1911Forum banner
1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
271 Posts
Unfortunately yes that's true.

We practice weapon retention during our monthly shoots and during physical training

Theres nothing quite like having someone focus on trying to get your gun from you and all you can do is hold on for dear life.

I always use a stall when I'm in a public restroom and I stand with my gunside turned away from the person behind me in line when I'm at a store or gas station.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,409 Posts
Oh yeah, it's true alright! If you are a LEO and you don't actively practice gun retention, your training is lacking for sure!

Every cop out there can tell you at least one story of a bad guy (or gal) who tried to grab his/her gun. And probably at least one other story about some nut who just had to touch it! Sad to say, but it's true. NAA.
--------------------------------------------
1911: Best damn "Government" in the World!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
853 Posts
Originally posted by Greg1911:
I read this on the website below it can't be true can it?

"Be sure your vest will stop your own handgun. Nearly 20% of all police officers shot are shot with their own weapon."
Sadly Greg it is true. Fortunately the average has gone down over the years since the development of level 2 and 3 security retention holsters and weapons retention training.

Officers get into wrestling matches all the time and suspects like to try and snatch weapons or several suspects will jump an officer and while two or three are tussling with the officer the other will try to rip the weapon out of the holster.

I know of lots of cases where the officer was downed, by one means or another, and while he or she was unconscious the suspect took the officers weapon and executed the officer.

Suspects also get the drop on officers and force the officer to surrender their weapon and the suspect will use the officer’s weapon to make the execution. I have a personal rule about situations like this. You will have to kill me because I will not surrender my weapon and I am going down fighting. Who knows, I just might survive and rid the world of another pile of excrement.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,005 Posts
Actually, it makes a lot of sense: if there is only one gun at the altercation, the police officer brought it.

------------------
If God didn't want us to own guns, why did He make the 1911?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,122 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
I was watching some police videos were the Bad guys were trying to wrestle the gun away from the cops and the cop ejected the magazine and the gun wouldn't fire I think it was a glock I think if someone was trying to grab my piece I would just start pulling the trigger maybe give them the message to back the **** off.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
203 Posts
Magazine disconnect safety, prevents the gun from being fired unless there's a mag in place. Glocks don't have the mag disconnect, though.

When you're wrestling with someone it's all you can do just to retain the gun, much less fire it to stop the bad guy. Even if you could get your hand on the gun to fire it, you would have neglible muzzle control. Where are the bullets going to go? Into the bad guy? Into the ground? Into the bus full of school children across the street?

Gun grabs are more of a problem for LEOs (who carry open and have to make close contact with not very nice people), than for those who carry concealed and can choose to avoid/evade not very nice people. But retention awareness is still necessary.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,304 Posts
Retention techniques, and the neccessity of being amongst crowds are one thing; but many potentially fatal risks can be avoided by following basic procedures that are taught universally. One of the most appalling examples of negligent conduct I have seen was recorded on a police video (by the patrol car camera).

The officer was searching the trunk of a car, and allowed two suspects to stroll about - behind him. Needless to say, they jumped him, and the end result for him was fatal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
853 Posts
Originally posted by LAK:
One of the most appalling examples of negligent conduct I have seen was recorded on a police video (by the patrol car camera).

The officer was searching the trunk of a car, and allowed two suspects to stroll about - behind him. Needless to say, they jumped him, and the end result for him was fatal.
You forgot to mention that this small town Texas "Constable" was only a "part time" officer w/ little or no training.

Now, I wonder if you still insist on using the word "negligent" like so many "ambulance chasers" or would you consider that lack of training might be more appropriate?

One thing is for sure LAK, you certainly "LAK" sympathy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
538 Posts
In recent years, more non uniform officers are losing their guns than uniforms. Most plain cloths guys do not wear snatch resistant holsters, heavy belts, etc.

Training is the key--interview position, contact/cover, handgun retention, and constant awareness of your situation. GLV
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
853 Posts
Originally posted by LAK:
Patrickl,

How much training DID he have? You seem to know alot about him.
Yes, I am very familiar with the circumstances of the event. His position was primarily that of a politically appointed law enforcement officer. His role was to raise revenue for the little town situated on the highway through traffic fines. He also was given some training in drug trafficking profiles. The town knew that there was money in seizure assets.

Tragically his training was absolutely minimal. I would equate it to an 80-hour course here in California called 832 PC "Arrest and Firearms." We send our "Meter Maids" and "Technicians" to this course so they can legally write municipal code violation tickets here in California. It’s a course that gives you just enough information on how to make a basic legal arrest, know what end of the gun the bullet comes out of, and anything beyond that is a job for a real police officer.

I will agree with you on one respect. Any “town” that would send a man out with that kind of training to make traffic and drug interdiction stops is negligent in the first degree.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,304 Posts
Patrickl,

I do not know the date of the incident, but all Peace Officers in Texas, even part time or reserves, must at least comply with TCLEOSE since 1989. Of course some "local" definitions of "peace officer" have not been homogenous from "local" through State level, and it would not surprise me if not all of them fully complied with TCLEOSE. The practical side, and dangers, of field interviews, patrol, arrests etc may not be adequately taught. On a very small department, new officers may not have the benefit of anyone who will mark any risky habits, or omissions. My own training, in the military (late 70's) was very good. The instructors were both military and contracted civilians (career FBI, etc etc). I did take a self interest in my work, took a local State Peace Officer certifcation course, and had some very good mentors both military and civilian.

I do feel sympathy for him (any sane person who views such an incident would). But I can not help feeling that he himself bears some personal responsibility in that there was, under the circumstances, some common sense to be exercised. Unless of course he was of very simple and naive character - and I'll admit there are more than a few people like that.
That footage (and others like it) ought to be part of even the most basic Peace Officer certifcation courses. Lectures and textbooks are one thing, but there's nothing quite like having it hammered home in this way.

[This message has been edited by LAK (edited 09-10-2001).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
853 Posts
Originally posted by LAK:
Patrickl,

"peace officer" have not been homogenous from "local" through State level, and it would not surprise me if not all of them fully complied with TCLEOSE. That footage (and others like it) ought to be part of even the most basic Peace Officer certifcation courses. Lectures and textbooks are one thing, but there's nothing quite like having it hammered home in this way.

[This message has been edited by LAK (edited 09-10-2001).]
You will note that I used the word "Constable." He was not referred to as a peace officer. This is one way the town got around a bunch of training and circumvented the intent of “TCLEOSE.” We also have a “TCLEOSE” kind of law here in California but people are “grand fathered” and depending on their primary function can have less than full academy training; such as I pointed out with 832 PC "Arrest and Firearms."

I note that you suggest that this film be used as a training tool. This is how I know the circumstances of the case. I used it and others like it to teach at the regional academy here.

Yes LAK, people have a basic responsibility to themselves to be careful but as in any job one can become complacent. Since you do not appear to be in law enforcement you may not understand how one can become comfortable with danger and not keep up a constant guard. Things that would frighten the average person can and do become routine after a time.

It is almost impossible to have the senses and reactions of a cat for an entire 8 to 12 hour shift. I don’t care what Jeff Cooper and others say about this subject. None of them pound a beat and understand how impossible it is to stay pumped constantly. Even in Nam I couldn’t keep my spider senses up constantly. After taking mortar and rocket rounds I still wanted to sleep after things settled down.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,304 Posts
Patrickl,

I can't speak for all town Constables, but on a County level, Constables are definately classed as Peace Officers in Texas.

I specialized exclusively in law enforcement in the military for almost 5 years, and have worked in the private security sector for 15 years and work with local police on a daily basis. I am very familiar with the problems of keeping up one's guard. Of course it is impossible to keep it up, day in, and day out over even an 8 hour shift; let alone 12, 14 or 16 hours. And I am sure "Jeff" Cooper would agree. But there are various circumstances where you'd better have it switched on if you you value your life, and this particular case is a very good example.

It was also as part of a training curriculum that I am also familiar with the film. But even back in the late 70's, I had received some very intensive instruction along the same theme. And it was reinforced along the way.

It is odd that over the last decade or two the academic and formal training standards for peace officers have been raised considerably; and yet there seems to be very little improvement in some basic key areas of safety. I live and work in one of the 10 largest cities in America, and almost daily observe officers making traffic stops, responding to incidents, and still making elementary mistakes. Not surprisingly the corresponding death rates do not equate to a reduction with the increased institutional requirements.

I value my life. It seems to me that many apparently do not, and take too much for granted.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
853 Posts
Originally posted by LAK:

It is odd that over the last decade or two the academic and formal training standards for peace officers have been raised considerably; and yet there seems to be very little improvement in some basic key areas of safety. I live and work in one of the 10 largest cities in America, and almost daily observe officers making traffic stops, responding to incidents, and still making elementary mistakes. Not surprisingly the corresponding death rates do not equate to a reduction with the increased institutional requirements.

I value my life. It seems to me that many apparently do not, and take too much for granted.

Actually the death rates do equate to a reduction. The raw numbers of deaths across the nation have stayed roughly the same over the years even though the population has increased. If the numbers had kept pace with the population there would have been a 10-fold increase in the actual numbers over the last 40 years.

Next you need to be careful in your personal analysis of what you believe to be an "elementary mistake." Within law enforcement we all have our opinions as to what is the best way to handle any given situation. As an example, here in California CHP preaches the passenger side approach. They believe that it better protects their officers from traffic. I despise this approach because I “believe” it sacrifices significant tactical advantage for the officer and besides if the officer positioned their cruiser correctly in the first place there wouldn't be a problem with traffic. Needless to say some vehemently disagree with me. I could go on for a decade or more regarding differences of opinion in tactical applications but I guess you see my point.

There is also a fine line between safety, freedom, and just doing your job. Safety dictates that everyone, regardless of the offense, is taken out of a car at gunpoint, proned out, and handcuffed. I guess you can envision a problem with this. I have some young officers, who insist on cuffing people who are pulled over for investigation of criminal activity. This is swell from an officer safety standpoint but it sure as hell ends any ability for non-custodial questioning. It’s my experience, even if Miranda was not around, that there is a nerve that runs from the wrist to the mouth. Handcuffs on the wrist stimulates this nerve, which shuts down the mouth and no information is obtained.

I routinely do things that drive some of my younger officers insane because it is their opinion that it is not safe. Well, no one said this job was safe and although they hate what I do, they will admit that I make more arrests and get much more information, with fewer complaints, than they do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
853 Posts
Originally posted by cwm1150:
If anyone is interested his name was Constable Darrel Lundsford, may he rest in piece.
His name still is Constable Darrel Lundsford. Only that temple of clay is dead. He now stands guardian as all the angels do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,304 Posts
Patrickl,

I do not claim to have statistical informtion on a national level. But locally it is rising. Perhaps on a national level it is in line with the overall drops in the numbers of certain crimes.

I am familiar with the various disagreements over certain procedures, and the training is often the result of whose opinion influenced the manuals and/or training curriculum the most.

But having said that, allowing one or more subjects to stroll around behind you while conducting a search is definately an elementary mistake. Even with a second officer present it might be considered a mere "bad idea" to some.

[This message has been edited by LAK (edited 09-11-2001).]
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top