Is it therefore inappropriate that having previously pointed out questionable training tactics without response, to bring it to the attention of members that may be harmed by deploying such questionable tactics, or should I have continued to try to reach out to the instructor as before?
Nevertheless, I welcome your open criticism, and I even suspect that there are members that might agree with you. It’s all good, as we are here to learn and share.
But, I will still staunchly disagree with that particular instructor’s offering. Although it is not as questionable as the last one where he demonstrated moving while firing a handgun held sideways, whereby shell casings could be ejected into the face and the firearm is much more difficult to return to target. I think you would agree that is found nowhere in law enforcement methodology.
Anyway, your point is taken and hopefully that instructor who I believe was a Deputy will accept my criticism and feel free to discuss or even debate. That’s what Trainers do.
@Steven288 It’s not my aim to be critical of your post, sir. If it were me that offered information that would endanger people lives or make them less safe; I would appreciate a personal address rather than a public scourging. Permit me the opportunity to correct my error as a professional rather than to paint me as a ne’er-do-well.
I 'm just saying, perhaps the intended person would have been able to appreciate being held accountable in this regard. Enough with the public beating up on one another. That’s all I’m saying.
I understand. It is evident by this conversation that you would have indeed responded to me, but he did not before.
I’m not sure that “ne’er do well” is a description I would use. “Public scourging” certainly doesn’t as cops can be much more harsh with one another than I have been.
I admire your loyalty to your “team mate”. It is the most positive aspect of this conversation.
I’m older so that may have something to do with my perspective. If I am pulled over and caring concealed, my goal as a citizen is to do what I can to ensure the situation does not escalate.
If it’s dark dome lights going on, both hands will be on the wheel where the officer arrives the window will be down. The engine will be off. I will politely notify the officer I have a firearm on my person and ask how you wish is to proceed. From there it’s follow instructions.
Goal is in my opinion, no one gets hurt or harassed. Remember officers can make mistakes but if you were pulled over more than likely it was for a good reason. If you are calm and behaving in a rational manner things will turn out better for everyone.
NO! The police need to understand that there are more than 20 million people legally carrying. Just because a person is armed doesn’t make him/her a criminal. Just because a person is carrying doesn’t mean the officer has lost control and has to remove a person and disarm that person. AND THEN running the firearm to see if it was stolen is very thin ice for a 2nd and 4th amendment violation.
For example, here in Arkansas we must inform any LEO we are armed when asked to identify ourselves (need not be asking for drivers license).
If asked by the officer to remove your gun, consider something like,
“Officer, I do not wish to handle my firearm in your presence. I don’t want a third party thinking I am drawing on you. I will fully cooperate with allowing you to remove it and handle it as you need.”
I have not tested this approach, but have given it some thought. After a minor traffic accident in Tennessee I once had a rookie in training status ask me to unholster, unload, and place the gun in my glove box. His Training Officer did not correct him, so I complied accordingly.
Thank you ShooterRick. I like and agreed with your point about turning on the dome (interior) light.
My concern is on some cars, that dome switch might be positioned “lower”, or a foot or more distance away from the driver, and I wouldn’t want the officer to think I was reaching for something dangerous.
If I could turn it on subtly, without causing attention, I would. To me, It just seems like a simple and respectful thing to do. It conveys cooperativeness, transparency.
I just don’t trust that all officers are automatically going to turn their bright headlights and or flashlights on me. I’ve seen officers pull over cars, but only observed them “sometimes” having to go full lights action.
I think I mostly agree with the group here, where in the training video, I personally would not voluntarily reach for the firearm to hand it over, but wait for instructions in case the officer prefers a safer management. A compelling posted subject matter indeed friends. In the field of safety training, I think they call that a great catch, having a questioning attitude when something does not feel right.
Dome light at night is always a good idea. I have really dark tint on my windows, so I roll the front down as to not get a ticket for it, but I also roll the back down about halfway so the officer can see I’m not hiding something/someone. If I am carrying, I’ll wait until the officer arrives, notify him that I am carrying, tell him where my license and insurance is, and ask how he would like to proceed. A little courtesy goes a long way in making stops easier.
A friend of mine who is a CCW permit holder in my rural Colorado county encountered a sheriff’s deputy in a routine traffic stop. She was told that she needed to place her firearm on the dash whenever stopped.
That’s got to be the stupidist directive and shows a deputy who ought to be fired. But it also illustrates a common belief among LE that gun owners are dangerous.
I’m in the great outdoors a lot, putting in much mileage in a small vehicle with lots of outdoor gear in the back seats. The way my vehicle is shaped, and my having tinted windows to reduce hot sunshine, it’s kinda dark in my car.
Like the highlight of our behavior as motorists. Yes, I concur, simple small things can yield equal reciprocity of respect from an officer IMHO. I actually worry about them accidentally getting hit by a car, I cringe every time I see them working the roads while cars drive by so fast. Bless them.
Maybe a test of dexterity and competence? IMHO not a good test.
Can probably tell a lot about someone by the way they comply with those specific instructions on a traffic stop.
I don’t have a duty to announce, but I have enough respect and courtesy to issue my CCW with my drivers license, registration and proof of insurance, place my hands on steering wheel, wait for orders. Comply, go home with no holes!
I’m sure today, every traffic stop is going to be a felony stop! Can’t blame them.
I’ve recently had a convo with a local PD and a State Trooper about this very thing. We had met at a local coffee shop just to catch up, commiserate, BS and talk sh!t as its been a while. With the rise in attacks against LEO there is an emerging trend among Troopers to do a “Non Contact Warning”.
So somebody is blasting down the highway well above the posted and well above the threshold for over the limit (say 10 - 15 mph + over posted, if you’re not doing 70mph on I-64 you’re impeding traffic). The trooper stated that he would run them down with lights on and if they slowed down and started to pull over he would turn off the lights pull up next to them give the “wagging, don’t do that finger” and just hang a bit off to the side and behind for a while and let them go. Obviously if they ran it was full on go get um felony stop.
The PD LEO more to the point here stated the he would run Want’s and Warrant’s on the plate which also shows CCW permits. He would ask if the driver was the owner. If yes, then he would ask if there were firearms or drugs in the car. This is an “Are you going to lie to me check.” If the answer was "yes’ and “no” he would go down the road of “Where is it?” Given the variety of answers possible he would tell the person to keep their hands on the wheel. He reasoned that I already know if the license is valid, if the registration is valid and all that other stuff as well as photo ID of the driver and CCW status. He reasoned that if there was a buckled in driver with a gun on their hip that that was the best place for it to be. If they were un-bluckled He would request they slowly buckle up (and cite them for it plus whatever he stopped them for).
The conversion then turned to “agitated” or “confrontative” drivers and passengers. The universal response was de-escalate and call for back up. Both mentioned they had the portable retractable nail road blocks but they were hard to get in place. Both considered throwing them down at the initial stop and would have to think about it.
For the purposes of this conversion both agreed that leaving the person in the car buckled up was the safest method. Trying to take a pistol off was the most dangerous because it required the individual to handle the firearm. The obvious solution was to handcuff the person, remove the firearm and then proceed if there was a reason to do so. That said, once they are out of the car they have freedom of movement. The Trooper opined that handcuffing them to the steering wheel and making them back out of the car would work but there were questions about unlawful restraint.
Pump the brakes, you must have misunderstood what I meant. If there is reason to get someone out of the car, it is better to have them leave the gun in their holster than to have the possibility of an accidental discharge. I live in rural area of the state, and it is more common that almost everybody carries. I haven’t been in law enforcement for many years and I don’t recall a single time I or anyone else in the department took action against anyone who just had a gun in the car.
We don’t have the duty to inform in Nv but if a cop asks me if I have a weapon I say yes 3 o’clock inside the waist band. They seem to appreciate that and it gives them the opportunity to disarm me if they want the practice.
