View Single Post
Old October 7, 2011, 10:02 PM   #17
Senior Member
Join Date: March 28, 2005
Posts: 723
sh^& happens

This was quite a article. The off duty officer reacted in one of the most positive, aggressive, solve the problem life and death scenarios I’ve ever heard about.

Some of the comments about why didn’t he have his own weapon are important.

Some departments in my state, good old California, require their officers to carry a weapon while off duty. One department of over 5,000 uniformed members, back when the duty weapon was a 4 in. .38 revolver, were required to carry that weapon. Another department of equal or bigger size had a policy that only permitted an off duty officer to carry a concealed weapon. That weapon could literally be anything that fired a projectile. The off duty officer was not required to carry a weapon.

Now you may say, “why wouldn’t he carry if he legally could”?

I don’t have an answer. I was not required to carry off duty. Sometimes I did, sometimes I didn’t. However, there was always a concealable weapon someplace nearby. I did start carrying regularly after I walked into an armed robbery unarmed while off duty. The Colt Cobra in the glove box of my 1967 Firebird in the supermarket parking lot wasn’t of much use. I thought of that when I was laying on the floor of isle 3 with the rest of the customers.
Air goes in and out. Blood goes 'round and 'round.
Any variation on this is a very bad thing.
개인 정보를 보호하십시요
WIN71 is offline  
Page generated in 0.03384 seconds with 7 queries