Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Training Your Agency for the Future By WILLIAM L. HARVEY

  1. #1
    Regular Member ryanburbridge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Long beach ca, , USA
    Posts
    299

    Training Your Agency for the Future By WILLIAM L. HARVEY

    http://www.officer.com/web/online/Le...uture/16$54641.


    "As a former director of training and now a chief, I can tell you it is sometimes difficult to plan a department's training curriculum. Some may even lay down on the job and only go with their state's minimum recommendations. They use words similar to minimum required hours to protect their budget but not the officers and communities. First of all, training is like maintenance for the employee. You would not think of having a motor vehicle without tuning it up for peak efficiency and performance. Training for the officers is no different; training fine tunes your staff to maximize their performance. There are the usual training topics that come up to refresh the staff but in these changing and challenging times we live in, I see some topics that must be presented to your staff for everyone’s legal, tactical and administrative survival."

    And

    "Another point is the understanding of open carry laws for your state. This in many states is perfectly legal and often some officers may not fully understand this law. It is extremely difficult for officers to contact a person carrying a firearm, I know this. But, there are cases where a few officers did not know the laws and infringed some CCW and/or open carry personal rights. Let's work with our citizens and not set ourselves up for a bad case. There are several websites, most are state specific on this area, familiarize yourself here as well."



    This guy sounds like he gets it. Let's hope he is heard by others in his profession.
    Last edited by ryanburbridge; 09-28-2010 at 06:36 PM.

  2. #2
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231
    Nice find. Its pleasing to see that there are some CLEO's that understand that they have an obligation to the public they serve. I wonder if we could entice him to relocate to be a sheriff of a small northern Californian county...
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanburbridge View Post
    "Another point is the understanding of open carry laws for your state. This in many states is perfectly legal and often some officers may not fully understand this law."

    This guy sounds like he gets it. Let's hope he is heard by others in his profession.

    He seems to get it. Until you look deeper.

    I cannot immediately recall a bad cop encounter where the 2nd Amendment was at issue. It was almost always the 4th Amendment (search and seizure) that was violated, not the 2nd Amendment.

    When the author says it is hard for some officers to understand OC laws, he is tossing a red-herring. There is nothing for an officer to understand. Either the cop knows to a dead moral certainty that OC is illegal, or he doesn't. If the cop does not know for a dead moral certainty that OC is illegal, he has no justification for detaining (temporarily seizing) the OCer merely for OC. If there is something about which he is uncertain, or knows he does not understand, then he has no business taking non-consensual enforcement action.

    You can almost bet the farm that cops that illegally detained OCers were also illegally detaining other people. Those cops did not wake up that morning and say to themselves, "For the first time in my career I am going to violate someone's 4th Amendment rights today." They didn't suddenly decide to enforce this one non-existent law, or badger or harrass someone this one time.

    If he really "got it", he would be calling for activities designed to all but eliminate police being a law unto themselves, making it up as they go along, enforcing their opinions, and so forth. That is the root of this problem--enforcement action without legal authority.

    Personally, I think we OCers have contributed to exposing this problem in policing. The reason we discovered this is because the vast majority of seized OCers were doing something perfectly legal, not even meriting reasonable suspicion. Meaning there was no criminality cluttering up the picture. The picture was stark and clear.

    Even though we are dedicated to advancing 2A rights, I would be gladdened to see a strong initiative to hammer the 4A rights angle. If I woke up tomorrow and found this forum re-titled Street-level 4A.org with a view to legislative solutions, I would not object one bit.
    Last edited by Citizen; 09-28-2010 at 08:29 PM.

  4. #4
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335
    12031(e)'s days are numbered and diminshing more rapidly then we could guess.

  5. #5
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231

    Off topic.

    Quote Originally Posted by cato View Post
    12031(e)'s days are numbered and diminshing more rapidly then we could guess.
    I wish you wouldnt tease us with this...
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  6. #6
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660
    Quote Originally Posted by cato View Post
    12031(e)'s days are numbered and diminshing more rapidly then we could guess.
    +1/2

    E-Violation's days are numbered, but I don't know about the rapidly part.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Roseville, California, USA
    Posts
    486

    Profound! You are right-on!

    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    He seems to get it. Until you look deeper.

    I cannot immediately recall a bad cop encounter where the 2nd Amendment was at issue. It was almost always the 4th Amendment (search and seizure) that was violated, not the 2nd Amendment.

    When the author says it is hard for some officers to understand OC laws, he is tossing a red-herring. There is nothing for an officer to understand. Either the cop knows to a dead moral certainty that OC is illegal, or he doesn't. If the cop does not know for a dead moral certainty that OC is illegal, he has no justification for detaining (temporarily seizing) the OCer merely for OC. If there is something about which he is uncertain, or knows he does not understand, then he has no business taking non-consensual enforcement action.

    You can almost bet the farm that cops that illegally detained OCers were also illegally detaining other people. Those cops did not wake up that morning and say to themselves, "For the first time in my career I am going to violate someone's 4th Amendment rights today." They didn't suddenly decide to enforce this one non-existent law, or badger or harrass someone this one time.

    If he really "got it", he would be calling for activities designed to all but eliminate police being a law unto themselves, making it up as they go along, enforcing their opinions, and so forth. That is the root of this problem--enforcement action without legal authority.

    Personally, I think we OCers have contributed to exposing this problem in policing. The reason we discovered this is because the vast majority of seized OCers were doing something perfectly legal, not even meriting reasonable suspicion. Meaning there was no criminality cluttering up the picture. The picture was stark and clear.

    Even though we are dedicated to advancing 2A rights, I would be gladdened to see a strong initiative to hammer the 4A rights angle. If I woke up tomorrow and found this forum re-titled Street-level 4A.org with a view to legislative solutions, I would not object one bit.
    Hey Citizen,

    Thanks, I enjoyed reading your post.

    I second your motion to re-title to "Street-level 4A.org."

    This forum is more about 4A and 1A than 2A. If 4A and 1A rights were not being violated on a daily basis by LEO, OCers would have no problems with LEO while OCing.

    Meet-ups are free political speech events, which, as we all know, is the only form of speech that is TRULY protected by the Bill of Rights. Slander is not protected. Libel is not protected. Defamation is not protected. Speech that endangers public safety is not protected. Free political speech is protected.

    markm

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Roseville, California, USA
    Posts
    486
    Quote Originally Posted by cato View Post
    12031(e)'s days are numbered and diminshing more rapidly then we could guess.
    Hey Cato,

    Don't count your chickens...

    The fat lady has not...

    Moonbeam may become our retread anti-gun governor.

    markm

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by MarkBofRAdvocate View Post
    Hey Citizen,

    Thanks, I enjoyed reading your post.
    You're welcome. Thank you for the compliment.

  10. #10
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231
    Quote Originally Posted by MarkBofRAdvocate View Post
    Moonbeam may become our retread anti-gun governor.
    Actually Moonbeam is a better friend to the 2A than the Matron of E-Bay.
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  11. #11
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660
    Quote Originally Posted by ConditionThree View Post
    Actually Moonbeam is a better friend to the 2A than the Matron of E-Bay.
    One amicus brief and everybody is ready to hand him the car keys. If he is such a good friend to the 2A then why has he not drafted and released a memo stating 12031(e) is a violation of our...err...4A rights. Well he is a politician afterall.

  12. #12
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231
    Quote Originally Posted by coolusername2007 View Post
    One amicus brief and everybody is ready to hand him the car keys. If he is such a good friend to the 2A then why has he not drafted and released a memo stating 12031(e) is a violation of our...err...4A rights. Well he is a politician afterall.
    LOL... I didnt say I was going to vote for him...
    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  13. #13
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691
    I have him marked on my sample ballot. I guess that makes me a liberal who believes in the Bill of Rights. Is that an oxymoron?
    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Harrah, Oklahoma
    Posts
    769
    This will be the first time I vote for outside the two main parties.

  15. #15
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335
    Quote Originally Posted by coolusername2007 View Post
    If he is such a good friend to the 2A then why has he not drafted and released a memo stating 12031(e) is a violation of our...err...4A rights.
    He can't. A Ca. appellate court has already spoken on the issue in People v DeLong. We need the legislature to change the law or Federal Court relief.

    He DID demote BOF within DOJ. Some very anti staffers were pushed out of their jobs. DOJ is now focused on real criminals and not run of the mill gun owners and DOJ stopped cooperating w/ local DAs on prosecutions of OLL owners. And the CA AG's office joining McDonald was huge causing must angst among antis nation wide.

    Meg has NO internal compas. JB is at least LIB w/libertarian leanings. He owns guns and has defended private ownership in his interviews. A Dem in Ca doesn't have to do any of the above to get elected.
    Last edited by cato; 10-02-2010 at 02:03 PM.

Posting Permissions

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