Why do people always say......

[tjhands]

"If I ever have to pull my gun, I'm going to use it"??

Personally (maybe I'm an idiot, and tell me if I am), I can think of a bunch of scenarios right off the top of my head as to when I'd pull a gun and not necessarily aim and fire immediately.

1) Your doorbell rings. You look through the window and are eye-to-eye with a Mr. Nasty demanding that you open the f'ing door or he's gonna break it down. I pull my gun, let him get a look at it, and wait for him to make the next move.
2) Walking back to your car in a dark parking lot. Mr. Nasty pops out and walks directly toward you with harmful intent in his eyes. I stop, unholster and give him a second or two to think it over.

I mean, the list could go on and on. I understand the mindset that you don't draw until you are justified in using it, but if we think about it hard enough, we can all come up with scenarios in which we might draw or reveal our weapons without automatically blasting away. In neither of the above situations would I have been justified legally in shooting the man, but to just stay the course is wasting very precious seconds.

[spacemanspiff]

simple. the firearm is the last resort. in the first scenario you mentioned, you have the option of retreating to a secure location in the home, dialing 911, etc. besides, unless he has a battering ram, he's going to likely spend a couple minutes trying to get the door down.

in the second scenario, for starters you dont mention distance. there could be enough time to put distance between you and the potential thug, or at least put obstacles between you and him. if there is no weapon you can see in his hands, are you really sure that brandishing your weapon is a good idea?

what you are talking about is escalating the situation pre-emptively. sure, its fun to fantasize about it, but back on earth with the rest of us losers, we gotta make sure that every other viable alternative has been at least contemplated before jumping to showing the potential thug the business end or our gat.

[Stiletto]

1) That's not really pulling a gun, and legally, you're under the castle rule anyway. You can do whatever the hell you want with your gun, aside from shooting it at non-threats.

2) Highly debatable, but yeah, I guess that's legit. Ideally, you're not supposed to draw it until you are very sure that the guy's going to attack you and you are going to open fire if he doesn't back off RIGHT NOW.

[tjhands]

In situation #1, I sure as hell wouldn't run into another room, call 911 and wait for my heros to show up on white ponies. I'd do just as described. Not aiming it, not speaking - just draw and maintain eye contact. When he runs away, then I'd head for the phone.

Situation #2.....I picture a couple car lengths (what, 20 feet or so?) and closing fast. Sure I could yell for him to "STOP!!" before drawing, but he'd be down to 10 feet away by then. For some people, I'm sure that his displaying a weapon (knife, etc) would be the deciding factor and that's why I left it a mystery. Even with no weapon in his hand, if he is menacingly making a B-line right at me, I am drawing. Not aiming at him - just showing him the gun. It;s important that people key in on the word "menacingly." If he were skipping rope or playing hopscotch, things would be different....we all know a threatening look when we see it - it's instinctual. I am not a large man and would probably get brained by someone 5'11" or bigger, so to let him close in on me for a fist fight ain't in my book of options.

[spacemanspiff]

from someone who as BTDT-bought-a-tshirt, i think that drawing down on an unarmed person simply because they look 'scary' and are walking towards you is a bad idea.
unless you are cornered with no way out, i dont think that even brandishing your weapon is going to be considered 'justifiable'. would depend on your states laws regarding the use of deadly force and whether or not you have any duty to retreat, or at least make an attempt to.

[tjhands]

I hear ya - it's just that at that moment....in that immediate situation, for most of us here, I wonder how the scales would tip in the Law vs. Self-Preservation battle. I think most people would draw.

[Trip20]

You just can't generalize these situations as in:
--it's cool to flash your shiney pistol in this situation.
--it's NOT cool to flash your shiney pistol in this situation.

The're all different. You can try to post scenerios all you like but the "what would you do if" stuff really doesn't end up in any great answer to the question.

I guess all I mean is I'd actually have to really be in the situation to know if I'd justify any action in particular.

Generally you hear the "I won't pull it until I know I have to fire" because most people who carry on TFL like to consider themselves law abiding citizens. That, coupled with the what they teach in the classes they had to take in order to carry, make them give this response.

Not to mention the thought of knowing your taking a situation that you really do not understand yet, and turning it into a situation where at least one dude has his boom stick out. There's usually not a good result unless your banking on the bad guy crapping his pants and you having a funny story to tell your other CCW buddies.

[Edward429451]

I think people say that because its the textbook answer and they think its the right thing to say. In a way they're correct, and in another way trip20 is right, ya kinda gotta be there to know if it'd help or not. Sometimes it might be the right thing to do (draw without immediately firing).

I'd rather draw without firing than the reverse. Who wants to kill? It might escalate the situation or it might just strtegically defuse it too! One time when I was a security guard and got (attacked) by some guy I basically beat the crap out of him with a PR-24 and got on the radio to have the local po po come over and take a report...he cussed at me and went for his pocket. I dropped the radio and drew my pistol, but on a 45 degt angle without pointing it at him. It turned out that he was going for his car keys instead of an AMT Backup because he didn't want to be arrested. I'm glad I didn't shoot him! Should I have waited to see what he pulled out before I drew? I think not. It could've been a pistol.

It's all situational ethics. You gotta be there to know. I'da stood a better chance, having mine drawn already if he did pull a pistol. As it turned out, no harm no foul. You just need to be able to articulate good reasons for your actions for the aftermath. No easy answer here but do what ya gotta do without crossing the wrong line.

A couple other times I put my hand on it without drawing and defused the situation. BG's know that going for the gun movement and generally stop.

[JSandi]

From a cop’s point of view, it’s my life and if I feel threatened I’m clearing leather.

Here in GA to use deadly force you must one, be in fear of death or in fear of death to another person (3rd party) or be in fear of great bodily harm to yourself or another. It’s fairly simple and straightforward, if you feel threatened and feel that a person is about to deal you death or great bodily harm it’s a deadly force situation, no one has a duty to retreat, end of story.

We are constantly debating the use of deadly force on an unarmed opponent at work and on the forums I frequent.

I’m not a big guy, I stand 6 foot tall and weigh in at 185 pound and have a wiry athletic type build, not muscular at all.

I am not going to fight anyone period, I am not paid to fight and no where in the Georgia code does it say it’s my job to take an @$$ beating just because I’m a cop.

But it does say in the Georgia code where I can use force against an unarmed attacker.

Imagine if I stop a car one night, way out in the boonies miles from any sign of backup and immediately this huge guy gets out of the car squares off on me and announces he’s going to kick my @$$, he’s 6 foot tall and weighs in at around the 250 mark.

Guess what, he’s getting one chance to stop his closure towards me then its’ straight to deadly force.

Now if someone say 5 10 about 180 pounds but clearly in good physical shape does the same, guess what…

Same ending.

Someone leads me to believe they are trained to fight, martial arts, and ultimate fighting types I’m blasting.

I am not paid to fight nor am I trained to fight beyond minimal to moderate resistance we usually encounter when arresting someone who just wants to get away from us and not go to jail.

My options are OC, Baton or Gun, but in Georgia we are not taught preclusion therefore we have no requirement to anticipate an attack an attempt to head it off nor do we have a duty to retreat, we can enter the UOFC at any point we feel is justified to stop the attack or effect the arrest.

If I feel I have time I might go to OC or a baton, if the situation is escalating at a pace where I can think clearly and react clearly if not and the situation goes to hell in a hand basket, the outcome will be entirely different.

[FrankDrebin]

Why do people always say......

"If I ever have to pull my gun, I'm going to use it"??

Because carrying a gun makes some people feel powerful and tactical, like the Ninja. And like the Ninja, who must draw blood when they pull their swords, the gunman who threatens to use his gun every time he pulls it out of its sheath feels even more like the Ninja.

I am not going to fight anyone period, I am not paid to fight and no where in the Georgia code does it say it’s my job to take an @$$ beating just because I’m a cop.

But it does say in the Georgia code where I can use force against an unarmed attacker.

Imagine if I stop a car one night, way out in the boonies miles from any sign of backup and immediately this huge guy gets out of the car squares off on me and announces he’s going to kick my @$$, he’s 6 foot tall and weighs in at around the 250 mark.

Guess what, he’s getting one chance to stop his closure towards me then its’ straight to deadly force.

Now if someone say 5 10 about 180 pounds but clearly in good physical shape does the same, guess what…

Same ending.

I think you need a new line of work.

[XavierBreath]

"If I ever have to pull my gun, I'm going to use it"??

Why do I say that? Because I have taught myself to think that. I want to think it and believe it in my bones so deep that there will be no moment of hesitation that may cost me my life. It's a mindset.

Pulling a gun is not to be taken lightly. When you pull a gun, you are employing lethal force whether you fire it or not. Pulling a gun will either end a conflict by death or retreat, or it will escalate the conflict beyond your wildest imagination. You assume that pulling a gun will cause a retreat on the other person's part. What do you do if he pulls his gun? What do you do if he snatches a child? What do you do if he just keeps coming saying "What are you going to do now punk? Shoot an unarmed man?" for all to hear? What do you do when his buddy off to your left that you are unaware of pulls his gun and ventilates your skull?

If you have the time your scenerios present, you also have the time to take other measures. Chances are, in a real life encounter, you will have very little time. Hesitancy will get you killed. The time to hesitate is before you pull the gun. Once the gun has been pulled, you cannot put it back so easily. Your gun changes the entire dynamics of a confrontation.

That being said, if his retreat begins before my sights are aligned, he will retreat unharmed. I hope he doesn't hesitate.

[Double Naught Spy]

Why do people always say......
"If I ever have to pull my gun, I'm going to use it"??

First, people don't always say this, but many do. Missing from the quote is context. By "use it," do they mean that it will be used at least as a show of force/power, or do they mean they will be shooting it?

Of the folks I have heard say this, they meant discharging the gun.

The sentiment expressed in the quote seems to represent a sense of false bravado (the ninja feelings thing FrankDrebin mentioned). It also seems to represent something of situational ignorance. Obviously, guns do not need to be discharged in all cases where they are drawn.

XavierBreath said he goes by that plan so as to teach himself to be able to administer shots without hesitation. This is a pretty good consideration as you don't want to hesitate at a time when time is critical and winning or losing separated by fractions of seconds. As noted, drawing should not be taken lightly. He mentioned that whether or not the gun is fired, it is a use of lethal force. Technically, that is not correct. Drawing a gun only signifies a threat of lethal force. Lethal force does not occur until the force is actually applied. Lethal force s defined as We also hold that in this circuit “deadly force” has the same meaning as it does in the other circuits that have defined the term, a definition that finds its origin in the Model Penal Code. We define deadly force as force that creates a substantial risk of causing death or serious bodily injury. Drawing alone simply does not constitute lethal force and drawing does not create a substanital risk of causing death or severe bodily injury.

If drawing did consitute use of lethal force, then depending on circumstances, you could be put on trial for attempted murder. Since it is not lethal force to draw a gun, then you won't be charged with a lethal force crime for simply drawing the gun.

[XavierBreath]

Thank you for the correction DNS. I guess that's another thing that I have cemented in my brain, albeit incorrectly....to help me make that jump. :o

I guess what I am saying is there are many ways to end an unpleasant social situation. Guns should be reserved for saving your life. If your life is saved because he retreated, or because you fired it is still the same reason you drew it. Guns should not be used to end unpleasant or frightening encounters.

Scenerio #1. Yes, get 911 on the line, and take cover. When he breaches your door, do what you have to do to save your life. If you show your gun, how do you know he will not leave, go around the block and then come take you out with a rifle from across the street? You are now at a disadvantage because he knows your plan.

Scenerio #2. get a car between you and the BG while you assess the situation and find the friend or two he is sure to have along for the ride. Chances are you are being herded. Cars are great barriers. If you are taken in a parking lot, it is by surprise or because you did not use obstacles to your favor. If you pull your gun when you are unaware of BG#2, then there is a high probability you will loose your gun when he takes you from behind and by surprise. BG#1 is just there to draw your attention while BG#2 pops you from behind with a pipe.

Bad guys who cannot succeed at life win because they have a plan, while the victim does not. The BG depends on you following thier plan. When you pull a gun but do not shoot, you are still following that plan.

Enough, I'll hush before I get flamed. ;) I agree that no scenerio can be analyzed hypothetically. You can "what if" yourself to death. I know the costs of taking a life. They are not to be taken lightly. I also know the value of saving your own life. That scale may be balanced by any person who lives, whether they carry a weapon or not. It's not a matter of using the gun. It's a matter of saving your life.

[jcnesqmba]

yeah kind of but I think its really the philosophy. Because pulling a gun can really escalate a situation, you dont want to do it unless you have to. If you are correct in determining that you have to when you pull it, then the same threat that caused you to pull it should also be a threat that justifies using it.

Maybe a better rule is "if I pull my gun, Im planning to use it, unless sometime between me pulling the gun, and thereafter firing, I am given reason to believe that I no longer need to fire. Something changed from before drawing and after drawing, that makes the plan to shoot, no longer supportable. This goes the same for between shots.

[BillCA]

Let's get back to the base scenarios.

1: Doorbell & Mr. Nasty being abnoxious at my door. Perhaps pounding and kicking it. I won't display anything until he either approaches a window or manages to force the door. By that time, hopefully, my 1911 has covered my retreat to the bedroom to fetch the 12gauge. That is what I want him to see -- not me holding something like a .25 caliber mouse gun.

2: Parking lot intercept. I too have BTDT and got the T-shirt. Now I'll have to break with most opinions here and say something different.

Carrying in a public place does several things. But I think the most important one is that it allows you to look a potential perp in the eye with the look of the hunter, not the prey. I've noticed that when I'm carrying I tend to watch potential threats and look them in the eye more so that when I'm unarmed. This is tantamount to yelling "I see you, dirtbag, and I'm not letting my guard down!" and they can see it. I have no doubt that this alone has caused several losers to seek easier victims.

In a parking lot scenario, I'll change my direction to see if the perp also changes to intercept. At that stage, if he does, the body turns the strong side hip away from him, right foot back, knees flexed, hand starting the reach while the offhand starts low, palm out and rises with my voice commanding "Stay back!" If he continues to advance in a meanacing fashion, I'll likely move back just a tad before using him as a JHP test target.

[Wraith]

When I say "I am going to use it" what I mean is "I am READY to use it".

Simply, I am not afraid to pull the trigger if need be. If the situation is resolved by the draw, then so be it. But if the BG makes an advance or I feel threatend by his movements, I know my finger won't hesitate to make decisions.

It's not that I want to kill, I am merely prepared to do so.

That's all. :cool:

[JSandi]

I think you need a new line of work.

No sir,

I have a firm understanding of the law and I have been schooled in many different courses, in applicable case law where unarmed attackers have been shot and killed by LEO’s where the situation was ruled justified.

See whether you might agree with it or not every call we go on is a gun call, why?

Because we bring the gun to the call, every single time.

The courts, more specifically the USSC has acknowledged time and time again that the only reason a person would attack a LEO is to do them harm, possibly great bodily harm and that the LEO can only act based on the facts known to them at the time, which does not include the knowledge of just how much harm this person may or may not intend to do and physical size disparities are always factors which can and do lead to people being in reasonable fear of great bodily harm or death.

And by doing so, if I allow the attack to go on, against an attacker which I know I cannot physically "take" there is the very real and great risk I will loose control of my weapon.

To believe otherwise is outright stupid.

In Georgia assualt is defined as “when one person places another in reasonable apprehension of immediate bodily injury. A mere threat of harm is insufficient to support an assault charge. A threat combined with the apparent present ability of a defendant to actually carry out the threat is necessary. The victim must reasonably believe that he is in danger of receiving immediate bodily injury.”

Size is a factor here.

Aggravated assault, “when an assault is committed one of three ways: 1) with intent to murder, rape or rob; 2) with a deadly weapon (includes any instrument which, when used against a person is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury) or 3) by discharge of a firearm from within a motor vehicle toward a person or people.”

This also includes hands and fists or other bodily instruments, you can't reasonably argue that the hands and fists of somone the size of Lou Ferrigno are not deadly weapons.

OCGA 17-4-20(b) “Sheriffs and peace officers who are appointed or employed in conformity with Chapter 8 of Title 35 may use deadly force to apprehend a suspected felon only when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect possesses a deadly weapon or any object, device, or instrument which, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury; when the officer reasonably believes that the suspect poses an immediate threat of physical violence to the officer or others; or when there is probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm.”


This is not a blanket license to kill but a necessary tool that must exist to allow us to be able to effectively do our job, the courts thankfully understand that not all cops can be the size of some steroidal monster or have the fighting capability of Bruce Lee and that we must have the assurances necessary to effect any arrest which must be carried out.

This is why the FBI created the use of force continuum and the Courts have adopted its model and apply it to all cases involving deadly force, especially in LE.

This model allows us to go at a minimum one step above the level of force being used to overcome any resistance to effect a arrest, but it also does not limit us in our ability to enter this continuum at any point we feel is necessary, hence we can go straight from verbal encounter to deadly force without having to stop along the way if we feel our life or safety is in jeopardy.

[FrankDrebin]

No sir,

I have a firm understanding of the law and I have been schooled in many different courses, in applicable case law where unarmed attackers have been shot and killed by LEO’s where the situation was ruled justified.

Doesn't matter what the law says. If I'd have shot every person that I was legally justified in shooting, I'd have killed more than a dozen people by now. I didn't say I thought you needed a new line of work because you didn't know what the law was. I said I thought you needed a new line of work because I don't think cops should be so ready to shoot unarmed people who say they're going to kick a cop's ass and don't stop in their tracks the first time the cops says "stop". What happens if some guy who is bigger than you sucker punches you at a bar fight? You're just going to shoot him in the chest?

[tjhands]

I'm no expert on the law, but just from a logical standpoint, it seems very reasonable to me that if an officer yells "STOP!" at a man who has just verbally threatened him with bodily injury ("I'm gonna kick your ass, you pig!") and is approaching the officer to do just that, the cop has a perfect right to shoot him dead. This is (at least morally) a no-brainer. As far as the law goes, well, the law and morals are seldom found in bed together anyway.

You just don't physically threaten a cop and not expect to take the dirt nap.

Back to my scenarios.........

In #1, I would still do the same exact thing. Y'all can run around dialing numbers while a maniac tears his way into your castle, your belongings, and your wife if you want to; I'm showing him that there are easier targets to be had. In that situation, 99 times out of 100, he will turn and flee, never to be heard of again. Those are damn nice odds, and they're the ones I'd be going with. In that split second, I don't have time and wits enough to think, "wait! what if he has a friend hiding with a rifle trained on my window?" or other crazy ideas like that. I'm addressing the IMMEDIATE situation. In a situation like this one, to think about things other than Mr. Nasty getting ready to level your door, kill you and your family and rob the castle, is just insane. Easy targets is what they are after. People with .45's and 00 buck shot aren't easy targets. I'm going with the odds here. This one is getting way too "what-if'd" by people. It's easy to sit at the keyboard and dream up possibilities of his friend sitting across the street with crosshairs on your chest, or the guy leaving but then coming back later, or that you are on Punk'd or Scare Tactics or something, but I still believe that most of us would not think like that when the time comes. In the moment of attack, all planning and thinking would be abandoned. It's not TFL forums anymore. Now it's innate. It's primal. We'd counter his threat with one of our own, and in all liklihood, that'd be the end of it.

#2 has too many variables to get people to commit to an answer as to what they think they'd do. I'll let that one go, but in #1.....I'm sticking to my guns. ;)

[20cows]

What happens if some guy who is bigger than you sucker punches you at a bar fight? You're just going to shoot him in the chest?

I guess the sucker punch would be free (except for that little assault charge), but I won't take a second one. There is a big difference between a single, unexpected punch and a committed sustained attack. It all boils down to "ending the threat". If the SOB is content that he "got you" with the sucker punch and has no intent to continue the assault, then the threat is over. Put your ego in your pocket and let the legal system do its job.

As a teacher in a juvenile correctional institution, I was assaulted once. The lad was not happy with his test, stood up, picked up his desk and threw it at me from 20 feet. I saw it coming, was in a swivel chair and praise the Lord he threw straight with no spin and I caught it. He was not in my face and beating on me, so I put the desk down and informed the security staff. It would not have justified my going to the student and applying any type of force. He did pick up a second desk, but by this time staff was there and I easily stepped aside and let it hit the wall (he threw hard and shattered the desk). Staff was able to restrain him at that point.

Had he come over to me and started attacking me directly, I would have been justified in using any force necessary to stop his attack. True this was in a situation where no "weapon" was availible, but if I had to break his scrawny neck to stop him, it would still be justified.

Back to the above situation in the bar. (I don't go in bars.) For someone to get the chance to hit me, it's going to have to be a sucker punch or an attack without warning. One punch can do significant bodily harm and I am not legally required to take an @$$ whippin' just because he didn't mean "to really hurt me". ("I was just funnin' ya!")

If a fella says he's going to kick my @$$ and doesn't stop, I'm not going to let him have the chance.

[XavierBreath]

I would still do the same exact thing. Y'all can run around dialing numbers while a maniac tears his way into your castle, your belongings, and your wife if you want to; I'm showing him that there are easier targets to be had. In that situation, 99 times out of 100, he will turn and flee, never to be heard of again. Those are damn nice odds, and they're the ones I'd be going with.
On Scenerio #1, I'm not saying not to use lethal force. I am saying not to tip your hand until you must. Doing otherwise can open up a whole realm of possibilities. Yes, chances are he will leave. If he is intent on doing you harm, he will find a better time and place, when you are less prepared. If he is on drugs or drunk, he may very well continue the assault on your door anyway. If he is an enraged relative, or suicidal, he may continue the assault on your door. Someone who is assaulting your door with force is not behaving rationally, they are enraged. Showing them a firearm is not likely to suddenly make them rational. If anything it will escalate the rage.

If he breaks down your door and enters, you are justified in dropping him on the spot where I live. You will likely not even be taken in for questioning. You will loose your gun to the evidence locker until the case is closed. You will have to clean up a bit.

If you show your gun and he leaves and calls the police, giving them a description of your gun and yourself as well as your address and saying he mistakenly approached your home and you brandished a weapon on your front porch, you are going to be doing some explaining. You may go to court on false charges. You may loose your weapon and your right to carry. It's his word against yours, and he made the complaint. Don't expect him to be truthful or a gentleman about it.

Every situation is different, but I cannot think of a generalized scenerio where tipping your hand would be in your favor.

[Duxman]

I agree with most of the logic in these posts: Don't draw your weapon until your life is in immediate danger. Otherwise you could be in worse trouble. There are many options avaliable to you - if they are practical - take them instead - retreat, evasion, HTH combat. But if you must....

Here are my inputs on the 2 scenarios:

1) At home vs BG - Well first I wouldn't look through window, I would turn off my interior lighting and turn off exterior lighting and try my peephole. If he threatens, I will retreat from doorway take cover, and tell him I am armed. Never breaking eye contact with entry points. (At this point weapon would be drawn and pointed at doorway. No shooting through the door or anything like that - too dangerous. Would call 911 if phone was next to me. But if I had to go to next room to get it, no way. Keep entranceway(s) covered.

Turning interior lights off definitely gives you an advantage over BG as you know the layout of your home. Also as the outside light is on, he would be perfectly silhouetted target as he broke in.

2) Parking lot vs BG - No way I draw here. I would stop, look at avenues of retreat, and / or additional threats (peripheral vision) , and not break eye contact with BG. Verbal warning if he continues to approach. Act accordingly as scenario unfolds. No way do I draw unless he has a visible weapon.

But if I were to draw - then I would use weapon (unless he made a hasty retreat as the weapon was being displayed.)

[pangris]

Brandishing can cause alot of problems. If I have to draw it is coming up to the target with a high probablity of me planning to fire upon a good sight picture. IMMEDIATE compliance might prevent that, but for me, the point at which I am drawing, my life or a loved one's life is in danger.

[stephen426]

I too have wondered about the statement "If I draw my gun, I'm going to use it." I know that there will be situations where lethal force is justified but that for me would be a last resort.

Secnatio 1: If someone is pounding on the door, I will announce in a loud voice that I have a gun and will shoot him if he comes in. This will stop any opportunistic criminals and send them packing. If the person does not stop the attack, then there will be no choice but to shoot him if he comes in. I normally have my cell phone on me so I will be calling the cops and moving towards cover after I make the announcement. As for retrieving a more powerful weapon, I think this is a bad idea since the intruder may already have forced his way into your house by the time you retrieve it and may be on top of you before you have time to get it into play.

Scenario 2: This is a little more questionable since your scenario is somewhat vague. If you are in a bad area and there are few people around, then he may be targeting you. If not then you are illegally brandishing and potentially escalating the situation. I would give the guy a good look in the eye as someone else mentioned and "adjust" my gun so he knows I am armed. If it appears he is holding a weapon when he is approaching and is within 20 feet I will draw and keep the gun at the low ready position.

I am not eager to shoot anyone but I will shoot if I have to. If the bad guy runs away or backs down, then the situation has been resolved. It is not my right to remove these scumbags from the planet, as much as I would like to. I imagine my life would also be much more complicated if I didn't have to go through the whole explanation of why I shot the person to the police and the whole civil suit from the scumbag's family.

I have also given much though to less than lethal responses such as pepper spray. There have been quite a few threads lately and the stuff from Fox Labs seems to be the best stuff out there. I have also given serious thought to installing a Lasermax spring guide replacement laser that may cause a bad guy to seriously reconsider his actions. What are your thoughts on this?

[vidme]

and then he lost the debate, anyway. You billy bad ones can take on men with your bare hands( and maybe get your own gun used on you). I"ll draw the gun, and then if he's so crazy-desperate to make me fire, so be it.

[spacemanspiff]

Someone leads me to believe they are trained to fight, martial arts, and ultimate fighting types I’m blasting.

I am not paid to fight nor am I trained to fight beyond minimal to moderate resistance we usually encounter when arresting someone who just wants to get away from us and not go to jail.

it must be nice to be a cop and not have to justify your actions like us peasants would.
do what you feel you need to do. unload on people that walk towards you muttering 'i know kung fu'. what do i care?

[tjhands]

Spaceman,

It's not that he thinks he's better than you and me - "us peasants" as you say. It's just that cops ARE in an authoritative position in our society and in that vein, they deserve to be (are REQUIRED to be!) obeyed when told to "STOP!". Why is it that someone who punches a cop is in MUCH deeper doo-doo than someone who punches a gumball repairman? Why is it that killing a police dog is often the SAME as killing a human officer? Because they are better than us? No, it's because they represent the law of the land and automatically deserve respect.

[FrankDrebin]

Why is it that killing a police dog is often the SAME as killing a human officer?

Do you have a state statute to back that one up???

I never thought I was very tough, but I guess I've always been tough enough to take someone into custody without blowing their brains out because they tried to punch me in the nose and just happened to be bigger than me.

[JSandi]

It's not as stiff as murder but in GA it's still a felony.


OCGA 16-11-107(b) Any person who knowingly and intentionally destroys or causes serious or debilitating physical injury to a police dog or police horse, knowing said dog to be a police dog or said horse to be a police horse, shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one nor more than five years, or a fine not to exceed $10,000.00, or both. This subsection shall not apply to the destruction of a police dog or police horse for humane purposes.

[Trip20]

If I was in K9, I'd have a hard time NOT blasting the dirt ball that killed my 4-legged partner.

[FrankDrebin]

Why is it that killing a police dog is often the SAME as killing a human officer?


It's not as stiff as murder but in GA it's still a felony.

Hmmmm.......So in other words, it's not NEARLY the same as killing a police officer, let alone "often" the same.....

[tjhands]

Frank, nope I don't have the statute on that one. I was talking to an officer at my place of business once, and he said that people have been triedin court for murdering an officer after they had killed a police dog. I was relying too much on his statements, I suppose. Sorry for the (apparently) false info......the point of the post is still intact, though, even if it only qualifies as a non-murder felony. :)

[tjhands]

I try to keep the bullship to a minimum on these websites (and life in general), and I wondered at the time if I was going too far out on a limb in saying what I said. I just didn't know that Franky D was waiting there with a hacksaw! :D

I've now officially been "Drebin'd".

[FrankDrebin]

Say you go to a family trouble run where the man is going to be arrested for domestic violence, and he's putting on a show so he doesn't look like a punk in front of his woman and kids. "Nobody's taking ME to jail! I'll kick your ass! You're just gonna have to KILL me!" Then he starts walking toward the door that you're standing in front of and doesn't stop when you tell him to.

I've been to dozens of calls like that and ended up fighting with men and women who were a lot bigger than me, and never had to kill any of them. Are you just going to shoot the unarmed guy a few times in the chest in front of his woman and kids and then tell the newspapers it was a "gunfight" because you brought a gun?

[Bullrock]

Time changes, and the rules change with them. When I was a LEO many, many, moons ago, I was trained in this manner; Never pull your service weapon unless you intend to use it, and when you do shoot to kill!

As a retired old fart my rule today is; Never pull your gun unless you, (your family / friends) are threatened with deadly force. Be calm, be cool!

As a realist; you can never be sure what you will do in a deadly force situation. If you make a mistake; there by the grace of God, go I!

[tjhands]

No, I don't suppose I would.

But what COULD you do? If there's a substantial size discrepancy with the BG being the big one, what do you do in a situation like that? Mace him?

How many punches to the face do you have to absorb before you DO shoot the guy? Or, if he's winning, do you just let him pummel you unconscious, take your gun, and run? The whole topic got started by talking about a large perp saying he's gonna kick the cops ass and not stopping when told to stop, and a smaller officer who would be obviously outmatched in a fist fight. I can still see shooting the guy.

[1BadF350]

What happens if some guy who is bigger than you sucker punches you at a bar fight? You're just going to shoot him in the chest?

I have to ask a few question to this. What role is he playing? Is he a patron of the bar on his night off? Is he in LEO attire on official police buisiness?
Do LEO's routinely jump into the middle of bar fights to break them up, or does the whole place get O.C.'d beforehand?
I am not a LEO so please tell me what the proper procedure is in responding to a bar fight. If I were a LEO I don't think it would be very smart to go charging blindly into something like that without a plan. Heck I would EXPECT to get sucker punched.

I believe that each scenario is unique. The mind is able to process alot of information quickly in rapidly developing situations. Having said that it would seem that you will definitly know when it is time to use your weapon. Some situations develop so fast that you just doen't have time to attempt multiple forms of threat suppression so you would instictively prepare for the use of deadly force.

[1BadF350]

BTW, I'm not a big guy either and if I were a LEO, and a big mo'fo' was threatening me with bodily harm, advancing on me, I would have no choice but to assume he thinks he's going to give me a beat down and take my weapon and then possibly use it against me in his getaway. WHat should I do? Which one would you do?
1) run away
2) run around in circles and hope I'm quicker than he is until backup arrives
3) make a bee-line for the squad car while spraying OC over my shoulder.
4) say my prayers and prepare to meet my maker.
5) Draw down on him and order him to stop, if he doesn't than I assume he intends beat me and use my weapon against me so I fire at him.

We had a scenario in here where a female officer responded to a call about a man with a knife. When she arrived on the scene it was a foreign guy with a box cutter. He started toward her so she commanded him to drop the knife. He did not so she drew on him. as he advanced toward her she walked backward. She had her shoulder mounted radio mic keyd the whole time so all of her commands and the whole scenario could be heard by dispatch and fellow officers in route. To make a long story short she had to use deadly force. The fact that she held her mic button is what saved her from lawsuits etc, I think.

[JSandi]

Here is the problem with many LEO’s today and a good number of the old hands from yester-year.

They all have this billy-bad-@$$ mentality which leads them to believe they are required to stand between the world and all that’s evil, they fully believe they must go toe to toe with each and every bad guy who bows up, talks back or runs from them and the good old fashion @$$ whooping was the order of the day.

Speaking as a LEO with experience spanning a good part of a decade I can stand here and say with confidence that nothing could be farther from the truth.

You will end up in a civil lawsuit quicker for physically going toe to toe with an opponent today than you will if you use OC, a baton or tazer or end up shooting a person due to the afore mentioned variables.

Why you may ask…

When all is said and done nowhere in any SOP does it state you can use in any manor as a weapon your body, except in exigent circumstances, in which case you would be justified using the bumper off a 1940 Ford coupe if you had it.

Punching to the face is considered excessive and is a no-no in any department, you cannot use your feet but only in a take down, you cannot kick a suspect, you cannot choke a suspect (a supreme no-no) and you cannot use any form of martial arts expect in extreme circumstances and a good example is those cops in Atlanta who were just recently fired for using a type of “ultimate fighting” maneuver to take a person down.

The GBI ruled it violated all APD SOP and was not approved in any GA approved training curriculum and was far beyond excessive, but yet said the cops would have been justified in using the ASP baton which all of the carried at the time but did not use.

Our SOP outlines the UOFC, which starts with officer presence and verbal commands, then moves into soft open hands, OC and hard open hands and pressure points, then impact weapons and then deadly force.

The only strikes we were taught in the academy and the only ones approved to be taught in any course in GA is/were open palm strikes and strikes to various pressure points.

We were taught and our SOP clearly outlines that if those don’t work you go to an impact weapon or higher.

The FBI does not teach any form of hand-to-hand beyond open strikes, take downs and grappling, if it goes beyond that they are to move to some form of a weapon.

If you go to court and you physically pounded a person in a fist fight how is that going to look to a jury, or one better how would it look to a passerby, seeing you do your best Rocky Balboa impression on the street corner over, deploying an impact weapon, which everyone already accepts as a standard piece of cop equipment, and you are giving verbal commands then ending the altercation with one or two well placed strikes, over spending 2 minutes exchanging face and upper body punches with some guy?

This whole idea that we are required to absorb a given amount of violence just because we are cops is preposterous, maybe 25 years ago, but today we are given more and more tools which are designed to keep us out of the ER and on the job, OC, Tazer, Baton etc…

And ultimately deadly force which can and has been used justifiably against unarmed attackers.

[FrankDrebin]

Speaking as a LEO with experience spanning a good part of a decade I can stand here and say with confidence that nothing could be farther from the truth.

How many years do you have on the job?

Here is the problem with many LEO’s today and a good number of the old hands from yester-year.

They all have this billy-bad-@$$ mentality which leads them to believe they are required to stand between the world and all that’s evil, they fully believe they must go toe to toe with each and every bad guy who bows up, talks back or runs from them and the good old fashion @$$ whooping was the order of the day.

I didn't avoid killing people that I didn't have to kill because I thought I was a bad ass, I did it because it was the right thing to do.

This whole idea that we are required to absorb a given amount of violence just because we are cops is preposterous, maybe 25 years ago, but today we are given more and more tools which are designed to keep us out of the ER and on the job, OC, Tazer, Baton etc…

So why didn't you use your more and more tools here:

Imagine if I stop a car one night, way out in the boonies miles from any sign of backup and immediately this huge guy gets out of the car squares off on me and announces he’s going to kick my @$$, he’s 6 foot tall and weighs in at around the 250 mark.

Guess what, he’s getting one chance to stop his closure towards me then its’ straight to deadly force.

Now if someone say 5 10 about 180 pounds but clearly in good physical shape does the same, guess what…

Same ending.

Given your choice of weapons here, when WOULD you use your less lethal tools???? When someone refuses to pass the ketchup? And what does the "out in the boonies with no sign of backup for miles" have to do with anything? If you knew that back-up was 1 minute away, would you fight with the guy for one minute? You could take care of the guy if back-up was 1 minute away, but not 10? And if he first got out of the car, then "squared off" at you, you wouldn't have time to do anything other than shoot him after he started walking toward you after getting out of the car and after squaring off? If it's straight to deadly force for a guy who is 5'8 and in good shape, who do you use your taser and OC and baton on?????

[jonathon]

I think that the answers to both 1 and 2(in a common sense way, legal issues are state by state) are simple: Don't pull your pistol unless your ready to shoot. Not saying that you should every time, just that by pulling a weapon you can escalate things...

[JSandi]

8 years, started working in a small rural county S.O. of 19,000 total population, moved up to a large city PD in the Atlanta Metro area, total city/county population 119,000, I now work for my home county S.O. which has a population combined city and county of around 45,000.

My order of preservations goes like this,

My life/well being
My partner’s life/well being
My paycheck
My partner’s paycheck
Your (the public) @$$

Sorry it goes that way but again I don’t get paid to fight, my state certification says peace officer not ball buster.

I am currently writing a paper for the Georgia Police Academy on the application of deadly force and it’s justification, which will be submitted to POST for inclusion into the basic Peace Officers Training Curriculum. I plan on expanding this into a full 24 hour lecture in about 2 years once the total basic mandate course is expanded allowing me the time within the state required training hours.

This module will cover both armed and unarmed attackers and will be well founded in current case law as well as GA law as the General Counsel for the Georgia Bureau of Investigation interprets it.

Most of my opinions about deadly force against an unarmed attacker have come from those court rulings and not surprisingly make good sense. The courts tend to agree that in the face of uncertainty or overwhelming odds such as an unarmed attacker who without question poses a substantial threat to your ability to fend off an attack because of size disparity or a perceived ability to fight such as an attempt to employ a martial arts or a display of the same in your presence, which places you in fear of great bodily harm due to your in ability to counter such threats you can use deadly force.


You are either missing or circling deliberately the whole crux of the argument, which was use of force vs. street fighting and the level of force introduced at the beginning was deadly, I began to inject other options into the basis of the argument, while not trying to stray from the original topic.

The gun option

As for using other means that too would depend on the totality of the situation, was this initially a peaceful contact, which began to escalate up the R.A.M. chain or was it full blown charge towards me once the cars come to a stop and his door flies open, he barrels out full bore at me, giving me little to no time to even think about assessing the threat, just reaction.

If you recall from you basic training you should know that action is three to five as fast as reaction even with the most seasoned of gunfighters.

Remember I hope you recall from your police academy days that you are only required by law to act upon the facts as they exist at the time, if you see some 250 pound 6 foot tall redneck brute clear the cab of his pickup charging towards you while you are still calling out the stop, any reasonable man would have to assume he was not running up to you to give you a kiss and thank you for pulling him over.

Same would apply to a little old lady exiting the car screaming and pointing a small hair dryer at you, it’s 2AM you have been on patrol 10 hours, yet to eat or take a break, it’s dark, your tired and you make a traffic stop on a lonely stretch of highway, before you can get out of the car crazy old lady roars out of the car pointing this black object at with both hands in a manor any half intelligent person would associate with holding a gun while firing.

You shoot, killing her, finding out later she only held a small compact hair dryer.

In 1998 an Ohio State Trooper shot and killed a man who exited his car quickly and began reaching to his right side under his jacket drawing an object out moving as if he was bringing it to bear on the Trooper.

The object was a cellphone, the man died at the scene from multiple gunshots as well as his young daughter who was sitting in the rear seat, when a round entered the back glass and struck her in the head.

Shooting was ruled justified and upheld all the way to the US Supreme Court.

A small framed Female Dallas PD officer shot and killed an unarmed football player after he nutted up on a traffic stop, stating he was going to kill the officer then charging her.

The man was well over 200 pounds and in excellent shape the officer was about 505 and 100 pounds soaking wet.

Ruled justified.

A Florida State Trooper shot and killed two men who exited their on a traffic stop after being told to remain in the vehicle many times, both men got out stood still for a few seconds clearly sizing up the officer and communicating back and forth over the car, Trooper calls for backup, both began to advance, Trooper yells for them to stop, both go from a walk to a full charge, Trooper emptied his handgun into both killing them at the scene.

Ruled justified.

In Georgia about 12 years ago a small town PD officer pulled over a drunk one night, had him out of the vehicle doing SFS on him, the man became physical with the officer and actually slapped the officer then began to run to his truck, the officer gave chase grabbed the guy who was trying to grab something out of the truck, the officer could not tell what he was trying to get, officer fell back about 5 steps ordered the man to stop, the man looked back at him, yelled something unintelligible on the film, then began moving as if he was trying to reach for something, officer shot him, killing him.

The investigation concluded the man had grabbed a seat belt inside the truck and was attempting to buckle it back together.

Ruled justified, officer was in reasonable fear of his life due to the unknown threat which may have been hidden from view inside the truck, the officer was anticipating the man to produce a gun or other weapon, based on his training and knowledge of stops and the extremely unusual actions of the suspect.

There are over 63,000 cases listed on the West Law Server dating back over 80 years involving deadly force against unarmed attackers, now not all of these resulted in death, but the level of force used met the threshold of deadly force.

[FrankDrebin]

I'm starting to smell a rat....or at least a bullsh**er....

Speaking as a LEO with experience spanning a good part of a decade I can stand here and say with confidence that nothing could be farther from the truth.

How many years do you have on the job?

8 years, started working in a small rural county S.O. of 19,000 total population, moved up to a large city PD in the Atlanta Metro area, total city/county population 119,000, I now work for my home county S.O. which has a population combined city and county of around 45,000.

But in December 2004, you had a combined total of 5 years on.

I’ve been in LE for a combined total of 5 years, I took a 7 year sabbatical to pursue other interests before my return, during my first tenure I pulled my back really bad sidelining me for several months, then upon my return to LE within a year of going back on patrol I was out with a blow out ham string.

What gives?? You went from having a combined total of 5 and a half combined years on the job over a span of 12 and a half years, to having 8 years on. How'd those three extra years get in there??? I'm not the type to quibble over seniority as long as somone isn't trying to BS me.....
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1460030#post1460030

[Mark54g]

one pet peave, if you don't mind. Lose is what you don't want to do in battle, loose is how you need to be after you pull the trigger so you don't go nuts :)

[Blind Tree Frog]

deleted

[jonathon]

8 years, started working in a small rural county S.O. of 19,000 total population, moved up to a large city PD in the Atlanta Metro area, total city/county population 119,000, I now work for my home county S.O. which has a population combined city and county of around 45,000.

My order of preservations goes like this,

My life/well being
My partner’s life/well being
My paycheck
My partner’s paycheck
Your (the public) @$$

Sorry it goes that way but again I don’t get paid to fight, my state certification says peace officer not ball buster.

Now, if only more LEO's would see it that way. Its our duty to protect ourselves, and you guys just keep the peace. Thanks for giving me some hope!

[JSandi]

Frank I’ll be as polite as I can from this point on or just short with you…

Blanket statements like smelling a rat wins no points in any form of a debate, infact it gives away your weaknesses.

I spent 3 years working in the jail, most cops don’t consider that as being “in” LE even though I was sworn and certified at the time.

5+3=8

When ones augment is faulty or flawed the one putting forth that argument tends to attack his/her opponent, which is what you seem to be bent on doing.

[1BadF350]

Still waiting on Frank to describe the proper procedure for scenarios like this, instead of picking apart each post in what seems like a cross examination in an attempt to discredit certain members. Nobody is on trial here Frank, please just tell us what steps we should take in these given circumstances from your supreme LEO perspective.

[jburtonpdx]

FrankDrebin
I hope you are still working as a LEO, if not, please come work in my town! If you have moved on from LEO, I hope you at least participate in your states LE academy and pass on your wisdom. We need thousands more like you.

I hope that if I am stopped by a LEO on the worst day of my life - the one were I get fired, my wife leaves me, I find out I am bankrupt, and my dogs have run away - that it is Frank or a Frank trained LEO that stops me, if it is Jhands or somebody like him I will probably be killed....Even though I have never actually hurt anybody in my adult life. (I have a tendancy to be verbally argumentative, am a big guy at about 260lbs and a weightlifter/martial arts student, and a very emotional person)

As far as both scenarios that originated the thread. Same answer for both, if I believed that I or my family is in imminent danger of death or severe bodily harm I am going to use any and all means to stop the threat as quickly as possible. Civil and criminal charges be damned at that point. My family will be protected.

Somebody crazy enough to break into my house after hearing my booming voice shouting "I have a gun and fear for my life, if you come through that door I will shoot you" is a threat and will be shot. The castle rule applies here I believe that I dont have a duty to retreat in my own home. That is not to say that if it was safe to retreat and I could safely get through the situation without killing somebody, well I would always choose not to take a life if I dont have to... We do have our plan for home defense and have practiced it. Honestly now though I dont know if things would work that way at all. As I heard one guy say, "Everybody has a plan till they get punched in the mouth".

As far as the BG making a beeline for me or my family members. Totaly situational. First choice is retreat, I could pick up both my kids and run like hell if I had to. My wife also studies fighting - she is 6'3" and placed at least 3rd in every tournement she has fought in, grew up in a large family (fighting all the time), was the kid in school that beat up the bullies... I would probably have to convince her to retreat instead of breaking the guys skull on the pavement...

[FrankDrebin]

Nobody is on trial here Frank, please just tell us what steps we should take in these given circumstances from your supreme LEO perspective.

There really is no PROPER procedure in the common sense of the word. There is what you can legally justify, and what you consider morally right or wrong. Like I said before, if I'd shot every person I could have legally justified shooting, I'd have killed a lot of people that I'm glad I didn't kill in retrospect.

1) Your doorbell rings. You look through the window and are eye-to-eye with a Mr. Nasty demanding that you open the f'ing door or he's gonna break it down. I pull my gun, let him get a look at it, and wait for him to make the next move.

First I would call the police to make sure he's not the police. If he broke down the door while I was on the phone and I wasn't convinced he was the police when he came through, I'd probably shoot him if I was in fear for my life or my kids' lives. That way you're being recorded as you take a reasonable step to try to "let the police handle it" and also recorded as the guy breaks down the door, and as you tell him to stop, and then shoot him if you have to. Before he broke it down, I'd try to figure out WHY he wanted to break it down. Am I a drug dealer and he's another drug dealer who is trying to rob me? Is he my ******-off neighbor because he thinks I'm banging his wife? Is he the father of a young girl who thinks she's hiding out at my house after running away from home? Is it a straight up robbery?

2) Walking back to your car in a dark parking lot. Mr. Nasty pops out and walks directly toward you with harmful intent in his eyes. I stop, unholster and give him a second or two to think it over.

First I'd be watching his hands, second pull my gun out and keep it behind my leg if I wasn't sure it was a robbery. If I thought he was armed and going to rob me I'd keep my gun at waist level tucked into my waist, pointed at him and tell him I was the police and tell him to keep his hands in the open. If it was some guy I just ****** off at the bar because I was looking at his woman, I probably wouldn't pull my gun right away, if at all. I can't think of a situation I've heard of in my experience where an unarmed or armed robber would continue after seeing the gun and being warned. It's usually not like TV where they say "You ain't got the GUTS to shoot me," and then look all surprised when they get shot. If someone does that they're likely a mental. It all depends what I reasonably think their motive is. If they keep walking and won't stop, I just might walk the other way! If it's armed robbery, he's a lot more likely to get shot than if it was just a road rage incident and I have no reason to think the guy is armed. I'm not going to kill someone just because I'm afraid of getting my ass kicked. However, if you're scared, pull your gun. If you're afraid of being seriously injured or robbed, the last thing on your mind should be being charged with a "brandishing" misdemeanor. Unfortunately, it all comes down to your judgement. There is no "magic formula". We're all adults and have the ability to reason. Your ability to reason can save your life, your wallet or your car, or send you right to prison. If you can't reason well, you probably shouldn't be carrying a gun.

When ones augment is faulty or flawed the one putting forth that argument tends to attack his/her opponent, which is what you seem to be bent on doing.

So if someone gave you that kind of story on the street, you wouldn't be suspicious? Forgive me if I was wrong, but 6 months ago, you explained how you had 5 years of combined law enforcement experience, now you have a different standard of what constitutes law enforcement experience. You just sound do me like you're rather inexperienced, because in any big city, with your standard of deadly force, as posted in this thread, you'd have killed a dozen people by now. Also, you seem to be bent on justifying the minimum level of shooting someone instead of how to NOT have to shoot someone. You initally NEVER mentioned any kind of less lethal alternative, but went right into this:

Imagine if I stop a car one night, way out in the boonies miles from any sign of backup and immediately this huge guy gets out of the car squares off on me and announces he’s going to kick my @$$, he’s 6 foot tall and weighs in at around the 250 mark.

Guess what, he’s getting one chance to stop his closure towards me then its’ straight to deadly force.

Now if someone say 5 10 about 180 pounds but clearly in good physical shape does the same, guess what…

Same ending.

Your attitude seems to be "Hey, I'm justified in shooting this guy, so I'm GOING to shoot him because officer X, in people vs. Y did it." Not "I'm justified in shooting this guy because I'm afraid he's going to kill me or hurt me real bad even though I have a gun, taser, OC spray, fists, flashlight, training in martial arts, etc..."

[Bullrock]

I am not going to fight anyone period, I am not paid to fight and no where in the Georgia code does it say it’s my job to take an @$$ beating just because I’m a cop.

Jsandi, I agree! While I was a LEO that was pretty much my attitude. I hated having to go to work everyday knowing there probably would be a physical confrontation before my shift ended. So I moved on. Two years later my partner took an @$$ beating from 3 BG's, and it damn near killed him.

I think the lines have been pretty much drawn on this thread. The problem is no one really knows how they are going to handle violence until it happens. Putting up senarios doesn't mean squat because we are all different, and we will react differently.

I remember stopping a car one night. They driver got out, and started back towards me. I remember, I pointed my finger at him, and ordered him back in the vehicle. I was lucky, he obeyed! And to be honest in most cases as described in this thread, I always was ready to clear leather.

One thing I hate about today's LEO's, most have chips even with us former LEO's. The last time I spoke with a LEO was regarding my granddaughter who had been just been injured by a hit and run driver. When I told him I was a former LEO his reply was, Yeah, what kind of a cop were you! I hear this too many times. All of us have to earn respect, including those who currently serve.

Peace!