"In Iraq, I raided insurgents. In Virginia, the police raided me."

RallyPoint Shared Content — Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:18:44 -0400

From: The Washington Post

Alex Horton is a member of the Defense Council at the Truman National Security Project. He served as an infantryman in Iraq with the Army’s 3rd Stryker Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division.
I got home from the bar and fell into bed soon after Saturday night bled into Sunday morning. I didn’t wake up until three police officers barged into my apartment, barking their presence at my door. They sped down the hallway to my bedroom, their service pistols drawn and leveled at me.

It was just past 9 a.m., and I was still under the covers. The only visible target was my head.

In the shouting and commotion, I felt an instant familiarity. I’d been here before. This was a raid.

I had done this a few dozen times myself, 6,000 miles away from my Alexandria, Va., apartment. As an Army infantryman in Iraq, I’d always been on the trigger side of the weapon. Now that I was on the barrel side, I recalled basic training’s most important firearm rule: Aim only at something you intend to kill.

I had conducted the same kind of raid on suspected bombmakers and high-value insurgents. But the Fairfax County officers in my apartment were aiming their weapons at a target whose rap sheet consisted only of parking tickets and an overdue library book.

My situation was terrifying. Lying facedown in bed, I knew that any move I made could be viewed as a threat. Instinct told me to get up and protect myself. Training told me that if I did, these officers would shoot me dead.

In a panic, I asked the officers what was going on but got no immediate answer. Their tactics were similar to the ones I used to clear rooms during the height of guerilla warfare in Iraq. I could almost admire it — their fluid sweep from the bedroom doorway to the distant corner. They stayed clear of one another’s lines of fire in case they needed to empty their Sig Sauer .40-caliber pistols into me.

They were well-trained, their supervisor later told me. But I knew that means little when adrenaline governs an imminent-danger scenario, real or imagined. Triggers are pulled. Mistakes are made.

I spread my arms out to either side. An officer jumped onto my bed and locked handcuffs onto my wrists. The officers rolled me from side to side, searching my boxers for weapons, then yanked me up to sit on the edge of the bed.

At first, I was stunned. I searched my memory for any incident that would justify a police raid. Then it clicked.

Earlier in the week, the managers of my apartment complex moved me to a model unit while a crew repaired a leak in my dishwasher. But they hadn’t informed my temporary neighbors. So when one resident noticed the door slightly cracked open to what he presumed was an unoccupied apartment, he looked in, saw me sleeping and called the police to report a squatter.

Sitting on the edge of the bed dressed only in underwear, I laughed. The situation was ludicrous and embarrassing. My only mistake had been failing to make sure the apartment door was completely closed before I threw myself into bed the night before.

I told the officers to check my driver’s license, nodding toward my khaki pants on the floor. It showed my address at a unit in the same complex. As the fog of their chaotic entry lifted, the officers realized it had been an unfortunate error. They walked me into the living room and removed the cuffs, though two continued to stand over me as the third contacted management to confirm my story. Once they were satisfied, they left.

When I later visited the Fairfax County police station to gather details about what went wrong, I met the shift commander, Lt. Erik Rhoads. I asked why his officers hadn’t contacted management before they raided the apartment. Why did they classify the incident as a forced entry, when the information they had suggested something innocuous? Why not evaluate the situation before escalating it?

Rhoads defended the procedure, calling the officers’ actions “on point.” It’s not standard to conduct investigations beforehand because that delays the apprehension of suspects, he told me.

I noted that the officers could have sought information from the apartment complex’s security guard that would have resolved the matter without violence. But he played down the importance of such information: “It doesn’t matter whatsoever what was said or not said at the security booth.”

This is where Rhoads is wrong. We’ve seen this troubling approach to law enforcement nationwide, in militarized police responses to nonviolent protesters and in fatal police shootings of unarmed citizens. The culture that encourages police officers to engage their weapons before gathering information promotes the mind-set that nothing, including citizen safety, is more important than officers’ personal security. That approach has caused public trust in law enforcement to deteriorate.

It’s the same culture that characterized the early phases of the Iraq war, in which I served a 15-month tour in 2006 and 2007. Soldiers left their sprawling bases in armored vehicles, leveling buildings with missile strikes and shooting up entire blocks during gun battles with insurgents, only to return to their protected bases and do it all again hours later.

The short-sighted notion that we should always protect ourselves endangered us more in the long term. It was a flawed strategy that could often create more insurgents than it stopped and inspired some Iraqis to hate us rather than help us.

In one instance in Baghdad, a stray round landed in a compound that our unit was building. An overzealous officer decided that we were under attack and ordered machine guns and grenade launchers to shoot at distant rooftops. A row of buildings caught fire, and we left our compound on foot, seeking to capture any injured fighters by entering structures choked with flames.

Instead, we found a man frantically pulling his furniture out of his house. “Thank you for your security!” he yelled in perfect English. He pointed to the billowing smoke. “This is what you call security?”

We didn’t find any insurgents. There weren’t any. But it was easy to imagine that we forged some in that fire. Similarly, when U.S. police officers use excessive force to control nonviolent citizens or respond to minor incidents, they lose supporters and public trust.

That’s a problem, because law enforcement officers need the cooperation of the communities they patrol in order to do their jobs effectively. In the early stages of the war, the U.S. military overlooked that reality as well. Leaders defined success as increasing military hold on geographic terrain, while the human terrain was the real battle. For example, when our platoon entered Iraq’s volatile Diyala province in early 2007, children at a school plugged their ears just before an IED exploded beneath one of our vehicles. The kids knew what was coming, but they saw no reason to warn us. Instead, they watched us drive right into the ambush. One of our men died, and in the subsequent crossfire, several insurgents and children were killed. We saw Iraqis cheering and dancing at the blast crater as we left the area hours later.

With the U.S. effort in Iraq faltering, Gen. David Petraeus unveiled a new counterinsurgency strategy that year. He believed that showing more restraint during gunfights would help foster Iraqis’ trust in U.S. forces and that forming better relationships with civilians would improve our intelligence-gathering. We refined our warrior mentality — the one that directed us to protect ourselves above all else — with a community-building component.

My unit began to patrol on foot almost exclusively, which was exceptionally more dangerous than staying inside our armored vehicles. We relinquished much of our personal security by entering dimly lit homes in insurgent strongholds. We didn’t know if the hand we would shake at each door held a detonator to a suicide vest or a small glass of hot, sugary tea.

But as a result, we better understood our environment and earned the allegiance of some people in it. The benefits quickly became clear. One day during that bloody summer, insurgents loaded a car with hundreds of pounds of explosives and parked it by a school. They knew we searched every building for hidden weapons caches, and they waited for us to gather near the car. But as we turned the corner to head toward the school, several Iraqis told us about the danger. We evacuated civilians from the area and called in a helicopter gunship to fire at the vehicle.

The resulting explosion pulverized half the building and blasted the car’s engine block through two cement walls. Shrapnel dropped like jagged hail as far as a quarter-mile away.

If we had not risked our safety by patrolling the neighborhood on foot, trusting our sources and gathering intelligence, it would have been a massacre. But no one was hurt in the blast.

Domestic police forces would benefit from a similar change in strategy. Instead of relying on aggression, they should rely more on relationships. Rather than responding to a squatter call with guns raised, they should knock on the door and extend a hand. But unfortunately, my encounter with officers is just one in a stream of recent examples of police placing their own safety ahead of those they’re sworn to serve and protect.

Rhoads, the Fairfax County police lieutenant, was upfront about this mind-set. He explained that it was standard procedure to point guns at suspects in many cases to protect the lives of police officers. Their firearm rules were different from mine; they aimed not to kill but to intimidate. According to reporting by The Washington Post, those rules are established in police training, which often emphasizes a violent response over deescalation. Recruits spend an average of eight hours learning how to neutralize tense situations; they spend more than seven times as many hours at the weapons range.

Of course, officers’ safety is vital, and they’re entitled to defend themselves and the communities they serve. But they’re failing to see the connection between their aggressive postures and the hostility they’ve encountered in Ferguson, Mo., Baltimore and other communities. When you level assault rifles at protesters, you create animosity. When you kill an unarmed man on his own property while his hands are raised — as Fairfax County police did in 2013 — you sow distrust. And when you threaten to Taser a woman during a routine traffic stop (as happened to 28-year-old Sandra Bland, who died in a Texas jail this month), you cultivate a fear of police. This makes policing more dangerous for everyone.

I understood the risks of war when I enlisted as an infantryman. Police officers should understand the risks in their jobs when they enroll in the academy, as well. That means knowing that personal safety can’t always come first. That is why it’s service. That’s why it’s sacrifice.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/in-iraq-i-raided-insurgents-in-virginia-the-police-raided-me/2015/07/24/2e114e54-2b02-11e5-bd33-395c05608059_story.html

In Iraq, I raided insurgents. In Virginia, the police raided me.

The military changed its overly aggressive tactics. It’s time for law enforcement to do the same.

Response by CW4 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 27 at 2015 11:24 AM

CW4 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:24:08 -0400

Thanks for sharing, very interesting article.

Response by LTC John Shaw made Jul 27 at 2015 11:32 AM

LTC John Shaw — Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:32:52 -0400

RallyPoint Shared Content Alex, so sorry you went through this event and I hope we can learn societal lessons from it. I am very concerned about the increase in home raids on all citizens.
I am especially concerned about the use of the IRS and police in WI on citizens who have committed no crimes based on the political whim of a Democratic prosecutors or party hacks, just to punish and suppress free speech.
Thank you for sharing your painful lesson for the benefit of others.

Response by SGT Ben Keen made Jul 27 at 2015 11:38 AM

SGT Ben Keen — Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:38:49 -0400

One take away from all this is that everyone should do their double checks. If Aaron would have closed the door completely and/or if the police would have checked with the property owners, all of this might have not happened.

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Jul 27 at 2015 11:46 AM

Capt Seid Waddell — Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:46:02 -0400

Great insights.

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 27 at 2015 11:52 AM

CW5 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:52:35 -0400

Amen! What an excellent article!!! Police need to bring judgment and common sense to their daily "fight." When a person fails to signal a lane change, does that really require the threat of a taser? And does she really need to be cuffed and laid out on the ground (officer's knee in her back and her head pushed into the dirt)? I'm thinking that was just a little over the top. I'm also thinking those tactics won't change anytime soon.

That said, respect by citizens when interacting with the police is an equally important part of the equation. Sadly, though, some officers will still be asses, even when the citizen is respectful.

Response by LCDR Rabbah Rona Matlow made Jul 27 at 2015 12:20 PM

LCDR Rabbah Rona Matlow — Mon, 27 Jul 2015 12:20:01 -0400

I heard about this before. It is a huge failure of the modern police state in which we live. Horton is lucky he isn't black. If he were, he'd probably be dead, because of being "guilty" of nothing more than SWB (sleeping while black)... This is all a by-product of the 9/11 paranoia, and the whole "Homeland Stupidity" and "Unpatriotic Act" establishments... I know these statements may not be popular among the conservative here, but the reality is that we gave up far too much liberty with the "Unpatriotic Act" and "Homeland Stupidity" did not increase security at all; all it did was increase bureaucracy...

The fact that police forces, whose job is to "keep the peace" and to "protect and serve" are very militarized, from blacked out tacticals to Army vehicles, to full battle rattle... They aren't protecting or serving the community when they destroy and shoot and then ask questions...

The Washington State Police Academy, which does POST for all LEO in Washington State, has changed their tactics recently, in their training, to work on de-escalation of scenes as a priority. I hope it will pay dividends and not just be another PC project run amok.

Another example is Los Angeles County SO, who requires all deputies to work two years in Corrections, before going on street patrol. COs have no weapons other than their minds... By working as COs for two years before going on the street, they learn how to deal with situations, without resorting to shooting first...

Perhaps this should be the model for all LEO in the country...

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 27 at 2015 3:32 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 27 Jul 2015 15:32:14 -0400

I agree that this was a questionable policy issue and a poor judgment call. That being said, here is my take on your editorial comments:

Since you reference your time in Iraq, the escalation of force rules were: "Show (presentation of deadly force/weapon), shout, shove, shoot!" These were the same rules in effect during my deployments in 2008-2009 and 2012-2013 (a timeframe which includes our largely failed efforts to win the hearts & minds of the populace long term through GEN Petraeus' COIN campaign).

The degradation of society is in large part due to the lack of any unifying concept thanks to our newfound trust in a politically correct world gone mad. During the Roman empire no one dared to harm not only a Soldier, but also its' citizens no matter where they were in the world. To do so incurred the wrath and swift vengeance of a unified nation. Ronald Reagan had it right when he stated, "self defense is not only our right, but our duty." Self defense doesn't always mean a reaction. Self preservation is common sense. Action is always faster than reaction. I would rather an officer present a weapon and gain compliance than react to a perceived threat, only to find out after the application of deadly force that it was a false alarm (there are countless cases of that).

Police officers do understand the risks in their jobs when they enroll in the academy, they also understand that their agencies' policies largely dictate their actions with regards to the rules of engagement. Personal safety can’t always come first, but it shouldn't come last to fulfill some liberal's warped sense of utopia. Everyone's sense of service is different, hence the reason so few answer the call to stand on the wall...whether it is military or law enforcement. Sacrifice needs to have a reason, not just a political expediency. "'Not in vain' may be the pride of those who survived and the epitaph of those who fell" (Sir Winston Churchill).

Response by SPC George Adkins made Jul 27 at 2015 3:34 PM

SPC George Adkins — Mon, 27 Jul 2015 15:34:38 -0400

Excellent article. The phrase "when all you have is a hammer in your tool box, all you see is nails" rings true. LE has to carry a lot of the blame for current relations. The 99% that are good have to stop turning their a blind eye on the 1% that are corrupt. Our officers need to put "service: to their communities" above all else. The place to start is by realizing that they aren't at war with those in the community. They are there to serve them and make their lives better. Being Andy Taylor won't be as much fun as being Judge Dred, but the results will be better and make their jobs safer. Until this happens, expect more violence and more revenge.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Jul 27 at 2015 4:05 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Mon, 27 Jul 2015 16:05:10 -0400

Kicking down doors and searching houses was not a good way to win over the people.

Response by PO2 Brian Marshall made Jul 28 at 2015 1:36 AM

PO2 Brian Marshall — Tue, 28 Jul 2015 01:36:10 -0400

Good work

Response by SCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 28 at 2015 4:03 AM

SCPO Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 28 Jul 2015 04:03:41 -0400

I can only wish the hundreds of recruits to whom I taught Report Writing in several police academies during my career could have written as well a narrative as did Alex Hortonis. Being a retired law enforcement officer, I can empathize with the unfortunate scenario in which Alex found himself. I can see everything unfold as he describes it. I know these unfortunate situations have occurred since police first took "to protecting and serving." I'm glad it ended as it did. Alex's military training kicked in perfectly. The officers generally followed a fairly basic SOP in this event. All I can say is mistakes are sometimes made. The public doesn't always translate what they see or hear to the police properly when they call 9-11. What's lost in translation has, unfortunately, led to tragedy because the adrenalin flowed fast on both sides. Police are only human. Too much television and too many movies have caused far too many Americans to think police should walk, talk, act, and be perfect. On the Big Silver Screen, the scriptwriter can ensure that happens. In an alley, at night, on an unknown suspicious party call, things are 180-degrees different. And they always will be. Alex responded perfectly. I believe the police did also. The result of a well-meaning resident's 9-11 phone call was handled and resolved properly. It's pretty much end of story and the end of any need for further discussion, at least on my part.

Response by SCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 28 at 2015 4:25 AM

SCPO Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 28 Jul 2015 04:25:27 -0400

No further comment required.

Response by Cpl Jeff N. made Jul 28 at 2015 6:44 AM

Cpl Jeff N. — Tue, 28 Jul 2015 06:44:35 -0400

Wow, that was a harrowing story. A neighbor calls in a possible squatter and the police show up, weapons drawn, entering the apartment ready for a take down. No one checks with anyone in a position of authority at the complex about the resident of the apartment. Does anyone check the validity of the caller? We just accept the call at face value and assume the worst?

What ever happened to investigative work? Knock on the door, allow someone to answer, ask a few questions, get the whole story, BEFORE going in guns drawn etc.

What if this guy slept with a pistol under his pillow? Game over, we have a shooting incident over a call in from an anonymous person reporting a possible squatter!

I support the police, I know they have a tough job but this type of behavior only alienates them from those they are supposed to serve. We all should have an expectation that the police are acting with reasonableness to situations presented to them. That force is used only when absolutely necessary. If you are too concerned about your personal safety as an officer to accept any personal risk perhaps you are in the wrong profession.

Response by PO3 Tom Atkeson made Jul 28 at 2015 1:24 PM

PO3 Tom Atkeson — Tue, 28 Jul 2015 13:24:29 -0400

I completed the USCG Boarding Team Member School at the Maritime Law Enforcement Accademy at Federal Law Enforcement Training Center Charleston, SC. There was a BIG emphasis on the UOF Continuum and deescalation of hostile situations. We were trained that Personal Defense Weapons (PDF) such as the Beretta M9M (later SigSauer P229) were NOT your first tool to gain compliance. The first tool is always your words and how you project yourself to who you are dealing with. We were taught that while having your hand on a tool (baton, pepper spray or PDF) or even having one unholstered wasnt a bad idea it could escalate a situation and raise tensions. Each officer would have to feel out what was best in each situation. More hours were spent role playing these situations with the instructors than at a range. They taught us that we would rather talk to someone than shoot them and that no one should ever want to have to use a firearm against another person. Being safe in those situations was keeping our distance, triangulating fellow officers on a subject and communication. These tools served me well for the rest of my time at USCG units that conducted LE operations and were lessons I could never forget. I can only venture to guess why the USCG takes this stance but I imagine it has to do with the blurred lines of being a branch of the military and a law enforcement agency at the same time. oh and the fact that this mentality and training just flat out work.

Response by SGT Ronald Audas made Jul 28 at 2015 3:22 PM

SGT Ronald Audas — Tue, 28 Jul 2015 15:22:43 -0400

As a child,I remember strapping on my toy holster and gun.Immediately,I was transformed to a new person.Some carry this same bravado into adulthood.When you arm a force, (military,police,etc.) with special forces equipment,you create a new attitude.Without excessive,proper training,you have the potential for disaster.In Austin,Texas;The police chief has asked for 400 new officers.Not to be able to combat more crime,but to have enough people to put into the communities and work with neighbors.If we don`t come together soon,we could have a situation that cannot be repaired.

Response by Cpl Frank Hayden made Jul 28 at 2015 6:31 PM

Cpl Frank Hayden — Tue, 28 Jul 2015 18:31:09 -0400

Wow, how stupid is this article? The police obviously spoke to a neighbor, who was probably very confident that no one should be there and something was wrong. The police were allowed to go into the residence based on exigent circumstances of what was a believed crime in progress... that crime being burglary. Every situation is different, but waiting longer to talk to wake up the landlord or anybody else would most likely removed the exigency. Looks to me that they followed the law and best practices appropriately. Your knowledge of room clearing obviously had you scared, and makes you think you are an expert about law enforcement, but you clearly know nothing of search and seizure laws. In the end they did not roughen you up or hurt you. They just secured the scene, placed you in cuffs, then conducted a more thorough investigation. Then they let you go. Everything you describe tells me that it was handled appropriately. If you feel otherwise, quite bitching on the Internet and sue the PD... You will lose, because you are wrong. Get off the police bashing bandwagon.

Response by PO1 John Miller made Jul 31 at 2015 8:17 AM

PO1 John Miller — Fri, 31 Jul 2015 08:17:05 -0400

(Excuse my language in advance)
It's SHIT like this that makes the general public not trust the police.

Response by MAJ Karl Knutson made Sep 28 at 2015 1:51 PM

MAJ Karl Knutson — Mon, 28 Sep 2015 13:51:17 -0400

There is a 1,500% increase in the use of SWAT teams over the last two decades. We have gone from use in major siege situations to 'Investigating" squatter calls. When you start out as a bully there is no place to go in getting tougher.
Che Guevara Said you must keep the populous on your side but failed to follow same when in Bolivia which lead to his downfall and death. We need a change in leadership with policing as we now have bullies with badges breaking into the gated communities of the law abiding.

Response by MAJ Karl Knutson made Sep 28 at 2015 2:04 PM

MAJ Karl Knutson — Mon, 28 Sep 2015 14:04:59 -0400

Gated community of law abiding citizens.

Response by MAJ Karl Knutson made Sep 29 at 2015 2:14 AM

MAJ Karl Knutson — Tue, 29 Sep 2015 02:14:16 -0400

So now even people in gated communities are at risk. When will we reel in the police? Not everyone accused is a serious criminal.

Response by MAJ Karl Knutson made Sep 29 at 2015 2:35 AM

MAJ Karl Knutson — Tue, 29 Sep 2015 02:35:52 -0400

http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/police-militarization-an-interview-with-radley-balko

How Cops Became Soldiers: An Interview with Police Militarization Expert Radley Balko

Balko, an investigative reporter for the Huffington Post, was kind enough to answer some questions about how our police turned into soldiers

Response by Sgt Martin Querin made Aug 12 at 2017 3:48 PM

Sgt Martin Querin — Sat, 12 Aug 2017 15:48:39 -0400

A very well written and thoughtful article, thanks for sharing. We must remember we joined to "serve and protect", all, not just those that support us. We will always say respect is earned; and while I wholeheartedly support the LE community having many family and close friends in LE, we all need to foster positive relationships with and the respect and trust of those we say we serve and protect.

Response by CPO Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 25 at 2017 9:13 AM

CPO Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 25 Nov 2017 09:13:10 -0500

Very well written,

I wonder what state and city this took place in?

This issue is a Democrat Issue... Hear me out. For 8 years Obama was telling the public the cops are bad and the criminals are good. Every time some criminal thug was popped Obama would weigh in on and call the police stupid, or try and get the DOJ involved. Anyone think this didn't put the Police on the defensive? Now that most cops are using bodycams the left is screaming about the criminals civil rights and not wanting the cam footage allowed in court... Police are sued if they save you they are sued if they kill you, they are sued for just showing up... Think that doesn't put them on the defensive?

Where do most Minority's get killed by cops? Its Democrat run Cities and States and due to Democrat laws and regulations. Garner (Choke hold in NY) was over selling loose smokes because the Democrats demand a high Tax on Cigs. So many others....

I'm not saying the Police get it right every time, and in this case a 2 min conversation would have solved the entire problem. This happens often enough that it should be discussed. Common sense should be a tested requirement. I once had a Cop stop me as I was walking to a bar, he asked what I was doing and I told him I'm walking to the bar. He then asked me why I didn't drive there...... I'm a smart ass so I asked him "Did you really just ask me why I'm not driving to an establishment that serves alcohol?" he then just drove away. We have seen the stories where the cops have raided the wrong apartment or one where the person they wanted moved out 6 months prior.. yes in all of these common sense and a little detective work would have solved the issue. All around, all sides need to come to the table on this subject or it will just get worse.

Response by SFC Greg Bruorton made Nov 25 at 2017 11:18 AM

SFC Greg Bruorton — Sat, 25 Nov 2017 11:18:05 -0500

Despite the hardship and demoralizing incident you experienced, your story was a superb write-up and well expressed. Great narrative!

Response by SGT Charles H. Hawes made Nov 28 at 2017 2:46 PM

SGT Charles H. Hawes — Tue, 28 Nov 2017 14:46:53 -0500

A double edged sword. As a former Tact team member you always want the safety of your men to be first but as you said intel to bring a situation to an end in the least hazardous way is key. Law inforcement first goal should always be protect and serve.

Response by SP5 Larry Morris made Nov 28 at 2017 3:42 PM

SP5 Larry Morris — Tue, 28 Nov 2017 15:42:38 -0500

The world is not what is was 15 yrs ago cops and service people that deal with bad people has increased 1500% so rather driving or going shopping is not the same. Me if a cop would not pull over some one at night untill in a lighted area just so I could better see what I was dealing with. As for the room clearning that was BS they were wanting to shot

Response by MSG Dan Castaneda made Nov 29 at 2017 10:26 AM

MSG Dan Castaneda — Wed, 29 Nov 2017 10:26:07 -0500

He had me until the very end.

"I understood the risks of war when I enlisted as an infantryman. Police officers should understand the risks in their jobs when they enroll in the academy, as well. That means knowing that personal safety can’t always come first. That is why it’s service. That’s why it’s sacrifice." You are absolutely wrong.

He deployed one time, or at least it read that way. He compared a 15 month deployment to the duty of an officer who does their duty every day for many years. If I was an officer walking in, I would definitely have my pistol drawn and at a minimum he would go in cuffs until after the situation was cleared. I see nothing wrong here.

Response by SPC Robert Coventry made Dec 3 at 2017 12:41 PM

SPC Robert Coventry — Sun, 03 Dec 2017 12:41:18 -0500

I was with you until the investigate first, I run a Government Contract security, investigation and corrections company and would not call or check with anyone first. The first priority is the arrest, making contact with the subject. If you call to investigate you risk the subject being alerted and the police walking into a ambush or the subject not being there. The guards post orders probably have them calling the unit to ask who is there.

Sorry this happened to you, like you said make sure you close the door all the way. I would feel safe in your community, a lot of complexes would not have called the police with an open door I commend your neighbors.

Response by Capt Tom Brown made Jan 1 at 2018 11:16 AM

Capt Tom Brown — Mon, 01 Jan 2018 11:16:39 -0500

A horrible catch 22.

Response by SFC Thomas Nichols made Jan 1 at 2018 4:29 PM

SFC Thomas Nichols — Mon, 01 Jan 2018 16:29:01 -0500

Interesting read. Definitely some parallels between military combat and the more-and-more militarized police but not sure about all of the conclusions. Worth reading and is thought provoking.

Response by CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 26 at 2018 4:17 PM

CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 26 Feb 2018 16:17:51 -0500

A thin line between public safety/rights and officer safety. LEOs have a tough job. Many bad actors are so full of hate toward society that taking a LEO's life is no big deal. Talking about it is a good start. I want the LEOs to go home alive at the end of their shift. I also want them to be mindful of personal freedoms, but only to the point where it starts to endanger them. Glad you survived the encounter. Thanks for sharing.