Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 27

Thread: Leo always reminds us that not all gun owners are good guys

  1. #1
    Regular Member Kevin108's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Portsmouth, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    353

    Post imported post

    http://edition.cnn.com/2007/US/10/08/wisconsin.shooting

    Deputy fired 30 shots from rifle in killing 6, officials say

    CRANDON, Wisconsin (CNN) -- An off-duty sheriff's deputy used a police-style AR-15 rifle to kill six people at an early morning party in a small Wisconsin town, officials said Monday.Twenty-year-old Tyler Peterson had gone to the party early Sunday to make amends with his ex-girlfriend, a friend of Peterson's told The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
    Peterson lost control after people called him a "worthless pig," Mike Kegley told the paper.
    Peterson left and got a police-style AR-15 rifle from his truck, forced his way back into the apartment and fired about 30 rounds at about 2:45 a.m. (3:45 a.m. ET). Six people were killed; one person survived and is hospitalized, Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen said at a Monday news conference.
    Peterson was killed in a shootout with law officers Sunday afternoon after negotiations for his surrender failed, officials said. The town's mayor said Tyler was killed by a SWAT team sniper.
    The dead and wounded were all students or graduates of Crandon High School, and Peterson was a graduate of the school, which has a little more than 300 students.
    Witnesses said the victims ranged in age from 14 to 20, and one was apparently Peterson's former girlfriend.
    Peterson's family, in a statement read by Bill Farr, a pastor, expressed condolences to the victim's relatives and said they could not find any reason for the killings.

    "We are grieving for your losses. We are very sorry for what has happened. This huge tragedy has deeply affected everyone, including us. We also feel a tremendous amount of guilt and shame for the horrible acts Tyler committed. This is not the Tyler we knew and loved," the statement read.
    Jenny Stahl said her daughter, Lindsey, was the youngest victim. Watch the victim's mom describe her grief »
    "I don't want to believe it. I'm waiting for somebody to wake me up," she said. "She's only 14 -- she'll be 15 next month; she's just starting to live. And the sad thing is who killed her -- a cop. Cops are supposed to always protect you, I thought, and it's one who took my daughter and how many other people's lives."
    It was the high school's homecoming weekend.
    Friends of the victims said Peterson also worked part time as a Crandon police officer.
    Residents near the scene of the shooting told the Associated Press it was hard to accept that a police officer was the shooter.
    "The first statement we said to each other was, 'How did he get through the system?' " David Franz told the AP. "How do they know somebody's background, especially that young? It is disturbing, to say the least."
    The town's schools were closed Monday, with grief counselors available to students, said Superintendent Richard Peters.
    "This was the kind of scenario where every small town in the USA says, 'This could never happen here,' " Peters said.
    Crandon, a town of about 2,000 people, is 220 miles north of Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
    Crandon Mayor Gary Bradley said the town will work together to get over the tragedy.
    "There's a lot of people weeping and gnashing their teeth and the emotions are very raw right now," Bradley said. "But we'll rebuild brick by brick."
    Forest County Sheriff Keith Van Cleve called the situation "very difficult" for his deputies and the community.
    Karly Johnson, 16, told the AP she knew the shooter.
    "He was nice. He was an average guy -- normal. You wouldn't think he could do that," Johnson said, adding that Peterson had helped her in a class and had graduated with her brother, according to the AP.
    The state attorney general's office will investigate the case, Van Cleve said.
    Kevin St. John, a spokesman for the state Department of Justice, said the agency's criminal investigation unit routinely investigates cases of a "statewide or significant nature."




  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Yorktown, VA, ,
    Posts
    270

    Post imported post

    Not that I have anything against the thousands of fine LEOs out there doing the right thing for the right reason...but:

    It is my opinion (no facts at this point) that LEO have a much higher probability of actually being criminals as compared to regular civilians. What I mean to say is that given one thousand randomly selected LEOs and and equal number of randomly selected civilians - there would be more LEOs that have been charged/convicted or crimes per capita as compared to civilians.

    Fact: law enforcement attracts a narrow range of persons with specific interests, habits, and character traits as compared to the general population.

    Fact: this "group" as compared to the general population, has either a higher potential to commit crimes or a lower one.

    Fact: this same group may arrive to duty with the best of intentions but after being exposed to the worst in our society their view of the world becomes blurred. Doing something "a little bad" is nothing compared to what they see routinely. For normal civilians who rarely see anything bad, "a little bad" may seem like a big deal.

    Can anyone point to any studies that deal with this issue?




  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    Kevin108 wrote:
    http://edition.cnn.com/2007/US/10/08/wisconsin.shooting

    Deputy fired 30 shots from rifle in killing 6, officials say

    The town's mayor said Tyler was killed by a SWAT team sniper.
    Later reports have his four wounds as self-inflicted.

    Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought ot be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA/GOP *******

  4. #4
    Regular Member paramedic70002's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Franklin, VA, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,448

    Post imported post

    Doug Huffman wrote:
    Kevin108 wrote:
    http://edition.cnn.com/2007/US/10/08/wisconsin.shooting

    Deputy fired 30 shots from rifle in killing 6, officials say

    The town's mayor said Tyler was killed by a SWAT team sniper.
    Later reports have his four wounds as self-inflicted.

    Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought ot be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA/GOP *******
    Is that like someone falling on their kitchen knife 4 times, or did he have a select fire weapon?
    "Each worker carried his sword strapped to his side." Nehemiah 4:18

    Guns Save Lives. Paramedics Save Lives. But...
    Paramedics With Guns Scare People!

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    paramedic70002 wrote:
    Is that like someone falling on their kitchen knife 4 times, or did he have a select fire weapon?
    My first response to this event's telling by the lamestream media was that it is the first time an AR-15 rifle did not have the 'assault' epithet attached - evidently it wasn't select fire or rogue cops are allowed by the media to have such.

    Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA/GOP *******

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Northern VA, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    51

    Post imported post

    Renegade wrote:
    Fact: law enforcement attracts a narrow range of persons with specific interests, habits, and character traits as compared to the general population.

    Fact: this "group" as compared to the general population, has either a higher potential to commit crimes or a lower one.

    Fact: this same group may arrive to duty with the best of intentions but after being exposed to the worst in our society their view of the world becomes blurred. Doing something "a little bad" is nothing compared to what they see routinely. For normal civilians who rarely see anything bad, "a little bad" may seem like a big deal.

    Can anyone point to any studies that deal with this issue?
    Are these actual "facts" or your opinions?

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Hampton, Va, ,
    Posts
    623

    Post imported post


    Revelation 1911 - And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Powhatan, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    57

    Post imported post

    Renegade wrote:
    Not that I have anything against the thousands of fine LEOs out there doing the right thing for the right reason...but:

    It is my opinion (no facts at this point) that LEO have a much higher probability of actually being criminals as compared to regular civilians. What I mean to say is that given one thousand randomly selected LEOs and and equal number of randomly selected civilians - there would be more LEOs that have been charged/convicted or crimes per capita as compared to civilians.

    Fact: law enforcement attracts a narrow range of persons with specific interests, habits, and character traits as compared to the general population.

    Fact: this "group" as compared to the general population, has either a higher potential to commit crimes or a lower one.

    Fact: this same group may arrive to duty with the best of intentions but after being exposed to the worst in our society their view of the world becomes blurred. Doing something "a little bad" is nothing compared to what they see routinely. For normal civilians who rarely see anything bad, "a little bad" may seem like a big deal.

    Can anyone point to any studies that deal with this issue?


    I'm assuming you have statistics to validate your assumptions? With out statistics they are just that, assumptions or opinions.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Fairfax, VA, ,
    Posts
    1,244

    Post imported post

    <sarcasm>This is why citizens should go up to any cop they see carrying a gun and ask to see his license, then call 9-11 to make sure he's not wanted. You never know. </sarcasm>

  10. #10
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Renegade wrote:
    Fact: law enforcement attracts a narrow range of persons with specific interests, habits, and character traits as compared to the general population.

    Fact: this "group" as compared to the general population, has either a higher potential to commit crimes or a lower one.
    How is it a "fact?"

    And what do you mean by "potential to commit crimes?"

    There would seem to be three possibilities:

    1. The LE group has a "higher potential to commit crimes" than the general population.

    2. The LE group has a lower "potential to commit crimes" than the general population.

    3. The LE group has a "potential to commit crimes" thatdoes not (statistically) differ fromthe general population.

    How do you know it is either lower or higher? How is it a fact? What the heck is "potential to commit crimes?"

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    For a start, cop hires are a sample of a population, "regular civilians," that includes criminals. The OP was "either a higher potential to commit crimes or a lower one." that seems to effectively exclude the middle. QED

    If the population is defined as not including criminals, then the likelyhood of criminality of the population and the sample might approach.

    Further, the OP's statement "law enforcement attracts a narrow range of persons with specific interests, habits, and character traits as compared to the general population." is a naive statement of 'self-selection' and probably accurate without the too precise and undefined "narrow."

    But I'll withold further comment, waiting for someone here, I don't recall who, that posts of being familiar with "probability analysis" or some such. I'm just a retired neutron mechanic and not qualified in some eyes to 'think out loud.'

    It is amusing to read the retreat to a demand for "facts" in this blizzard of base opinion. The only value in opinion comes from the effort in its development and exposition. Some here don't even bother to spell or attempt standard grammar.

    Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA/GOP ******* I think HenrieTTa may also.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Marco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Greene County
    Posts
    3,844

    Post imported post

    National Police abuse project
    http://www.gainesnet.com/police.htm
    If you think like a Statist, act like one, or back some, you've given up on freedom and have gone over to the dark side.
    The easiest ex. but probably the most difficult to grasp for gun owners is that fool permission slip so many of you have, especially if you show it off with pride. You should recognize it as an embarrassment, an infringement, a travesty and an affront to a free person.


    ~Alan Korwin

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    , Washington, USA
    Posts
    570

    Post imported post

    Agent19 wrote:
    National Police abuse project
    http://www.gainesnet.com/police.htm
    Interesting.:X

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    101

    Post imported post

    He had problems and his agency overlooked his situations. Often times people join the force for power and respect that they couldnt get from public. When there is too much power, they would start to abuse the power and ultimately they will end up being killed.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    This is a citizen that shot and killed several people because he "lost control after people called him a "worthless pig" and that is all.

    He was employed as a cop and was off duty at the time. This does not mean that cops go out and kill people on duty.

    As with any "citizen"... murders happen.

    Renegade wrote: It is my opinion (no facts at this point) that LEO have a much higher probability of actually being criminals as compared to regular civilians. What I mean to say is that given one thousand randomly selected LEOs and and equal number of randomly selected civilians - there would be more LEOs that have been charged/convicted or crimes per capita as compared to civilians.

    Fact: law enforcement attracts a narrow range of persons with specific interests, habits, and character traits as compared to the general population.

    Fact: this "group" as compared to the general population, has either a higher potential to commit crimes or a lower one.

    Fact: this same group may arrive to duty with the best of intentions but after being exposed to the worst in our society their view of the world becomes blurred. Doing something "a little bad" is nothing compared to what they see routinely. For normal civilians who rarely see anything bad, "a little bad" may seem like a big deal.


    What you post as fact is total BS!

    Fact #1 This could not be farther from the truth! The LEO profession attracts people from all walks of life. They are so different in so many ways.

    Fact #2 How can the LEO group have aHigher AND Lower potential to commit crime? This it moronic! That is like says my car is expensiveand cheep at the same time.

    Fact #3 The LEO sees the bad people every day. His view is not blurred as you suggest.. It opens your eyes to how bad some people canbeand how many criminalsout there others do not know about. Just because the LEO sees crime does not mean he is going to commit "small crimes" because of it.

    Fact: There are 303,158,137 people in the US

    Fact: There are about 850,000 LEOs in the US

    Fact: There were 766,010 inmates in US jails in 2006

    Fact:1 out ofevery 406 people in the US area jail.

    Fact:1 out of every 357people in the US are a LEO.

    Fact: .24% of the US population were in US jails in 2006

    Fact: .28% of the US population are LEOs

    Fact: 1000 out of 303,158,137= .000329

    Fact: 1000 out of 850,000=.117647

    Fact: The correct ratiois1000 of the US populationto 3 LEOs

    Your assertion that more LEOs are criminals vs citizens based on a random sample of 1000 from each group is so flawed!! It is simply wrong mathematically.



  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Fairfax, VA, ,
    Posts
    1,244

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    This is a citizen that shot and killed several people because he "lost control after people called him a "worthless pig" and that is all.

    He was employed as a cop and was off duty at the time.

    Oh please, he was a cop...it's hilarious that you're trying to act like he was just another guy who happened to be "employed as a cop"...but not a member of "da brudda-hood" or whatever you're calling yourgang nowadays. I guess the Chicago cop that beat up that young bartender was just another guy who "happened to be a cop" too?

    It's a shame for him he wasn't on duty when he did it because he probably would've just been put on administrative leave till internal investigations cleared him. Plus, he would've had the benefit of having the entire police spin team behind him to say the victims had it coming.

    LEO 229 wrote:
    Your assertion that more LEOs are criminals vs citizens based on a random sample of 1000 from each group is so flawed!! It is simply wrong mathematically.
    The fact that cops can do everything from get high off of stolen drugs to assaultyoung girlsto murder people without getting charged just MIGHT have something to do with it. On the other hand, the rest of us can be jailed if we yell "shut up" to a dog. Your statistics are completely worthless.

  17. #17
    Campaign Veteran roscoe13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Catlett, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,134

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    Renegade wrote:

    Fact: this "group" as compared to the general population, has either a higher potential to commit crimes or a lower one.

    Fact #2 How can the LEO group have aHigher AND Lower potential to commit crime? This it moronic! That is like says my car is expensiveand cheep at the same time.
    Read much? Note the words "either" & "or" in "Fact" #2.
    "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." - George Washington

  18. #18
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator longwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Fauquier Co, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,297

    Post imported post

    Moved to General Forum, not a Virginia topic and not very OC related.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    roscoe13 wrote:
    LEO 229 wrote:
    Renegade wrote:

    Fact: this "group" as compared to the general population, has either a higher potential to commit crimes or a lower one.

    Fact #2 How can the LEO group have aHigher AND Lower potential to commit crime? This it moronic! That is like says my car is expensiveand cheep at the same time.
    Read much? Note the words "either" & "or" in "Fact" #2.
    That alleged fact is meaningless....

    It is just likepregnancy "Either your pregnant or your not...."

    Which is it??



  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    That alleged fact is meaningless....

    It is just likepregnancy "Either your pregnant or your not...."

    Which is it??
    Dumb bass.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excluded_middle

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

    Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA/GOP *******

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    Experts look at a young officer’s murderous rampage

    By Chuck Remsberg
    Provided by The Force Science Research Center
    You’ve no doubt read or watched the national coverage about the off-duty law officer in a one-stoplight timber town in Wisconsin’s North Woods who recently burst into an early-hours pizza party of high school friends…slaughtered 6 of them, including his ex-girlfriend, with his AR-15…opened fire on a responding fellow officer, a friend of his…eluded authorities for hours with deceptive calls about his whereabouts…and finally killed himself with 3 pistol rounds to his neck and head after negotiations for his surrender failed and he was wounded in the arm by a SWAT sniper.
    The offender, Tyler Peterson, was a part-time officer with the police department in the town of about 2,000 population, a full-time deputy for the sheriff’s department, and a member of the county’s Special Emergency Response Team.
    Fully certified, he was 20 years old and had been in law enforcement for less than a year. He hired on when he was 19. [Read news reports on PoliceOne.com].
    Urgent questions have emerged. Might the risk of violent explosion have been detected in Peterson by stricter pre-employment screening and certification standards? What latent demons may have driven him? Is anyone his age too young to be a cop? How will his murderous actions affect law enforcement generally and, in particular, those who served with him and those who had to hunt him down?
    Force Science News consulted 3 prominent authorities on police psychology for their professional insights: Dr. Bill Lewinski, executive director of the Force Science Research Center at Minnesota State University-Mankato; Dr. Alexis Artwohl, an advisory board member for FSRC and a former police psychologist in Portland, OR; and Dr. Kevin Gilmartin, former vice president of the Society of Police and Criminal Psychology and also a member of FSRC’s board.
    Our intent is not to Monday-morning quarterback Wisconsin authorities but to call attention to potential problems in other jurisdictions as well, where, in Lewinski’s words, “disasters are waiting to happen.”
    As in some other jurisdictions, no psychological testing is required in Wisconsin for prospective LEOs and none was voluntarily administered to Tyler Peterson before he was hired by either agency. Could such testing have made a difference?
    An advocate of psychological testing for 35 years, Gilmartin insists that the reliability of such screening is “excellent” and strongly believes that testing should be mandated in all states as a standard, precautionary condition of certification.
    “Whenever you move away from a foundational concept like this,” he says, “you risk a tragedy.” Yet he is “astounded and concerned” that even some major federal agencies, with thousands of officers in field situations that require critical decision-making every day, do not administer psychological tests to their enforcement personnel.
    Artwohl agrees that meaningful screening procedures “are obviously important and effective.” But she cautions that no attempt at predicting human behavior can guarantee 100% accuracy. Psychological testing done today cannot guarantee that a person will not have a serious problem through a 25-year career.”
    She cites the case of a respected officer in a Western state who passed competent screening and testing done by his agency. But later, beset with marital problems, he murdered his wife and killed himself, leaving their young child an orphan.
    “If he’d been in a happy, harmonious relationship, that tragedy might never have happened,” Artwohl says. “Who knows what kind of unpredictable personal or professional pressure may arise in the future that could cause an individual to step over the boundaries of their usual personality?”
    Lewinski adds that the value of psychological testing depends heavily on the quality of the tester. In some places, he explains, a psych eval consists merely of “a generalized personality test scored by a computer and loosely overseen by a licensed psychologist.
    “The testing may even take place in a day-care facility for mentally and developmentally impaired people, run by a professional who knows nothing more about law enforcement that the impressions he or she gets from TV. Sometimes there’s little meaningful psychological interviewing done. A programmed report is sent to the hiring agency, and the standard is usually rock bottom: Does the prospective officer present an immediate danger to himself or others.
    “These are not admirable or optimal conditions.” He recalls a situation in Minnesota where a “skills” [academy] recruit passed a psychological test “proving” he was not dangerous—and 6 months later, he got into a fight with his roommate and killed him.
    “Departments need to spend time interfacing with the psychologist about the test used and what else the tester is doing to effectively select out candidates who do not fit into the department and the community and select in those who do,” Lewinski says.
    Guidelines for quality testing are well-documented, thanks in large part to the Psychological Services Section of the International Assn. of Chiefs of Police, Gilmartin points out. “The random solo practitioner, acting without well-researched guidelines, is an obsolete model,” he says.
    “But unfortunately,” Lewinski claims, “many departments don’t know and don’t care. So long as some psychologist OKs the people they want to hire, that’s good enough for them.”
    What about background checks? Wisconsin’s standards, for example, require that they be “thorough” in establishing an officer’s “good character.”
    Done well, background investigations can be “a better screening mechanism than psychological testing,” in Lewinski’s opinion. Unfortunately, Artwohl says, compromises may be allowed as agencies, facing a presently shrinking pool of qualified applicants, “get desperate for warm bodies to put into patrol cars.”
    Small towns and rural areas “tend not to do good checks,” Lewinski says, “because they ‘know’ the subject being evaluated.” [In the case of Peterson, his family was well-known and had been involved in local public service, his mother having served as the county’s deputy treasurer.]
    What’s more, backgrounds that once would have disqualified candidates are now more often acceptable, with consequences yet to be determined.
    “Agencies think they can’t afford good procedures and high standards,” Gilmartin observes. “The truth is, they can’t afford not to have them.” With cash-strapped, personnel-scarce rural towns, he suggests, the ultimate answer may be to abandon the idea of local policing and turn the job over “to the next level of government that will maintain professional standards. If a community can’t or won’t fund policing adequately, then it shouldn’t be in the policing business.”
    In Wisconsin, newly hired LEOs have 1 year in which to complete a 520-hour recruit academy for their certification, 5 years in which to accumulate mandatory college credits—not unlike some other states. During this time, they can carry a gun and make arrests as authorized by their agencies. Does this seem reasonable?
    Tyler Peterson was fully certified before his violent outburst, so his training met the state’s minimal requirements. But, Lewinski points out, “with grace periods like these, which are not uncommon in the U.S., a person could be working the street with full law enforcement powers without having passed any of the true requirements for becoming an officer.
    “If, in addition, a department has no FTO program, there’s no chance to evaluate how an officer reacts under stress or what innate judgment he displays before he’s on his own.” He describes the experience that a new hire reported on a small department in Iowa: “The first night on the job, the chief showed him how to use the radar and gave him a pistol. ‘Do you know how to use this?’ the chief asked. The kid said he did. The chief drove around with him that night. The next night, he went on patrol alone.
    “No other profession in the United States other than law enforcement allows people to enter and operate with full authority while waiting a year for training. Imagine if a CPA, a dentist, an optometrist, a doctor could do that!
    “An agency may say that a new officer is performing under supervision during the grace period. But in one state I know of, the POST board has admitted that a supervisor could be as far away as Paris, France, available by phone only after a 4-hour delay, and still meet that state’s definition of ‘supervision.’ ”
    “We clearly can’t permit this sort of thing any longer,” Gilmartin says. “It’s a hold-over from an era long past. We have to raise the bar.”
    How about the issue of age? In some states, as in Wisconsin, you have to be only 18 to be a cop. Should he have been in law enforcement at all?
    “Research tells us that the human brain is usually not fully developed until sometime in the early 20s,” Lewinski explains. In other words, most people of 18, 19, or even 20 will not have matured emotionally and be capable of great decision-making.
    “If you mature early, you may transcend this. But an agency needs to ask if it wants the risk of placing the heavy responsibility and need for keen judgment required of today’s street officers on young people who may still potentially be immature.”
    In Gilmartin’s opinion, “Age standing alone would not concern me. There are plenty of 20-year-old sergeants leading soldiers in combat as we talk. But the military is a much more structured and tightly supervised environment than policing, and the decision-making responsibilities are different.”
    He agrees that “the typical 20-year-old doesn’t have the necessary level of maturity for police work today. Most are in a period of prolonged adolescence and have not made the personal transition into adulthood. For a such a person to be driving around with a duty-issued AR-15 in his personal vehicle in an unstructured environment is highly risky.
    “Selecting a law enforcement officer is a little like handicapping a horse: You have to look at the track record. But a 20 year old doesn’t have a track record. He’s played high school football, maybe, or worked at the Dairy Queen. But is he ready for a tremendous amount of decision-making in an essentially unstructured setting?
    “For the most part, the skills of law enforcement are not difficult to teach and master. Eighteen year olds can master them. But they can’t nearly as easily master decision-making under stress. That capacity is terribly complex in emotionally charged situations.”
    [During his college and academy training, Tyler Peterson spent a week going through simulation exercises involving deadly force decision-making. Initially, he failed that component of the program. He retook the testing and passed.]
    A few contemporaries in his hometown have suggested to reporters that Tyler Peterson acted a bit badge-heavy. Before the shootings, he and a fellow officer were named in a complaint of inappropriate force that remains unresolved. But for the most part he appears to have been well-liked and well-regarded professionally. If a “psychological autopsy” is conducted, that should reveal more about his inner self. Meanwhile, any thoughts on what might have touched him off, based on your professional training and experience?
    Lewinski speculates that the crux of the bloodbath lies in Peterson’s relationship with his 18-year-old ex-girlfriend, whom he’d dated for about 4 years and who was one of his victims. She had broken up with him, and he apparently had come to the party at her apartment hoping to reconcile. “This is likely a classic ‘pit bull’ scenario,” Lewinski says.
    He refers to a study of domestic violence perpetrators conducted by researchers at the University of Washington. They concluded that 2 personality/behavior types tend to be the most violent in domestic relationships: “cobras” and “pit bulls.”
    When angered or frustrated, cobras exhibit highly visible body language of agitation. “They clench their fists, look angry, stomp around, shout, perhaps spit in their opponent’s face. Yet their inner physiological indicators remains perfectly calm, with pulse rates as low as 42 bpm. These are cold-blooded psychopaths who put on an alarming show in an effort to manipulate people, but remain perfectly in control of themselves and their reactions.
    “Pit bulls, on the other hand, are highly emotionally dependent on a relationship, over-invested in it. When it begins to fall apart, they tenaciously hang on to it far beyond any indication that it has any chance of succeeding. They desperately need the relationship in order to be who they think they are.
    “In the face of a relationship disintegrating, they tend to increase their effort to control the other person—and increase their level of violence—for fear that if they lose their partner they themselves will disintegrate.
    “The community might see the subject as a nice guy—and he is, if things are going along well. He only acts out violently when what he needs and needs to control is jeopardized.
    “A really good background check or really good psychological testing might surface indications of this tendency toward emotional immaturity and dependency.”
    [According to news reports about the case, some people at the pizza party taunted Peterson as a “worthless pig” while he was attempting to reconcile with his girlfriend. It has not been revealed whether she joined in the name-calling.]
    Gilmartin speculates that Peterson’s role as a small-town LEO may have made his relationship with his girlfriend critically important to him. “She may have been his only social outlet,” he says.
    He explains: “The stress on small town police officers is often greater than it is on those who work in big cities. In a city, it’s easier psychologically to balance the job with an unrelated, off-duty life. You can move into customary civilian roles with much greater anonymity; people may not even realize you are a police officer when you’re not working.
    “But in a small town, it’s much harder to get away from your cop role. A critical factor that tends to precipitate inappropriate behavior is isolation. In a small town, you can feel isolated from other officers, because there aren’t very many, and you can feel isolated from other aspects of life because policing becomes your total persona. Everyone knows you as ‘the cop.’ It’s your predominant identity. It’s very easy for a 20 year old to become one-dimensional.”
    Almost always in slayings like the Peterson case, Gilmartin says, “there’s a sense of loss involved.” Peterson’s loss of his girlfriend may have assumed epic proportions in his mind. “When people are one-dimensional, they tend to be very possessive, and at risk of angry, fixated rage. Once an outburst starts, it easily gets out of control.”
    What’s the probable impact of Peterson’s actions on the law enforcement community and on individual officers?
    Even officers far removed from the incident “may be conscious of coming under greater public scrutiny after a horrendous breach of conduct like this,” Lewinski says. “It’s perceived as an embarrassing black mark on the profession, and officers may feel a need to conduct themselves in public to a higher standard even than they ordinarily do.”
    An incident like this gets exaggerated in the police world because cops are supposed to be the extra good guys, the ones who prevent such things,” Artwohl adds. “People normally are a little afraid of the police. When officers show evidence of being mentally unstable, it can be frightening. People want reassurance that officers carrying guns around are very professional, ethical, controlled, and protective individuals.”
    Those closest to Peterson—officers from his 2 agencies or working in the area—will understandably feel the greatest impact.
    “Any time you have someone who has been accepted as a normal member of your group and who then suddenly goes off the deep end and does something shocking and scary, it really shakes up everyone in the group,” Artwohl observes. “You become concerned about your ability to read people and feel safe with them. You wonder, Who else don’t I know? Who else around here is a ticking time bomb? It jars your view of the world—for cops especially, because they tend to think that people who do crazy things are out there, not in here.”
    Officers who knew Peterson personally “might feel grief,” Artwohl says, “but it will be very complicated, because they’ll also likely feel angry at him and betrayed by him. They may blame themselves for not seeing this coming and doing something to stop it. It’s important for them to remember that the only person responsible for what that young man did is that young man.”
    As for the trackers who experienced the final confrontation with the killer, Artwohl expects that most of them “will cope well with what they had to do.” Peterson “stepped over the line into being a violent criminal. He called the shots, literally.
    “At that point, their training would have kicked in and they would have distanced themselves enough emotionally to react to him as they would to any other violent offender. It’s highly doubtful that his status as a law officer would have impacted on their professional performance.”
    She recommends, however, that any officer involved “get the usual post-incident care that they would receive after any other officer-involved shooting.”
    “Everyone involved is going to need assistance,” Gilmartin stresses. “No one who was close to what happened is untouched by this tragedy.
    “We like to think that something can be learned from every tragedy,” he adds. “Hopefully, law enforcement will learn from this one.”
    [NOTE: As this is written, 3 Wisconsin legislators, one of them a former sheriff, are planning to introduce a bill into the state legislature to require psychological screening of all potential LEOs. The sheriff says she believes “the rest of the state’s hiring standards for police officers, including the minimum age of 18,” should be re-evaluated.]

  22. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    Dumb bass. Your ability to cut and paste is not a indicator of your perspicuity.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credentialism

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_authority

    Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA/GOP *******

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    Doug Huffman wrote:
    Dumb bass. Your ability to cut and paste is not a indicator of your perspicuity.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credentialism

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_authority

    Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA/GOP *******
    Showing your childish nature again I see.....

    I am only providing additional information on the original topic.

    The moderators really need to get cracking on thetrolls.....




  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Kirkland, Washington, USA
    Posts
    425

    Post imported post

    Fact: There are 303,158,137 people in the US
    Fact: There are about 850,000 LEOs in the US
    Fact: There were 766,010 inmates in US jails in 2006
    Fact: 1 out of every 406 people in the US are a jail.
    Fact: 1 out of every 357 people in the US are a LEO.
    Fact: .24% of the US population were in US jails in 2006
    Fact: .28% of the US population are LEOs
    Fact: 1000 out of 303,158,137 = .000329
    Fact: 1000 out of 850,000 = .117647
    Fact: The correct ratio is 1000 of the US population to 3 LEOs
    While I don't necessarily disagree with the conclusion you come to, your facts are misleading. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics bulletin, in 2005 there were over 2.2 million persons in custody (~750K in jail, but ~1.4 million in federal or state prison). .7% of the US population was in jail or prison in 2005. This is three times the .24% that you suggest, since you left out everyone in prison and only included those in local jails. .35% of the US population were LEOs (3.5 out of every 1000) in 2004. I would venture to guess that number is higher now, due to increased "post-9/11" staffing, but don't have more recent numbers to verify it. However, let us not forget that "LEOs" in this context counts the 675,734 sworn officers nationwide. The rest are made up of non-sworn, non-badged personnel (dispatchers, campus police, administrators, etc). So, the actual number of officers is much smaller (~.24% of total population in 2004).

    http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/p05.pdf
    http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/law_e...nel/index.html

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    The moderators really need to get cracking on thetrolls.....
    Trolls? 3005 posts and hundreds of thousands of characters compared to <500 posts that are clear and concise and you cry "troll"? The conspiracy of ignorance masquerades as common sense.

    Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA/GOP *******

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •