Atlanta Shooting

[Bailey Guns]

Greg Ellifritz just posted an excellent analysis of this shitshow. https://www.activeresponsetraining.n...rooks-shooting

Few minor disagreements but overall a very good read.

[JohnnyDrama]

Greg Ellifritz just posted an excellent analysis of this shitshow. https://www.activeresponsetraining.n...rooks-shooting

He brings up some good points. I feel sorry for the officers involved.

Somewhere in his article I started thinking about police presence, crime, Atlanta, and Kennesaw.

[TheGrey]

thanks but it's her sarcasm. She neither has nor exhibits symptoms. But she did pass it on to her 3 cousins, in various LE agencies to "tell a friend"

Got it!
I've been crazy busy, so only saw the remark and not the context for your daughter.

[TheGrey]

Is there a forum woodshed?

Asking for a friend.

I know, right?

[CS1983]

I wonder, though, if "more training", "more screening" and "higher pay to attract quality candidates" might not end up working AGAINST the goal of removing "problematic" officers?

After all, the more training and screening, and the higher the pay, the more it "costs" the department to recruit and train an officer. And so when an officer is removed or fired, that money is flushed down the toilet and the expense of recruiting, screening and training an officer to take his place is that much higher.

Which could make it (a) easier to justify keeping an officer who has "issues" and (b) makes it more attractive to recruit an "already qualified" officer from another department - even though the circumstances under which that officer left that department might not have been favorable.

Paragraph = number

1. Nope. Not if they accept the risk of cost. Tell the bean counters to pound sand up their CPA assholes. Prescreening is the motivating factor. You want quality? You pay. Same as private sector. Boo-hoo. The boards are playable. The CVSA is trickable. Let?s be real. Anyone with half a brain knows what the board wants. Anyone who is a psycho/sociopath can game the poly/CVSA. Remember: it?s not a lie if you believe it. The academy should be the same as a trade school with a SLRP. Get some skin in the game before they have blood in it.
2. No shit? Such is the cost of doing business. Pass it on to the recruit with remuneration on the offside. Or otherwise accept it. That?s what business does.
3. Are they broken or irredeemable? Such is life. Nationalized POST certified officers and removal of certification upon firing for cause. What you mean to say is that the screening process would have to be improved and shifted to a continual one. Woe is me or somethin?.
Stop counting beans. Start counting lives.

Police deserve better. 51k during academy? 4 years to reach 80k? While risking their life every day and expected to maintain a sane headspace? Hell nah. Who does that? No one can support a family on that. Not now. Not in COS or DEN. Maybe in podunk Arkansas, but wedding/family reunion photos are cheap there.

[Irving]

It's not necessarily a bean counter thing. It's a people don't respond how economists think they will thing. Maybe.
I'm thinking specifically about the part where if the force spends more to hire and train recruits, they may be more remiss to get rid of them. That is a real irrationality that exists. People irrationally hold onto to what they perceive as sunk costs all the time.

[FoxtArt]

On the other hand, if liability is more direct, much like private enterprises, they'll also be more inclined to instantly ditch liabilities. No matter how irreplaceable we may think we are, if you CCW at work and someone robs the place, you defend yourself, you're shit-canned the next day. Companies don't have immunities and the bean-counting risk of liability far exceeds anything they could throw at replacing an individual.

ETA: (That said, I still think some level of QI should probably still exist, just at a cross-able threshold). If we do threaten their budget instead of state insurance, it would certainly do wonders to resolve the issue of unnecessary retention.

[VDW]

Without Qualified Immunity, police officers across the country will be just like the average joe citizen (and therefore completely unnecessary), who is repeatedly told by any good self defense instructor that unless their life is in serious jeopardy, just be a good witness. I realize that is precisely what many pushing “police reform” really want.

Qualified Immunity does not indemnify police from criminal acts (either civilly or criminally). It gives them some protection from personal civil liability while acting under the color of law only. It also doesn’t mean citizen’s can’t sue. It merely means the department or government entity takes on the financial liability for their actions and civil defense.

[Bailey Guns]

Exactly. Qualified immunity is just the whipping boy for those whose real agenda is to neuter the police. If you think you can't get qualified applicants now, wait'll you take QI away.

[TheGrey]

Exactly. Qualified immunity is just the whipping boy for those whose real agenda is to neuter the police. If you think you can't get qualified applicants now, wait'll you take QI away.

Seeing this in writing makes my gut clench.