Detective without any firearms

ShootingNut · April 13, 2007, 07:39 AM

Wife ran into a friend of ours yesterday who is a local detective. She told him that I have started shooting handguns. That led to him telling her, that he leaves his (3) guns in his locker, and never keeps a gun in his house.
For someone in his profession, doesn't that seem a bit unusual? I know other
LEO's, who run with a leg holster when off duty!

newerguy · April 13, 2007, 07:56 AM

I know one police officer who does the same thing. I think he's got a child at home that he's worried about. He keeps his duty gun locked up at work (I don't believe it's just in his locker, police stations generally have special lockers for handguns).

I've known a few others who don't carry off duty. A lot of departments require you to carry an approved handgun and sometimes a reload either at all times, or while in your geographic area of employment. I know a department that requires guys to carry handcuffs in their area of employment. I don't know why, because they aren't supposed to cuff someone without backup (a very good rule).

Now, like I said, I know guys (two of them long time friends) who don't carry off duty because they don't see the point (and like I said, the one leaves his at work). There might be a tiny chance that they would be a witness to a crime and need to intervene, but off-duty it's generally a good rule to call 911, and be a good witness (no uniform, no vest, no radio, etc). But there's also the "rubber-gun" guys who aren't allowed a firearm.

ShootingNut · April 13, 2007, 08:06 AM

newergy,
No question it comes down to a personal choice of any LEO, weighing all family considerations. Could be his wife's wishes, or a son at home who has had some problems growing up.
If I were in that line of work, I'd be concerned some hard a$$ would try and get even, for putting him away.
Another friend a deputy who carried leg holsters off duty, had transported
BG's to our county from all over the country. His concern was the revenge factor.
Oh well, everybody is made different!
Regards,

newerguy · April 13, 2007, 08:34 AM

You have a point about bad guys getting even. There is also an expectation that police officers will intervene to stop crimes, and that expectation is hard to leave at work.

Just so you know, it's not always personal choice. Like I said, some department require their officers to carry a hundgun off-duty.

Groundhog · April 13, 2007, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Shootingnut said:

But there's also the "rubber-gun" guys who aren't allowed a firearm.

Could you explain this? I'm rather clueless as to what this means.

newerguy · April 13, 2007, 10:35 AM

Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that this is the case with the person the OP is talking about.

If you have a cop who is fit to be hired, is in fact hired, and at some later point becomes unfit to carry a firearm in the opinion of his boss (like an emotional or psychological problem or they are being investigated for a disipline or health related matter), depending on the laws governining public employment, union contracts, and the presumed cause of the officer's condition, a department may decide that they will keep the officer employed (working inside desk-type jobs) but not allow them to carry or own a firearm (that could be tempoarary or long term). They don't actually get rubber guns. I think there was a movie called "Rubber Gun Squad", but I don't know whether the phrase or the movie came first.

Doug.38PR · April 13, 2007, 11:16 AM

I think a Houston Policeman told me once that their officers are required to be armed at all times on or off duty (I think)

He was saying this, if I remember right, when a friend of mine and I were telling him about another officer the three of us knew of who often left his gun and belt holster in the car (said he wished he didn't even have to have a gun, said he could probably do more with his mouth than he could with a gun)

Doug.38PR · April 13, 2007, 11:23 AM

Quote:

(like an emotional or psychological problem or they are being investigated for a disipline or health related matter), depending on the laws governining public employment, union contracts, and the presumed cause of the officer's condition, a department may decide that they will keep the officer employed (working inside desk-type jobs) but not allow them to carry or own a firearm (that could be tempoarary or long term). They don't actually get rubber guns. I think there was a movie called "Rubber Gun Squad", but I don't know whether the phrase or the movie came first.

I remember Clint Eastwood as Calahan said that a biker cop friend of his was "ready for the rubber gun squad" because he knew him to have gone off the deep end and even tried to kill himself.

I remember a movie where Michael J. Fox is an actor who hangs out with a real police detective to learn how police do things. He is posing as a cop with the permission of the police department, but they give him a rubber gun. "DON'T MAKE ME USE THIS!" he shouts to some thugs as he sounds off a few squeaks from the rubber gun

Of course since they said it in the movies, it must be true right?

WeedWacker · April 13, 2007, 12:54 PM

Well if Clint Eastwood said it...

BikerRN · April 13, 2007, 01:48 PM

"The average Cop would rather have a nice Parker Pen than a gun."

I think it was Frank Magee, the former "Training Guru" for the NYPD that said that, or words to that effect.

The gun is seen by most as a tool, one that is infrequently used by most. If he, the Detective, has children in the home he may be doing that instead of using or buying a safe. He also could be one of the many that see the gun as just a tool and doesn't think he will need it Off-Duty.

It's his choice, and it doesn't sound like he is much in to guns. He is atypical of the Cops I hang with. The ones I know have shot on an Olympic Team, taken training that they have paid for out of their pocket and eat, sleep and breath guns for fun and sport.

Personally, when I am Off-Duty I am armed, (Fed LEO).

Biker

ShootingNut · April 13, 2007, 03:52 PM

BikerRN
"Personally, when I am Off-Duty I am armed, (Fed LEO)."

Glad you are, if you happen on a bad situation, you LEO's can do something about it and not get sent to jail (usually).
The others on this forum, that get a ccw and get involved, better have a good Attorney!

matthew temkin · April 13, 2007, 05:55 PM

A lot of times officers who are in trouble..legal, counseling, alcohol rehab, etc.--are permitted to stay on the police force but to work unarmed and sometimes without a shield.
Naturally such duty is not on the street, but usually in the station house, light duty at the courthouse, working the detention pens, etc etc.
There was a time when the NYPD slang for this was the Bow & Arrow squad, but now it has changed to the rubber gun squad.
Naturally such expressions are not a sign of respect.
I have known quite a few LEO's who choose not to carry a firearm off duty and as far as I am concerned that is a valid option.

tshadow6 · April 13, 2007, 06:24 PM

That scenerio is not uncommon. There was a dectective in my agency that never carried his weapon either. Me, I got written up for carrying an unauthorized weapon (1911 .45) while searching for an escaped attempted murderer.

ShootingNut · April 13, 2007, 06:28 PM

bottom line is, as a LEO it is your (unless the department regulates) choice, to carry off duty (in your personal home) or not. As it should be!
The only point I started making in post number one, is my personal feeling about not having a firemarm ones home (IF I was a LEO).
It makes me sick, to read our local paper about citizens being threatened by the THUGS IN THEIR OWN HOMES, I'm sorry in my opinion we have the right to take them out in the act.

NukeCop · April 14, 2007, 01:48 PM

Quote:

There was a time when the NYPD slang for this was the Bow & Arrow squad, but now it has changed to the rubber gun squad.

Air Force cops call it SWAT. Stalls, Walls, And Toilets.

Def. not a sign of respect!

BikerRN · April 14, 2007, 02:07 PM

ShootingNut,

I may be a Fed, but my Agency WILL NOT back me in a shooting and I better have a good attorney too.

I say this after seeing some of what has happened to other people in my Agency. I actually carry under a CCW and use the LEOSA as my "Trump Card" if and when I need it.

It's all about "Agency Politics" and what the Attorney General, Director and Regional Office want to do, as well as the GS-15's and 14's. I'm low enough on the "Totem Pole" that I am expendable to them.

Biker

James K · April 14, 2007, 02:35 PM

In his book, "The Saturday Night Special", often called "the Bible of the gun control movement", Robert Sherrill says the police should be disarmed first. Not only does he (along with other gun control advocates) believe that if police were not armed, criminals would give up their guns, but he calls police "morally inferior", "corrupt", "queer about guns", "mentally odd...mentally unbalanced", "quick on the trigger", and too cowardly to involve themselves in dangerous situations.

Any LEOs who believe that gun bans will exempt them need to understand that the anti-gun gang hates the police and military almost as much as they hate "civilian" gun owners.

Jim

Groundhog · April 15, 2007, 03:39 PM

Jim, I need to read that book. I suspect I'll either be horrified or rolling on the floor. Maybe both. The way you put it, it almost sounds like some anti's have raised the little mechanical pieces of metal to some sort of evil god like status. Perhaps creating another kind of whirlygig would allow them to worship something more peaceful? I'd be willing to mass produce them and sell to all for $19.95. That makes as much sense as their arguments.

fastbolt · April 15, 2007, 04:25 PM

It's not as uncommon as some folks might think.

Some firearms enthusiasts seem to focus on the 'armed' aspect of being a peace officer, and think that all cops are eager to be armed and take advantage of being able to carry concealed weapons as often as possible.

Not really. Not even close. It can become tiresome rather quickly.

I mean, depending on which statistics you prefer to use, the numbers of cops who ever fire their weapons in the line of duty (other than for training & qualification, of course) is still in the low single digit percentage numbers. I think I read it was still something like 3% in some study somewhere. Dunno.

Patrol vehicles, radios, computers, handcuffs & other restraints, chemical agents and a host of other items of safety equipment are used with much greater frequency, after all.

My agency is like an apparently growing number of them that doesn't require its officers carry weapons when off-duty.

It does make some recommendations regarding circumstances in which it might be inappropriate to be armed off-duty, and requires that employees who desire to carry personally owned handguns as authorized off-duty weapons qualify with them and have them accepted for use by the firearms unit. Ditto for personally-owned weapons someone may desire to use as an authorized Secondary or Backup weapon.

I also know a lot of cops who don't personally own any firearms, and only carry their issued weapon during working hours.

I've noticed a slow increase in the numbers of some of our folks coming to me and asking about getting and carrying a smaller weapon (than that issued) off-duty. Many of them aren't what non-LE firearms owners might consider as "gun people", but it seems the state of affairs and current events are influencing more cops to carry weapons off-duty. Not a bad thing, presuming they follow existing policies and procedures and use common sense and sound judgment based upon experience and training ... which can be said of most other things in life, huh?

I've noticed the increasing availability of smaller, compact and lightweight handguns has seemingly helped this trend, too ... at least among the LE folks with whom I come into contact. It's certainly helped in my case, since I have a number of compact & subcompact pistols, and several 5-shot revolvers of various models and weights, which have made it much easier for me to be armed off-duty, and in more situations.

Sometimes it just can't be helped, though.

I remember taking my kids to one of those large water theme parks one time. My wife wasn't able to go, but she wanted me to take the kids. Naturally, that meant I was going to be in the water all day, swimming and bing shot out slides and assorted aquatic adventures.

Naturally, the way things always happen, at one point I heard my official title and name being called out by a fellow. Turns out to be someone I met in the line of duty, and not exactly a willing participant in the association, either. Just wanted to tell me he remembered me and I had been instrumental in helping him make a change in his life. You just never know where and when you're going to meet someone, and sometimes the circumstances just won't lend themselves to being armed ... not to mention the circumstances might be such that it just might not be appropriate to fire one even it you had one.

Safe storage and keeping firearms away from unauthorized persons is an important concern, especially for cops who are parents. It wasn't until our youngsters became capable of self-movement that my wife thought that investing in a gun safe was a reasonable expense.

Dewhitewolf · April 15, 2007, 05:51 PM

I took a college course once where the instructor was a police chief. He said he almost never carried while off duty. For one thing, he never carried to class, because he said it's too much of a distraction; students just stare at his gun. He also said that even if he was in a convenience store and it was being robbed, he's more valuable as a witness than as a police officer. He can get a visual description with many details, and without endangering himself or others. Cops who carry might feel like being a hero and taking on a would be robber single handedly, and from there it turns into a crap shoot as to who will come out on top.

April 13, 2007, 07:39 AM	#1
ShootingNut Senior Member Join Date: December 27, 2006 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 1,475	Detective without any firearms Wife ran into a friend of ours yesterday who is a local detective. She told him that I have started shooting handguns. That led to him telling her, that he leaves his (3) guns in his locker, and never keeps a gun in his house. For someone in his profession, doesn't that seem a bit unusual? I know other LEO's, who run with a leg holster when off duty!

April 13, 2007, 12:54 PM	#9
WeedWacker Senior Member Join Date: December 13, 2006 Location: Body: Clarkston, Washington. Soul: LaCrosse, Wisconsin Posts: 1,591	Well if Clint Eastwood said it... __________________ - Jon Disequilibrium facilitates accommodation. 9mm vs .45 ACP? The answer is .429

April 13, 2007, 06:24 PM	#13
tshadow6 Senior Member Join Date: June 26, 2005 Posts: 619	police not carrying That scenerio is not uncommon. There was a dectective in my agency that never carried his weapon either. Me, I got written up for carrying an unauthorized weapon (1911 .45) while searching for an escaped attempted murderer.

April 13, 2007, 06:28 PM	#14
ShootingNut Senior Member Join Date: December 27, 2006 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 1,475	This has been interesting.. bottom line is, as a LEO it is your (unless the department regulates) choice, to carry off duty (in your personal home) or not. As it should be! The only point I started making in post number one, is my personal feeling about not having a firemarm ones home (IF I was a LEO). It makes me sick, to read our local paper about citizens being threatened by the THUGS IN THEIR OWN HOMES, I'm sorry in my opinion we have the right to take them out in the act.

April 15, 2007, 03:39 PM	#18
Groundhog Senior Member Join Date: February 5, 2007 Location: San Antonio, Texas Posts: 406	Jim, I need to read that book. I suspect I'll either be horrified or rolling on the floor. Maybe both. The way you put it, it almost sounds like some anti's have raised the little mechanical pieces of metal to some sort of evil god like status. Perhaps creating another kind of whirlygig would allow them to worship something more peaceful? I'd be willing to mass produce them and sell to all for $19.95. That makes as much sense as their arguments. __________________ Greg Miller "Remember, a valid point never overrules a family tradition." - Me

April 13, 2007, 07:56 AM	#2
newerguy Senior Member Join Date: June 5, 2005 Posts: 218	I know one police officer who does the same thing. I think he's got a child at home that he's worried about. He keeps his duty gun locked up at work (I don't believe it's just in his locker, police stations generally have special lockers for handguns). I've known a few others who don't carry off duty. A lot of departments require you to carry an approved handgun and sometimes a reload either at all times, or while in your geographic area of employment. I know a department that requires guys to carry handcuffs in their area of employment. I don't know why, because they aren't supposed to cuff someone without backup (a very good rule). Now, like I said, I know guys (two of them long time friends) who don't carry off duty because they don't see the point (and like I said, the one leaves his at work). There might be a tiny chance that they would be a witness to a crime and need to intervene, but off-duty it's generally a good rule to call 911, and be a good witness (no uniform, no vest, no radio, etc). But there's also the "rubber-gun" guys who aren't allowed a firearm.

April 13, 2007, 08:06 AM	#3
ShootingNut Senior Member Join Date: December 27, 2006 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 1,475	newergy, No question it comes down to a personal choice of any LEO, weighing all family considerations. Could be his wife's wishes, or a son at home who has had some problems growing up. If I were in that line of work, I'd be concerned some hard a$$ would try and get even, for putting him away. Another friend a deputy who carried leg holsters off duty, had transported BG's to our county from all over the country. His concern was the revenge factor. Oh well, everybody is made different! Regards,

April 13, 2007, 08:34 AM	#4
newerguy Senior Member Join Date: June 5, 2005 Posts: 218	You have a point about bad guys getting even. There is also an expectation that police officers will intervene to stop crimes, and that expectation is hard to leave at work. Just so you know, it's not always personal choice. Like I said, some department require their officers to carry a hundgun off-duty.

April 13, 2007, 10:35 AM	#6
newerguy Senior Member Join Date: June 5, 2005 Posts: 218	Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that this is the case with the person the OP is talking about. If you have a cop who is fit to be hired, is in fact hired, and at some later point becomes unfit to carry a firearm in the opinion of his boss (like an emotional or psychological problem or they are being investigated for a disipline or health related matter), depending on the laws governining public employment, union contracts, and the presumed cause of the officer's condition, a department may decide that they will keep the officer employed (working inside desk-type jobs) but not allow them to carry or own a firearm (that could be tempoarary or long term). They don't actually get rubber guns. I think there was a movie called "Rubber Gun Squad", but I don't know whether the phrase or the movie came first.

April 13, 2007, 11:16 AM	#7
Doug.38PR Junior member Join Date: January 18, 2005 Posts: 3,298	I think a Houston Policeman told me once that their officers are required to be armed at all times on or off duty (I think) He was saying this, if I remember right, when a friend of mine and I were telling him about another officer the three of us knew of who often left his gun and belt holster in the car (said he wished he didn't even have to have a gun, said he could probably do more with his mouth than he could with a gun)

April 13, 2007, 01:48 PM	#10
BikerRN Senior Member Join Date: February 11, 2007 Location: "State of Discombobulation" Posts: 1,333	"The average Cop would rather have a nice Parker Pen than a gun." I think it was Frank Magee, the former "Training Guru" for the NYPD that said that, or words to that effect. The gun is seen by most as a tool, one that is infrequently used by most. If he, the Detective, has children in the home he may be doing that instead of using or buying a safe. He also could be one of the many that see the gun as just a tool and doesn't think he will need it Off-Duty. It's his choice, and it doesn't sound like he is much in to guns. He is atypical of the Cops I hang with. The ones I know have shot on an Olympic Team, taken training that they have paid for out of their pocket and eat, sleep and breath guns for fun and sport. Personally, when I am Off-Duty I am armed, (Fed LEO). Biker

April 13, 2007, 03:52 PM	#11
ShootingNut Senior Member Join Date: December 27, 2006 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 1,475	BikerRN "Personally, when I am Off-Duty I am armed, (Fed LEO)." Glad you are, if you happen on a bad situation, you LEO's can do something about it and not get sent to jail (usually). The others on this forum, that get a ccw and get involved, better have a good Attorney!

April 13, 2007, 05:55 PM	#12
matthew temkin Junior member Join Date: June 7, 2002 Location: NYC Posts: 363	A lot of times officers who are in trouble..legal, counseling, alcohol rehab, etc.--are permitted to stay on the police force but to work unarmed and sometimes without a shield. Naturally such duty is not on the street, but usually in the station house, light duty at the courthouse, working the detention pens, etc etc. There was a time when the NYPD slang for this was the Bow & Arrow squad, but now it has changed to the rubber gun squad. Naturally such expressions are not a sign of respect. I have known quite a few LEO's who choose not to carry a firearm off duty and as far as I am concerned that is a valid option.

April 14, 2007, 02:07 PM	#16
BikerRN Senior Member Join Date: February 11, 2007 Location: "State of Discombobulation" Posts: 1,333	ShootingNut, I may be a Fed, but my Agency WILL NOT back me in a shooting and I better have a good attorney too. I say this after seeing some of what has happened to other people in my Agency. I actually carry under a CCW and use the LEOSA as my "Trump Card" if and when I need it. It's all about "Agency Politics" and what the Attorney General, Director and Regional Office want to do, as well as the GS-15's and 14's. I'm low enough on the "Totem Pole" that I am expendable to them. Biker

April 14, 2007, 02:35 PM	#17
James K Member In Memoriam Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 24,383	In his book, "The Saturday Night Special", often called "the Bible of the gun control movement", Robert Sherrill says the police should be disarmed first. Not only does he (along with other gun control advocates) believe that if police were not armed, criminals would give up their guns, but he calls police "morally inferior", "corrupt", "queer about guns", "mentally odd...mentally unbalanced", "quick on the trigger", and too cowardly to involve themselves in dangerous situations. Any LEOs who believe that gun bans will exempt them need to understand that the anti-gun gang hates the police and military almost as much as they hate "civilian" gun owners. Jim

April 15, 2007, 04:25 PM	#19
fastbolt Senior Member Join Date: June 9, 2002 Location: northern CA for a little while longer Posts: 1,931	It's not as uncommon as some folks might think. Some firearms enthusiasts seem to focus on the 'armed' aspect of being a peace officer, and think that all cops are eager to be armed and take advantage of being able to carry concealed weapons as often as possible. Not really. Not even close. It can become tiresome rather quickly. I mean, depending on which statistics you prefer to use, the numbers of cops who ever fire their weapons in the line of duty (other than for training & qualification, of course) is still in the low single digit percentage numbers. I think I read it was still something like 3% in some study somewhere. Dunno. Patrol vehicles, radios, computers, handcuffs & other restraints, chemical agents and a host of other items of safety equipment are used with much greater frequency, after all. My agency is like an apparently growing number of them that doesn't require its officers carry weapons when off-duty. It does make some recommendations regarding circumstances in which it might be inappropriate to be armed off-duty, and requires that employees who desire to carry personally owned handguns as authorized off-duty weapons qualify with them and have them accepted for use by the firearms unit. Ditto for personally-owned weapons someone may desire to use as an authorized Secondary or Backup weapon. I also know a lot of cops who don't personally own any firearms, and only carry their issued weapon during working hours. I've noticed a slow increase in the numbers of some of our folks coming to me and asking about getting and carrying a smaller weapon (than that issued) off-duty. Many of them aren't what non-LE firearms owners might consider as "gun people", but it seems the state of affairs and current events are influencing more cops to carry weapons off-duty. Not a bad thing, presuming they follow existing policies and procedures and use common sense and sound judgment based upon experience and training ... which can be said of most other things in life, huh? I've noticed the increasing availability of smaller, compact and lightweight handguns has seemingly helped this trend, too ... at least among the LE folks with whom I come into contact. It's certainly helped in my case, since I have a number of compact & subcompact pistols, and several 5-shot revolvers of various models and weights, which have made it much easier for me to be armed off-duty, and in more situations. Sometimes it just can't be helped, though. I remember taking my kids to one of those large water theme parks one time. My wife wasn't able to go, but she wanted me to take the kids. Naturally, that meant I was going to be in the water all day, swimming and bing shot out slides and assorted aquatic adventures. Naturally, the way things always happen, at one point I heard my official title and name being called out by a fellow. Turns out to be someone I met in the line of duty, and not exactly a willing participant in the association, either. Just wanted to tell me he remembered me and I had been instrumental in helping him make a change in his life. You just never know where and when you're going to meet someone, and sometimes the circumstances just won't lend themselves to being armed ... not to mention the circumstances might be such that it just might not be appropriate to fire one even it you had one. Safe storage and keeping firearms away from unauthorized persons is an important concern, especially for cops who are parents. It wasn't until our youngsters became capable of self-movement that my wife thought that investing in a gun safe was a reasonable expense.

April 15, 2007, 05:51 PM	#20
Dewhitewolf Senior Member Join Date: March 4, 2007 Location: NJ, USA Posts: 229	I took a college course once where the instructor was a police chief. He said he almost never carried while off duty. For one thing, he never carried to class, because he said it's too much of a distraction; students just stare at his gun. He also said that even if he was in a convenience store and it was being robbed, he's more valuable as a witness than as a police officer. He can get a visual description with many details, and without endangering himself or others. Cops who carry might feel like being a hero and taking on a would be robber single handedly, and from there it turns into a crap shoot as to who will come out on top.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search