• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Guiding Principles On Use of Force - LEOs

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Training needs to improve.

"The survey found that while agencies spend a median of 58 hours of recruit training on firearms and another 49 hours on defensive tactics (much of it state-mandated), they spend only about 8 hours of recruit training each on the topics of de-escalation, crisis intervention, and Electronic Control Weapons (see page 10). A similar imbalance was noted with in-service training." - page #6


I subscribe to Force Science News - that is how this came to my attention.
http://www.forcescience.org/fs-news.html


 
Last edited:

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
Training does need to be improved, most particularly the training to use one's brain, and think. Most of these mistakes are not hard for average people to figure out without training. It will take more than training, it will take responsibility not only for actions of officers but responsibility for lack of proper supervision.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
The Walmart incident is the ideal case study to emphasize the importance/value of many of the policy recommendations.

Especially humorous the incident where a couple of cops were immune from killing a dude with a ECW because they did not know that using the ECW in the manner they did would be (could be) 4A violation...high-larry-ous!!!

One top cop noted that she must consider how the cop union thugs might think about some of the policies she may consider implementing.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
Training does need to be improved, most particularly the training to use one's brain, and think. Most of these mistakes are not hard for average people to figure out without training. It will take more than training, it will take responsibility not only for actions of officers but responsibility for lack of proper supervision.

their initial training needs to be ratcheted down a bit from 'immediately reactionary' to allow their brains to comprehend what is going so they then can access their 'ok, what is going on' mental capabilities. has to start at the academies and the olde school training mentality thrown out ~ quit showing judge dredd movies at viable training scenarios.

ipse
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
The book's central thesis is a dichotomy between two modes of thought: "System 1" is fast, instinctive and emotional; "System 2" is slower, more deliberative, and more logical. The book delineates cognitive biases associated with each type of thinking, starting with Kahneman's own research on loss aversion. From framing choices to people's tendency to substitute an easy-to-answer question for one that is harder, the book highlights several decades of academic research to suggest that people place too much confidence in human judgement.
[ ... ]
Heuristics and biases
The second section offers explanations for why humans struggle to think statistically. It begins by documenting a variety of situations in which we either arrive at binary decisions or fail to precisely associate reasonable probabilities to outcomes. Kahneman explains this phenomenon using the theory of heuristics. Kahneman and Tversky originally covered this topic in their landmark article from 1974 titled Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.

I am a sustaining contributor to The Wikimedia Foundation.

unfortunately, those techniques must be taught as the skills are not innately obtained and in the interest in LE mgmt's concepts, brevity at the academy accomplishing rote muscle memory skills towards BGs vice applying heuristics to artificial real-life teaching scenarios (or another way of stating this is applying philosophy experiments to police cadets) costs too much money as well as those accomplishing the academy teaching might lack the intellectual capability to facilitate this type of a course. in the call for fairness, those teaching might be intellectually capable but stuck in the 'we have always done it this way' mode.

ipse
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
"Some have argued that the original study was merely intended to warn officers about maintaining a “safety zone” between themselves and offenders with edged weapons. But over time, police chiefs have said that this “safety zone” concept was corrupted, and in some cases has come to be thought of as a “kill zone”—leading some offcers to believe they are automatically justified in shooting anyone with a knife who gets within 21 feet of the officer.

Although some have claimed that few offcers today are formally trained in the “21-foot rule,” many police chiefs have said that the 21-foot-rule continues to be disseminated informally. PERF’s research into recent incidents revealed examples of the “rule” being cited by offcers or their attorneys to justify shootings of suspects with edged weapons." (20 — Why We Need To Challenge Conventional Thinking On Police Use of Force)

It is easy to extend that mistaken logic to firearms.

please include real or perceived objects the nice LEs believe could harm them.

ipse
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
the book highlights several decades of academic research to suggest that people place too much confidence in human judgement.
[ ... ]

The largest hospital chain in Utah has been demonstrating this for several years now. Much to the chagrin of many doctors here, but to the benefit of patients' health and finances, Intermountain Health Care has implemented policies and procedures that must be adhered to unless specific reasons to deviate are given. Turns out that actuary data is way better in most cases than judgment calls even from highly trained doctors.

For example, IHC now prohibits inducing labor before 40 weeks (I think it is) unless there is a specific reason to do so. Doctor and patient convenience in avoiding a nighttime or weekend delivery are not considered sufficient reason to induce early. While any given doctor may not see (or may not admit to seeing) very many problems with inducing a week or so early, over the entire patient database, there are enough problems, big and small with increased costs to warrant removing most human judgment from this situation.

Other protocols including post surgery pain management, or how soon and how often patients should be encouraged to get up and move around are also now handled via protocols first, human judgment second only when there is some reason to deviate from the protocol.

Additionally, IHC now requires that doctors' notes be entered electronically so they are both available to and legible for any other care provider in the system who provides services to the patient. I go into any IHC hospital in the State (and beyond) and all of my medical records including x-rays and other images are immediately available to any doctor who cares for me.

IHC is both a medical provider (hospital chain) and an insurance company. So it has unique incentives and ability to reduce costs.

Health care costs in Utah are about 65% of national average, and among the lowest in the nation.

Charles
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
"... we recommend discontinuing outdated concepts, such as use-of-force continuums, the so-called “21-foot rule,” and the idea that police must “draw a line in the sand” and resolve all situations as quickly as possible." (Why We Need To Challenge Conventional Thinking On Police Use of Force — 5)

It is notable that the "21-foot rule" has been corrupted. Notice the comment from the officer quoted in the report:


"When I first came on, we would always use the 21-foot rule. If they’re within 21 feet, they can be on top of you and stabbing you before you react to that. But now I think they’re trying to extend that distance out even further, because I think there is documentation now that someone armed with a knife can literally run up on someone before you’re able to react to that, or already being stabbed.”

The Tueller Drill does not suggest that anyone inside 21 feet can stab you "before you can react." Rather, the drill showed how often (not 100% of the time, but often enough to be an appropriate benchmark) someone with a knife in hand can close 21 feet and stab before an officer can DRAW his gun and make a stopping shot. If the gun is already in hand, the officer doesn't have to draw. If the suspect isn't charging an officer with a gun in hand ought to be able to wait for the suspect to move toward him aggressively before pulling the trigger. And as our resident retired LEO, WW would point out, an officer might make use of something else to provide a buffer between him and a person armed with a knife rather than shooting him.

Officers could also use more training on dealing with the mentally ill or handicapped. They also need to be trained to recognize and appropriately deal with the difference between a peacefully if obstinately non-compliant person and someone who is actually presenting a threat.

With the greatest of respect to officers, it isn't like current pay and benefits packages are going to attract the brightest or best individuals into police work. It is a tough job that needs to be done well. On the other side are some really scummy criminals who as we're seeing think nothing of killing a cop for fun or beating to death a woman or aged man for no reason than the color of his/her skin or some perceived insult or slight.

Charles
 
Last edited:

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
--snipped--
IHC is both a medical provider (hospital chain) and an insurance company. So it has unique incentives and ability to reduce costs.

Health care costs in Utah are about 65% of national average, and among the lowest in the nation.

Charles
Not exactly on topic - no use of force.

Still, I make the observation that health care insurance companies make money by keeping premiums elevated and denying part or all of claims....at the least delaying payment thereof.

Hospitals have charged as much as $25 for a couple of aspirin, are recipients of indigent funds, can afford to write off bad debts or turn them over for collection. They don't lose, they just don't win as much every time.
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
Not exactly on topic - no use of force.

Still, I make the observation that health care insurance companies make money by keeping premiums elevated and denying part or all of claims....at the least delaying payment thereof.

Hospitals ....

If you'll indulge one more off topic post in response...

What makes IHC unique in this regard is that they are one company with both Insurance and Hospitals: and near monopoly levels in both here in Utah.

So if the hospital charges the insurance company outrageous prices for goods or services the insurance profits go down while the hospital profits go up. If the insurance company makes it difficult for the hospital to collect, the reverse happens. Taking money out of the left pocket to put into the right, or vice-versa, doesn't actually improve overall profitability. And with the "friction" of every such transaction, overall profitability suffers.

IHC is far from perfect. But, I mentioned the dual aspect of IHC to provide context for why IHC is highly motivated to reduce costs in the hospital where many other hospital chains have less personal incentive. It was the incentive to reduce costs that drove IHC to look to actuary-driven protocols in favor of human judgment, despite the objections of many of their most influence employees/contractors: the doctors.

Somewhat back on topic, how often do we hear from officers that they "reacted according to their training?" To me this is one more evidence that in the heat of the moment we probably get less judgment than some would like to admit, and more semi-automatic trained responses kicking in. Indeed, how often do officers fall back on the assertion that they "acted according to their training" to justify their conduct and to eliminate perceptions of personal liability? They did what the department provided training told them to do, so if they did wrong, it is the training and department that are wrong and liable. This would support the notion that more effective and appropriate training is needed to reduce needless deaths and injuries in potential use-of-force situations.

Thank you for your indulgence. :)

Charles
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
My mention of Thinking, Fast and Slow was intended to compliment the mention of officers' deliberation and deliberate action rather than instinctive reaction.

It was not an invitation to fork the thread.

My response was intended to support the notion that human judgment is often inferior to actuary-based protocols, even when the humans involved have a decade or more of highly skilled training and get addressed as "Doctor."

No intention to hijack or fork the thread.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by Nightmare

How many of these principles could we citizen activists anticipated.
Some can't follow the 10 commandments let a lone 30 Guiding Principles on Use of Force.
Follow ≠ anticipate. Jus' sayin'.
 
Top