DEI hire or lack of training?
- Thread starter SaltyMonkey
- Start date
While there is something to relaxed hiring standards for certain folks that’s not all the issue.
Plenty of all types of officers have had their body camera record utter abortions of Officer involved shootings, use of force actions and pure indecisiveness in critical situations.
And as a semi retire person that’s been involved in LE training it’s the watered down training that administration doesn’t want to pay for. They take their chances because burying and paying out of court settlements must be cheaper than training!
Until LE gets away from only flat range training and does Cognative decision making skills, simunition trainjng and don’t scare LEOs from going hands in if needed your going to have train wrecks of things getting escalated to shootings instead of just a physical subdued suspect and those shootings will have a mag dump with a suspect hit maybe once in the ankle!
Plenty of all types of officers have had their body camera record utter abortions of Officer involved shootings, use of force actions and pure indecisiveness in critical situations.
And as a semi retire person that’s been involved in LE training it’s the watered down training that administration doesn’t want to pay for. They take their chances because burying and paying out of court settlements must be cheaper than training!
Until LE gets away from only flat range training and does Cognative decision making skills, simunition trainjng and don’t scare LEOs from going hands in if needed your going to have train wrecks of things getting escalated to shootings instead of just a physical subdued suspect and those shootings will have a mag dump with a suspect hit maybe once in the ankle!
HayesGreener
Ronin
I was a LE firearms trainer since the 1970's. There is a wide range of attitudes and abilities in LEO's about firearms. Many struggle just to qualify year after year and annual qualifications are an ordeal. Some, for cultural reasons or lack of ability or emotional reasons are terrified or repulsed by the gun and would not carry one if not required. Most of those officers have other abilities that are useful, but you will never see them on SWAT. Fortunately, the gun is rarely employed and most officers will never fire their gun on the street in their careers. We can improve them with time and effort but there is a limit to how much manpower you can invest. Some are hopeless. Those who cannot meet minimum qualifications will be eliminated but some will remain at that threshold throughout their careers as long as they can meet the minimum qualifications.
Obviously, additional instruction is needed. I personally despise the hiring of unqualified people (and the term DEI), but I blame this poor performance on the instruction. Reminds me of school teachers who send kids to the next grade just so they won’t have them the next year. I completely understand, but we as a society need to do better.
HayesGreener
Ronin
My point is, there are some folks who just can't master the gun. Abilities to perform physical skills vary. Recruitment, selection, training, and discipline determine the quality of police service. Question is, do we eliminate candidates in the selection process? Do we eliminate them in training? Or do we keep the ones who barely squeek by because they have other useful qualities? The state standards are a pretty low bar to meet in most states. Personnel policies and legal considerations come into play as well. I have recommended termination, and have fired officers who could not qualify, but it is an agonized decision if they are otherwise good people. Most departments have a year probationary period following the academy, which means you have about 17 months to evaluate them.