® device was impressive. I know what you are thinking. “Yes,” I was exposed voluntarily and “No” people were not lining up to deploy the device on a lawyer! The device provided total neuromuscular incapacitation and created a reaction gap to allow law enforcement to effect the arrest.

Now for the confusion. As I went through the class, I thought of several physical confrontations that I experienced as a LEO. Each involved one suspect and several officers who were using appropriate techniques to effect the arrest while using the least amount of force necessary. I could not help thinking how the TASER® would have changed the equation. The suspect and the officers would have suffered fewer injuries and the risk of the officers being disarmed dropped to zero. The suspect is in control of any situation involving active resistance as he can stop fighting at any time. I am baffled that many folks in the media and some members of the public are vehemently anti-TASER®. The research shows the device is safe.

Bottom line: I’m in favor of any technique or device that rapidly ends the active resistance of a suspect and drastically reduces the risk of injury to the suspect and the officer. This is consistent with the constitutional requirement that officers must use the least amount of force necessary to effect an arrest.

A note about my voluntary exposure to the TASER® device. I was unable to move at all during the deployment. After the deployment, I got up and finished my lunch. Although several people have asked me to send them a copy of the video that documents my exposure, I have and continue to decline to send it. I have total faith that my law enforcement brothers and sisters will immediately post the video on the internet. Forgive my modesty, but that is not my idea of marketing!

Stay safe.

Seattle Police Officer Video: Everyone is an expert

I have been asked to comment on the recent video of Seattle Police Officer Ian P. Walsh who was attacked in the midst of attempting to effect an arrest on an actively resisting female suspect.

Here is a portion of the email I sent to Bill O’Reilly:

If the Seattle officer had a lawful reason to contact the first woman (black open top), then he acted appropriately. She was actively resisting his lawful efforts to control her. It is clear that she was in control of the situation; she could have put her hands behind her back at any time. However, she chose not to do so. That is, in any jurisdiction, resisting arrest.

As she resisted, she created a dangerous situation for the officer. As she forces the officer to move around to grab her arms, his sidearm is exposed the crowd that gathered. This is the exact situation that has led to officers being disarmed and shot.

The second woman (pink top) came up to the officer and put her hands on him for one reason: obstructing a lawful arrest. At that time, the officer had every right to escalate his use of force as he was now fighting with two people. He struck her one time and stopped her assault. The officer is allowed to use one level of force higher than is used against him. You will notice that the first woman then tried to grab the officer from behind as he then tried to effect the arrest of the second woman.

If you want to see an unlawful use of force, I give you Congressman Etheridge. He put his hands on that student without provocation, refused to release his arm and escalated his assault when he grabbed the student’s neck. The student showed remarkable restraint. The Congressman should be charged with assault and battery.

Wiehl and Guilfoyle are savvy and analytical, but they are unfortunately ignorant about the lawful use of force necessary to effect an arrest. You should have asked a law enforcement trainer to analyze the tape. You and your guests were not prepared to give the type of insightful analysis we have come to expect from you and Fox News.

Stay safe.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,326 other followers