News Reporter Takes On Police Training

news 1

Vanessa Medina, a reporter for WSVN Miami/Fort Lauderdale, underwent some police training scenarios to experience what officers go thru specifically regarding when to use deadly force.  Vanessa admits she is gun shy and you can see instances where she mentally shuts down and stops thinking. Granted this is throwing a non-swimmer into the deep end of a virtual pool. While it is not real, the lesson does seem to come across. The last part is rather disturbing.



Nicholas C

Co-Founder of KRISSTALK forums, an owner’s support group and all things KRISS Vector related. Nick found his passion through competitive shooting while living in NY. He participates in USPSA and 3Gun. He loves all things that shoots and flashlights. Really really bright flashlights.

Any questions please email him at nicholas.c@staff.thefirearmblog.com


Advertisement

  • iksnilol

    Well, looking at the “bright” side she did have the guts to pull the trigger on a little girl. So I doubt she’d have problems killing somebody less sympathetic.

    Do what you want with that revelation. I know mine wasn’t that scary but it was a real eyeopener.

    • TheNotoriousIUD

      Well, most kids are pretty annoying…

      • Nicks87

        …and so are you.

    • Al

      All I got to say is #littlegirllivesmatter.

      Seriously, has there ever been a traffic stop with a little girl with a shotgun?

      • iksnilol

        D’nae ask me, I sorta have a habit of not shooting people or getting shot at. Has worked somewhat well so far.

        • ghost

          All BS aside. I am with you on that. (After the military anyway. Even then not so much. Mostly we got drunk and thought the VC were disguising themselves as giant skinny rabbits. Who the hell can shoot giant skinny rabbits with those big brown eyes? Also, we had those first M-16s, you know those long ones where we could not maneuver in tight places? In my case I had trained in jungle warfare with M-14s. I suppose ignorance, (lack of knowledge) is bliss, never knew it was a handicap. Of course we were so stupid we did not clean the very thing our lives depended on.) Civilian life is different set of rules. But, once that round is turned loose, there is no bringing it back.

      • Grindstone50k

        Ramadi?

  • TheNotoriousIUD

    Little Girl: “We aint got time for no traffic stop! The Popeyes is gettin’ cold!”

  • Phillip Cooper

    Holy crap! They aren’t kidding the last scenario is disturbing!

    • KestrelBike

      wait, so was the last one with a kid who got out of the truck with a weapon an actual real video where a cop actually gets shot that they now use for simulator training? If so, good looordd….

      • Ethan

        No – high quality simulation. They have hundreds of scenarios with numerous decision branches each – its a very high quality training tool.

      • Phillip Cooper

        It is a real video. They are actors.

  • ernst stavro blofeld

    where’s the part where they show her how to plant a weapon and shakedown a dope dealer?

    • MR

      That was on FRONTLINE a couple years ago.
      #ham sandwich

    • claymore

      Only in your mind LOL.

    • Cleophus A

      That’s taught in the “advanced class.”

  • Rokurota

    Our SRO ran my high school civics class through some training films (using his actual service revolver! Ah, the good old days). They were all based on actual cases and some were brutal. There was at least one child pointing a gun at you, and the final scenario was a deaf and dumb man who couldn’t hear your questions. I don’t envy the cops in those situations.

    • Cal S.

      Use universal signals if you don’t know ASL. Gesture as well as mouth the words. Most deaf & dumb can lip-read.

      • Grindstone50k

        Too much work. Just shoot ’em.

        • Cal S.

          You’d shoot a deaf guy just because he’s deaf? I really hope you don’t own a gun. That’s something that a prosecutor would call “murder”.

          • Grindstone50k

            Your sarcasm detector is broken.
            Also, it’s only “murder” if you’re not a cop.

          • Cal S.

            There have been a few officers lately charged with murder. Just FYI.

          • missourisam

            I’m not going to couch my answer to your comment in veiled sarcasm. Your comment is demeaning, and uncalled for. I truly hope that if you need a cop, the nearest one is miles away. It is your type that are the first to demean police officers when you feel safe, and the ones that scream the loudest for one if you feel threatened. I will concede that there “Bad” police officers, but percentage wise there are less cops that cross the line than almost any other profession.

          • Grindstone50k

            I’m not going to couch my answer, you need to take yourself less seriously. Probably take a break from the Internet for a week or two.

  • USMC03Vet

    Boys, staph!

  • chead

    A real issue with this report is they never showed anything between physical altercation and deadly force and never incidents with multiple officers as would typically be the case. In the McKinney pool incident the officer pulls his pistol on some teens that were standing nearby while several other officers stood by (they run into frame as he draws, clearly intending to stop him from shooting a kid in the back). Presenting that as an appropriate (potential) use of deadly force is ridiculous.

    I have no idea if they just didn’t film or broadcast less-lethal training sessions or if they didn’t have any. In either case it’s irresponsible to either air the report without less-lethal footage or not address it if there weren’t any at all.

    • USMC03Vet

      They tried to move around behind him. He did the right thing. Their intention wasn’t to pat him on the butt and tell him good game. They were literally positioning themselves to attempt something whether that is to grab pieces of his equipment and/or grab him. People without combative intent don’t do that type of thing especially when there is an altercation with law enforcement and active resistance which is what the girl was doing.

      • chead

        Yeah, I understand the training scenarios that were shown in the report. My issue isn’t necessarily with the way those particular scenarios played out, it’s that they didn’t seem to have any in which there was a subject without clear “combative intent” or any in which the subject did but could be restrained or subdued without either physical altercation or lethal force.

        Additionally, “clear combative intent” is complicated. For instance it’s unfortunately common for mentally ill people to be harmed by police in situations where a subject’s agitated state is incorrectly interpreted as combative intent. Of course the only solution is training, but we didn’t see that. So either they neglected to air that footage, didn’t shoot it at all, or the training wasn’t done, all of which are upsetting possibilities.

        • Bill

          Well, there was the scenario with the unarmed guy…, and the unarmed woman who wouldn’t submit to arrest.

          I also worked my way through college in a hospital with a secure psych unit, then went to work at an agency in whose jurisdiction was a state mental hospital, it originally housed multiple hundreds/thousands until the vast majority were “streeted” for community services in the 1970s. The mentally ill get injured when being restrained in hospitals, as well as by the police. While I can empathize with their condition, they don’t get a pass when violent, and yes, I’ve been through CIT and deescalation training. If someone is attempting to hurt themselves or someone else, agitated and combative are synonymous.

          Arguably one of the horrific injuries inflicted on another person I ever saw was when a schizophrenic overwhelmed a psych nurse and began biting away her face. It took everything the staff had to get him under control, including a call to us, and she underwent multiple reconstructive surgeries and wound up leaving the field.

          • TheNotoriousIUD

            That’s f-cked up.

          • nadnerbus

            One of the customers that used to shop at my store was a former NYPD cop that got out after he almost died. He went to go roust out a bum, and was promptly stabbed in the chest with a hidden knife. The only reason he lived was because it happened close enough to the hospital that they could save him before he bled out from arterial blood lose. He showed me the scar on his chest from where they opened him up. I’d say that might make me reconsider my career options.

          • missourisam

            You did fail to mention that a mentally disturbed person is often much stronger in that state than they would normally be, and almost impervious to pain that would make a sane person quit fighting. I arrested a mental patient one night that I fought with for two blocks in the street. When it was over, I had four broken ribs, two teeth broken off at the gum line, a broken nose ans cheek bone, and he had an arm that was broken, and what ended the fight was when his scull was fractured. Even with the scull fracture, he was still fighting when I cuffed him. I contacted him because he had assaulted two women and a man and injured them severely. According to some, I guess I should have not interfered, and thus would not have hurt him.

          • Bill

            Ouch. I’ve found OC to be the worst solution, because it doesn’t effect an EDP to the point that they behave, but it always blows back on me, so I have to fight through it also.

            The incident I described ended when a hospital staff member deployed a fire extinguisher – as an impact weapon. The hospital tried to fire him and wanted criminal charges filed for assault and abuse of a patient. I made a special trip to the prosecutor’s office with the photos I took at the scene to make certain that didn’t happen. People have no idea……

        • missourisam

          The reason you didn’t see the peaceful solutions is because although most contacts are settled without violence, those never make the news. It is only if it bleeds does it lead. That is the situations she was put in so she might gain perspective. Apparently you were unable to grasp that. I have to ask, are you sure you are not an Obama cabinet member?

      • missourisam

        Amen brother. Finally a comment from someone that has apparently been there and done that. I had a friend who was a good man, but didn’t have the instinct of distrust for seemingly “Docile” people and let friendly persons in a situation much like that get behind him. He is now in a wheel chair because one of the non threatening crowd stabbed him in the spine. That was a lesson to all of us on our department. From that day on, no one was allowed to get behind an officer in a disturbance situation.

  • Bill

    That’s policing: everyone’s an expert until it’s time to actually walk the line, as the cliche goes.

    • Hyok Kim

      Hmmm, actually some real cops (well, ex-cops by now) got into trouble they could have avoided because they thought they knew (and they didn’t).

  • ghost

    Three things I never discuss anymore, Politics, Religion, “Police training”.

  • Dust

    If the lesson is “someone with no training will react poorly in stressful situations,” yes, lesson learnt.

  • Cal S.

    Good night, she screams a lot. Now you know why police on recordings shout loudly and repeatedly, eh?

    • missourisam

      Generally they shout loudly and often because the idiots they are dealing with won’t comply with a reasonable and lawful order.

  • Tassiebush

    I really enjoyed this video. One scenario I’d love to see done is a debunking of the old “why didn’t they just shoot them in the leg?” argument.

    • BattleshipGrey

      I’ve read (sorry no link) that South Korean police, if forced to shoot someone are highly encouraged to shoot for the legs. If the person is killed, that officer is highly shunned by the public.

      • Hyok Kim

        Most definitely true!

      • Hyok Kim

        The SOP regarding the pistols carried and the way they were supposed to be carried (at least in the 70s) were like this.

        Uniformed Police officers carried 1911, but with the no ammo in the chamber and the magazine carried elsewhere and hidden from plain view. This was supposed to make it impossible for anyone to grab the gun and fire while scuffling during the arrest attempt and make NDs far less likely.

        They were allowed to use the firearms only when if they were confronted by either hostile mob, or someone with weapons, knives, clubs, etc.

        Plain cloth officer were allowed mote choices. They could carry 1911 or a snub. If they chose snub, they were allowed to have the ammo in the cylinder, if 1911, then in condition 3.

        • BattleshipGrey

          Thanks for clarifying. Is it much different now?

          • Hyok Kim

            I don’t know about now, but by late 80s and 90s, uniformed officers were no longer carrying 1911, but a snub, but still could only use it for self-defense only, not for the purpose of making arrest, and when I mean self-defense, there has to be a weapon actually present. If the officer fired his/her gun, then there better be an actual weapon presented by the person shot.

            “Oh! I thought he was pulling a gun, but it turned out to be a cellphone!” doesn’t work in SK unlike here in U.S.

            It’s about whether a weapon was actually present, NOT whether the officer (or the Jury) thought a weapon was present without reasonable doubt.

            Basically, both the public and the government, and the high ranking police brass think rank and file cops are expendable, disposable, overpaid security guards.

            It’s a long story, but here it goes.

            There had been at least 3 purges of KNP (Korean National Police) between late 40s and early 60s, due to corruption.

            There is no such thing as local LE, but local branch of KNP. The reform in the early 60s mandated police officers must have served in the military before they were eligible to apply.

            They also could not serve in one district for more than a few years, and they had to come from another previous district they just served as far away as possible from the district they would serve their tour.

            Not only they could not ever serve in the same district they served once, but also none of the contiguous districts as well.

            They also could not serve in the district they were born, or were raised, grew up, or have relatives.or known to have close friends or associates as well.

            Those without a college degree could never rise above the rank of sergeant.

            Mandatory retirement age was 55 or 25 years whichever was sooner, and there was no pension for those retired below the rank of lieutenant, but they, and their wives and non-adult children got free healthcare.

            Lieutenant got pension, but not enough to maintain middle class lifestyle, they better get themselves a part-time job for that.

            Captains and above got pension similar to U.S. police officers get.

            Needless to say, there was no union. It was illegal, and I still think it is illegal, and the public is strongly opposed to the idea of police unions as well.

            Btw. I don’t know about now, but till 70s and maybe into 80s, the rookies were not allowed to carry firearms, but night sticks only.

            Also, all pistols carried by uniformed officers had to be turned in at the end of their shift.

            For the detective, they were allowed to carry their guns off duty so long as they were on call even if off duty. But when they were not available for whatever reason, they still had turn in their guns.

            Only police officer who were allowed to carry their guns even when they were off duty or not on call, were those rank of lieutenant and above.

            Most cops didn’t make much money. Only cops of rank of lieutenant and above made living wage.

            Plus no overtime, even when they had to work overtime!

            So the temptation for a little kickback was very high. Even the cops who want to stay clean ended up taking petty bribes to make ends meet, for something like minor traffic violation

            But most cops still managed to stay relatively clean. Yes, they took petty bribes for non-felony, non-violent offenses, but very seldom when it came to violent crimes, or felonies.

            A few unique things about SK justice system, there is a statue of limitation for murder, 15 years.

            Also, any crime other than treason, and murder one, can be dismissed with financial compensation to the victim and/or victim’s immediate family with agreed upon price.

            Police will work as mediators.

          • BattleshipGrey

            Very interesting. Thanks for replying. I’m in law enforcement in the states so it’s always interesting to know how the rest of the world operates. If you don’t mind another question, does the distrust of LE come from those corrupt decades, or is it something deeper? Does the public distrust government in general, or just LE? If you’re tired of answering questions I won’t blame you if you don’t continue.

          • Hyok Kim

            “Very interesting. Thanks for replying. “I’m in law enforcement in the states so it’s always interesting to know how the rest of the world operates.””

            I am glad I am not boring you.

            “If you don’t mind another question, does the distrust of LE come from those corrupt decades, or is it something deeper?”

            It’s a residual leftover from the decades. During the late 40s and till early 60s, one basically became a police officer through connection and/or bribery, not only that they had the option of, and they usually used the option of staying in their hometown.

            Connection was provided by the local bigwig, who usually ran the local political machine, and decided who would become the nominal heads of the local government, including the local police chief, and all their personnel! Yup, the local police was the private army/enforcer of the local bigwig, the real boss of the area.

            He controlled the election process, by protecting his vote cows, and disenfranchising others. His candidates won the election all the time.

            Police officers who used the bribery to get the job needed re-coup his investment, and even those who became one through connection, not bribery still had to earn his keep by following the orders from the bigwig, if he wanted to keep his job. There was no union protection.

            Also, the local policeman had his family, friends to protect and his personal enemies, and his family’s enemies to settle the scores with.

            Now, you can see why the SK government made the major reform in the early 60s.

            “Does the public distrust government in general, or just LE?”

            They distrust the government in general.

            “If you’re tired of answering questions I won’t blame you if you don’t continue”

            On the contrary, I am glad I am being useful.

          • BattleshipGrey

            Thanks again for taking the time. It’s too bad things turned out as they did. It sounds like some policy changes or better oversight from the central government could have prevented some of the distrust that still lingers. Not that the U.S. has it all straight either, but it sounds like there’s better job protection here.

  • ghost

    But, she looks good.

  • Tassiebush

    Wow it sounds like they aren’t allowed to be very assertive! That fighting gangs bit was an eye opener!

  • LetsTryLibertyAgain

    At this point, police departments could have weeks of training videos showing when not to escalate violence, when not to shoot a mentally ill teenager, when not to slam a drunk handcuffed woman’s face into a concrete curb, when not to beat a stroke victim, when not to pepper spray a person in a diabetic coma, when not to shoot a dog, etc. All they’d need to do is search YouTube for Police Brutality, and keep clicking on the related videos in the sidebar. There’s a nearly unlimited amount of free training! These videos seem to be uploaded faster than we could watch them in real time.

    Rather than train in violence and the paranoid suspicion that every taxpayer is murderous terrorist psychopath, I’d rather they watched Andy Griffith reruns so they might develop an appreciation for the protecting and serving that seems to have disappeared from their profession in the last couple of decades.

    At this point, I’d simply like to see them renewing their vows to defend our Constitution. Maybe have some remedial education in the Bill of Rights so they understood their oath.

  • Tassiebush

    thankyou very much for explaining that. it certainly puts it into context. That massacre by Woo Bum-Kon was dreadful! Massacres certainly have huge impacts on communities. i remember the shock of the port Arthur massacre (my bus driver was among those murdered) but that was a lone social misfit. For it to be done by a trusted figure like a policeman would add a whole other level of complexity.

  • BattleshipGrey

    For the moment, I’m getting my cake and eating it too. I’m covered by the union contract even though I’m not in the union. I’ve made my position clear to the other guys that I’m not trying to bum off of them by not buying into the union, but I don’t want to become a member because I know unions waste LOTS of money donating to political campaigns that I don’t agree with. It’s been a long while since anyone has pressured me into joining. There’s currently some (local) political stuff going on to where I might just join anyway, but I’d rather not have to. But I never discount the benefits that union bargaining has granted me.

    Unions can still be very effective, but clearly bloated when it gets to the point of donating to various political figures, usually liberal. On the flip side, as you detailed, having no job protection is also a recipe for disaster.

    • Hyok Kim

      “For the moment, I’m getting my cake and eating it too. I’m covered by the union contract even though I’m not in the union.”

      ….they’re not doing it out of altruism. By extending the benefits, they know that even if you don’t join right away, you might in the future, and you’re far less likely to turn into an opponent of Union than otherwise, and if you did, or would in the future, well, they got that covered as well!

      “I’ve made my position clear to the other guys that I’m not trying to bum off of them by not buying into the union, but I don’t want to become a member because I know unions waste LOTS of money donating to political campaigns that I don’t agree with.”

      It might look like waste to you, but the union is simply covering all the bases, diversifying, ala “Don’t put all your eggs into one basket.”

      “Unions can still be very effective, but clearly bloated when it gets to the point of donating to various political figures, usually liberal.”

      If no union, and liberals won, those whom liberals did not approve of would be out the door sooner or later no matter how impartial and competent jobs they did.

      Another word, eliminating union would not by itself make better police, and possibly worse, a lot worse.

      “On the flip side, as you detailed, having no job protection is also a recipe for disaster.”

      Most definitely, especially in a poor country. Ironically, the poorer the country, the higher crime, the more pressing the need for more police, the more police, the higher the cost, the higher the cost, the less money for investment in businesses for economic growth.

      It would be like having U.S. Supreme Court Justices be fired at the whim of the President or Congress.

      Ideal optimal solution I am thinking of would be, let police unionize, but make sure police union elections not to become politically partisan, but for the collective economic security of police officers, and create a civilian police audit board consisting of retired LE from outside the area do the audit of the conduct of individual police officers, instead of IAD.