Month: March 2009

Real Community Policing

Posted by – March 24, 2009

I was having a discussion the other day with Mostly Genius regarding the controversial statements made by Brian Stratton, the Mayor of Schenectady, New York, and that led to a more general discussion of how to fix a lot of the problems regarding law enforcement in the US today. The solutions proposed by the Mayor are misguided, but in any case, they are intended only as temporary measures until they can terminate the problem officers and hire new ones. They would not make any fundamental changes to how they operate.

Other options might include outsourcing policing to private companies. Private contractors could easily fill the gaps or even replace the entire department. Some gated communities already have what amounts to a private police force, but this only works because the community is actually private property and their “police” are technically security guards. There are numerous reasons why privatizing law enforcement duties would not be a wildly popular option, one of which, as MG pointed out, is that there would be problems with the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

My proposal is hardly original or new but I think it could help address several problems simultaneously. I suggest rejuvenating the office of Sheriff and revive the idea of deputizing responsible, capable citizens under Posse Comitatus. This would be the ultimate form of “community policing”. It would encourage active participation in the community, not only for deterring regular street crime, but also in an emergency like an active shooter situation or in a civil defense (natural disaster, nuclear attack, etc.) context as well. The office of Sheriff is an ancient one that predates modern policing and has many advantages. In the United States, it is an elected office, which adds to its appeal as far as accountability to the community.

I envision it as something like a vetted, trained neighborhood watch program on steroids, supervised and trained by the local Sheriff’s Office. It could organized in a similar fashion to the military reserves:

  • an initial training program
  • a small number of full time cadre
  • a much larger number of part-time, on-call members
  • mandatory monthly duty and continuing education/refresher training
  • a comprehensive annual training seminar
  • the duty (and vested interest) to respond to emergencies

This program could work really well when you consider that in any given community, there are often retired or discharged people with law enforcement, firefighter/paramedic and/or military backgrounds that already have a lot of relevant training and experience. This could create a much larger pool of people to call on in the event that an officer is sick, injured, suspended, terminated, killed in the line of duty, etc. Some of the part timers may have relevant areas of expertise and could be a great help in training academies or seminars and so forth.

In the event of an unusual emergency that is beyond the capabilities of a small number of full time deputies (active shooter, escaped convict, search and rescue, AMBER Alert, etc) a large group of trained volunteers could be quickly mobilized to address the problem. When the problem is resolved, the volunteers go back to their normal lives. This is not only more economical and more responsive to specific problems, but it also builds a sense of camaraderie and reinforces bonds of community.

The overall goals of such a program would be to reduce the burden on law enforcement, make it more accountable and encourage the citizenry to take an active interest in the safety of their own communities instead of abrogating those responsibilities to some faceless agency.

Even Barack Obama recognizes the need for a different approach:

“We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded.”

While I am not sure it would be a “… just as strong, just as well funded” as the military, it could be a significant improvement over the current situation in several ways. I don’t believe that merely throwing money at a problem leads to successful solutions. This idea would not require a lot of money to implement, to the contrary, I think it would make maximum use of already existing resources.

There are indications that Americans would embrace a program like this. People are already doing citizen patrols.

Against his wife’s loud protestations, the young steamfitter joined a dozen other neighborhood men and set up the Rosewood night patrol.

Armed with nothing but flashlights and cellphones, the group followed suspicious cars and even set up an impromptu sting when a neighbor left town and forgot to close his garage door. They called in police to arrest the suspects after a brief chase.

High foreclosure rates, a spike in brazen break-ins, and slashed police budgets are causing turmoil in America’s transitioning urban communities, auguring what Atlanta anticrime activist Larry Ely calls an “urban war.”

Why not organize, train and deputize them? No doubt many people, who are quite comfortable with the idea of an almighty state and a dependent, helpless citizenry squealing for the federal government to “do something!”, will decry this idea as promoting “vigilante” justice. I am sure they will invoke the images of Billy the Kid, the Lincoln County Wars and the Lattimer Massacre. I would counter by pointing out that significant numbers of innocent people are already being killed by allegedly professional SWAT teams. Many people made dire predictions of rampant duels and blood running in the streets if concealed weapons permits became commonplace and that has proven to be completely inaccurate.

Obviously, there could be nepotism, corruption and incompetence in a program like this, but I don’t think that those problems would be any worse than in any currently existing situations, and actually, they would probably be less frequent. Widespread, active citizen involvement in the program makes it more likely that a whistleblower could draw attention to problems within the office. Also, I think that active involvement by local citizens makes it less likely that deputies will kick down the wrong door when serving a warrant, unlike what we see today with SWAT teams frequently raiding the wrong home (and often killing innocent people in the process). After all, many of them could be your friends and neighbors.

(HT: Walls of the City )

Use of Force

Posted by – March 20, 2009

Use of Force Spectrum

The use of force chart is useful for private citizens to understand how the police (and the courts) tend to view a particular tool or technique. I make a lot of references to the use of force and forgot I hadn’t posted this graphic. There are a few inconsistencies: the order of pepper spray, taser, and arrest control/pain compliance techniques tends to vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. An individual police departments use of force policy will dictate where these items actually fall on “their” version of the chart.

Stupid Self Defense Gadget: The Bottle Bezel

Posted by – March 14, 2009

bezel1This is replacement cap for your disposable water bottle. From the website:

Why not use it to defend yourself? The Bottle Bezel has a checkered, “tenderizer” top surface, with 6 serrated, trapezoid petals that surround it. It can be used 4 standard ways, regular grip, inverted grip, gouging mode, or as a weighted flail with accessory lanyard.

I believe that you can probably get some self-defense value out of a water bottle, but just making the cap bumpy or pointy isn’t going to be enough. I hadn’t really considered using my water bottle as an improvised weapon since it is usually only in hand when I am drinking out of it.



Weaponized bottle? My standard water bottle is stainless steel. I bought mine to carry liquids in volume so it is a bit bigger (40oz.) than most regular water bottles (32oz.) but it would hit like a bat and be in no danger of breaking. I suppose I could down size it to the 27oz. size and it would be a little more suited to gripping.


Weaponized cap? The standard cap doesn’t have anything to scratch the opponent or whatever the “Bottle Bezel” is supposed to do for you but I am sure getting hit with the business end of the cap full force would probably leave a mark. I think I am going to stick with actual weapons rather than trying to make every day items into weapons.

The 870 Police Shotgun

Posted by – March 3, 2009

I am not a fan of shotguns and I don’t think they are the ultimate home defense gun. Somebody asked in another venue about the difference between the 870 Express and the 870 police. Both guns are parts compatible but the 870 Police is marginally the better gun:

Parts:
Longer magazine spring to improve feed & function.
Heavier sear spring to generate a reliable 5-8 lbs. Trigger pull.
Heavier carrier dog spring for more reliable feeding.
Compressed metal trigger housing.
Machined ejectors and extractors.
No ISS (Integrated Safety System) key locking mechanism.

Quality control:
Higher quality control standard and inspection standard.
Built in a special build area of the factory.
All parts are inspected before entering the the build area.

Barrel:
Can except a magazine extension tube without barrel modification.
Barrel is locked down with a “ball-detent” in conjunction with the magazine cap.

Furniture & Finish:
High luster blueing or parkerization.
Recievers are “vibra-honed” prior to parkerization or blueing.
Shorter fore end (for compatibility with vehicle racks.)
SPEEDFEED stocks and fore ends.

As a defensive shooter what you would care about is the better parts and springs and the rest is mostly eye-wash. The police model is a little more expensive, but buying an Express and upgrading it is less likely to produce the gun you are looking for.