Should Military Police be required to meet the same requirements as Civilian Police Officers ?

Ok this is probably not going to be a popular response but so be it. I am a Military Policeman. The training that these MP soldiers receive is adequate.

When did you complete the formal United States Army Military Police School at Ft Leonardwood, MO? (Sister services sorry don't know where you go) But it might surprise you to know that USAMPS is now integrating the Missouri POST (Police Officer Standards Test) into its curriculum. So the assumption that the training is substandard is incorrect. Most agencies use POST standards when training and evaluating new officers.

Its easy to say that MP soldiers are poorly trained, but most Installations and in recent years Office of the Provost Marshal General has required standardized Law Enforcement Certifications before those soldiers even begin duties as MP soldiers on post. Agencies are brought in to train, evaluate and test these soldiers and it is becoming in some places an annual requirement for retraining. So they are receiving training. Where it gets tricky with accreditation as federal law enforcement is where federal law and Department of Defense split paths on specific laws. And the LEOSA Act defined military law enforcement for the purpose of concealed carry, not enforcement of law, only for the credentialing of universal concealed carry that law enforcement as afforded.

Lastly, MPs are no stranger to this classification or castigation from others. "They think they are infantry in the field and cops in garrison" mentality. No, wrong again if they are trained properly and molded by NCOs and Officers, they know exactly what they are in the field, Military Police Soldiers with a tough job and almost zero respect from those they serve. When they return to garrison they know exactly what they are Military Police Soldiers that work round the clock answer every call there is from your neighbors dog barking at 3am to when a soldier beats their spouse or kids to a bloody pulp, yup they are there doing the job. Again with almost zero respect, show me one police department with a 100% crime solved rate and the best police officers in the world with zero defects. I hear the same gripes about civilian law enforcement, they suck at their jobs, they just want to be military and they are just shooting unarmed civilians...it goes on and on and on.

Here's a scenario for you: MP brings a 20 year old soldier back to the barracks for underage drinking. (Not DUI, but underage drinking) Now in some instances that 20 year old will be grateful and realize the MPs cut some slack and just brought him home. (We've all been there) Some instances that same 20 year old may talk smack about how he got over on the MPs. (And then everyone talks about the incompetency of the MP.) OR The MP after trying to cut the joe some slack, charges the soldier for underage drinking and you or your 1SG have to come down to the PMO and sign for him. (Then its nothing more than "MPs are just trying to ruin soldiers careers!")

Fact is, in the first instance the MP actually talked to the soldier and found out he/she is dealing with an issue and was blowing off some steam after a bad deployment. So MP takes joe to CQ and says bed him down and get him some counseling in the morning. (A lot of times CQs will never mention it the SDNCO and it doesn't get logged, but that's for another thread.) In the last instance the MP tried the talking approach and that young joe filled with bravado and not to be talked to by an MP started smack talk and ended up charged.

Fact is no matter what we do as MPs no one is going to like or appreciate what we do. Another fact is active duty MP Soldiers do receive additional training and sometimes its from US Marshal Service, State Agencies and Local Agencies. I can't speak for NG soldiers as I haven't trained with them. But I do agree that units that are reclassified to MPs do not receive the adequate training but you'd have to take that up with HQDA.

The answer is simple. Yes and without a doubt. There are a lot of Soldiers who join the Service as MPs to serve their country and then become police in the civilian world. Where they end up upset, is when they get out they find out that there is no equivalence and have to do all the training. Why not help everyone out and make the training the same across the board. <br>

Being a former Police Officer and MP I don't think this needs to be done for all MPs. MPs don't just work garrison and from my understanding most post use civilian DoD for the LE mission now.

MP have a much greater responsibility than just LE. Our job in combat is to go behind the infantry and release them to push forward. We then take over the duties of civilian law enforcement, detain the POWs, guide and guard the supplies moving forward, enforce the laws of the UCMJ for military personnel and most importantly make sure the enemy does not sneak up behind the infantry as they are pushing forward. It is not all about writing tickets and taking the drunks to their 1SG. So not everybody can be a 21 year old certified police officer. There has to be drivers, gunners, guards, fire teams, radio operators, correction officers, and so on.

Now MPs that are doing garrison patrol should receive more training in LE role. Maybe a school like Victor 5, but for patrol. I think it would not only benefit the post, but if a soldier could actually get a POST Cert he could get a job when he got out.

Speaking as a former Military Policemen that attended OSUT at Ft. Leonardwood, and then received re-cert training at Ft. Campbell, I can say that training is more than adequate.

I was a FLETC (Federal Law Enforcement Training Center) certified policeman with additional certifications that provided access to all state and federal criminal databases.

We were required to pass the same tests and meet the same standards as all other federal law enforcement officers (e.g. FBI and DHS)

I think the problem people run into is not all installations offered the same training while I was still in. I noticed a distinct difference in how each post handled training its MP's after they went through OSUT or (and especially) if the person came in under a different MOS and end up re-classing to 31B.


I believe OSUT is more than adequate; All training received post OSUT does not appear to be created equal. We should (if we haven't already) institute regulations that align and require the re-certification training to be the same on all installations. This would include bringing re-class training up to par with all other federal agencies.

I believe that it would help create a more professional and competent Police Corps that can respond to a wider variety of situations. I am a 31B and 31E and would love to see the training standards stepped up a lot. <br>

At various points the Air Force did have two separate career fields in the Security Police, Security and Law Enforcement. Most of My time was spent in Law Enforcement including Patrol, Desk Sergeant, Flight Chief and even Security Police Investigations. A great deal of what I learned in the Air Force including Motor Vehicle accident Investigations, Crime scene investigations etc , I was able to apply to another career as a Civilian Police Officer. I found esp. on very large installations the experience of all of us ended up being extensive. I did also however find that experiences I had in a Combat setting which involved protecting the base from enemy attacks etc. in Viet Nam which more resembled infantry functions that prepared Me for handing some things as a civilian Police Officer I may not have done as well with if it were not for some of the negative things I saw or experienced in a war zone. An example of that would be fatal motor vehicle accidents, violent crime scenes etc. I also believe the concept of teamwork in the Military and doing things not because You wanted to but because You knew they had to be done and therefore You performed those duties. Not everyone has the mind set for Law Enforcement and putting up and tolerating things most people would not but still be capable of overcoming other issues including the use of force without losing it. Its not for everyone.

The short answer is no. Even though the jobs seems similar, the is a huge difference between civilian LE and military LE. Also, the sad truth is that the majority of MP's could not meet the background standards to be a civilian police officer. At least in the more progressive states that have POST standards. I went to MP school in 1981 and have been a Civ LEO for over 30 years. I have also spent 3 years in our recruitment unit. I am a big proponent of hiring former military as police officers. But very few can pass the strict background standards. I am currently a Security Forces reservist in the AF. I can only speak for AF LE standards, but we are very far behind the civilian standard. In the AF, the qualifications to be considered for Security Forces are fairly low. They should be higher. but it is not. There is also are huge differences between civilian and military LE. In both the AF and Army, MP's also have a combat function. A combat MP and LE MP are two different animals. If the Army and AF had a separate career field only for LE, they could raise the standards to meet near civilian standards. Currently, I believe only the Navy has near civilian-like standards.

I agree 100%. I think their&nbsp;AIT should be at FLETC in GA, I think they should have to follow every aspect as a civilian LEO, or federal LEO.

The MP School is certified by FLETC. It's acknowledged in the civilian world.

When I went thru USAMPS OSUT school in 1977 we had to be qualified in many police functions including traffic control, drugs, weapons, vehicles and a very precise traffic accident processing that included freehand sketches with a very demanding marine gunny