since9
Campaign Veteran
Please read The Question (at bottom) and the amplified descriptions below before taking the poll. Thanks!
This is not bashing, so please do not stoop to it, here. Most LEOs know the laws as they apply to a citizen's lawful carry of firearms. This poll is an honest attempt to determine why some LEOs, and sometimes entire departments, seem to be unaware of this area of the law, or at the very least, unable to apply it appropriately in the situation where honest, law-abiding citizens are lawfully carrying a firearm.
It's my hope that the results might be taken used to take corrective action within various police departments. At the very least, the options should be a good checklist against which to compare the readiness of a police department or other law enforcement agency with respect to appropriate interaction with law abiding citizens who openly carry a firearm.
Last year I compiled a Colorado "cheat sheet" as to when, where, how, and why I can OC and CC throughout my state. It took me a day to compile, and it fits neatly on just two pages, the front and back of a single sheet of paper. Meanwhile, the Colorado drivers handbook is 41 pages, at least 30 of which are things people really need to know.
If LEOs can be experts on 30 pages of traffic regulations, why are some of them apparently unable to learn another 2 pages of information pertinent to the lawful carry of firearms?
I have several theories, one or more of which may be true:
1. Their training was good, but focused primarily on the unlawful carry of firearms. In other words, they were properly trained, but their training was overshadowed by other training. When an LEO focuses primarily on the unlawful carry of firearms, they're more apt to intercept the lawful carrier, attempting to determine "what's wrong with this picture?" before realizing nothing's wrong. This results in unnecessary detainment of lawful carriers and a serious increase in the statistical likelihood of miscommunication or altercation.
2. Their training was good, but was overridden by departmental memo or other directive from a superior officer. In this case we have an officer who knows the law, but instead chooses to follow departmental procedure. It's a situation of misplaced loyalty, yes, but one where the officer usually has no choice but to follow procedure if he wants to keep his job. Officers in this situation often do not have any recourse to elevate errant or unlawful procedures for review. Sometimes, however, the officer does have such an avenue for redress, but for whatever reason, decides not to "buck the system."
3. Their training was good, but they forgot their training. This is simply an LEO being inadequate or negligent.
4. Their training was good, but they're ignoring their training. This is far more serious, where the LEO is wilfully ignoring their training. They know what's right, they know they're doing wrong, but they choose to do so anyway.
5. Their training was not good; they were incorrectly trained. A good LEO would know the local and state laws and would comply with them anyway, in essence, completing their own training. Someone who is less knowledgeable would follow the incorrect training.
6. They were never given any training on the lawful carry of firearms by citizens. Personally, I can't see how this might happen, but not being privvy to a police academy syllabus... While I would think all states have minimum training standards, I also think in some regions all training may be up to the local sheriff, in which case the training may be somewhat lacking.
7. Other (please explain in your answer)
THE QUESTION: Which of these seven reasons do you believe is the primary cause or causes behind inappropriate LEO contact and interaction with a lawfully-carrying OCer?
It's a multiple choice poll, so feel free to vote for more than one. Voting for all of them, however, defeats the purpose. The operative word is "primary." Pick 1 to 4 options you feel best describes the situation.
This is not bashing, so please do not stoop to it, here. Most LEOs know the laws as they apply to a citizen's lawful carry of firearms. This poll is an honest attempt to determine why some LEOs, and sometimes entire departments, seem to be unaware of this area of the law, or at the very least, unable to apply it appropriately in the situation where honest, law-abiding citizens are lawfully carrying a firearm.
It's my hope that the results might be taken used to take corrective action within various police departments. At the very least, the options should be a good checklist against which to compare the readiness of a police department or other law enforcement agency with respect to appropriate interaction with law abiding citizens who openly carry a firearm.
Last year I compiled a Colorado "cheat sheet" as to when, where, how, and why I can OC and CC throughout my state. It took me a day to compile, and it fits neatly on just two pages, the front and back of a single sheet of paper. Meanwhile, the Colorado drivers handbook is 41 pages, at least 30 of which are things people really need to know.
If LEOs can be experts on 30 pages of traffic regulations, why are some of them apparently unable to learn another 2 pages of information pertinent to the lawful carry of firearms?
I have several theories, one or more of which may be true:
1. Their training was good, but focused primarily on the unlawful carry of firearms. In other words, they were properly trained, but their training was overshadowed by other training. When an LEO focuses primarily on the unlawful carry of firearms, they're more apt to intercept the lawful carrier, attempting to determine "what's wrong with this picture?" before realizing nothing's wrong. This results in unnecessary detainment of lawful carriers and a serious increase in the statistical likelihood of miscommunication or altercation.
2. Their training was good, but was overridden by departmental memo or other directive from a superior officer. In this case we have an officer who knows the law, but instead chooses to follow departmental procedure. It's a situation of misplaced loyalty, yes, but one where the officer usually has no choice but to follow procedure if he wants to keep his job. Officers in this situation often do not have any recourse to elevate errant or unlawful procedures for review. Sometimes, however, the officer does have such an avenue for redress, but for whatever reason, decides not to "buck the system."
3. Their training was good, but they forgot their training. This is simply an LEO being inadequate or negligent.
4. Their training was good, but they're ignoring their training. This is far more serious, where the LEO is wilfully ignoring their training. They know what's right, they know they're doing wrong, but they choose to do so anyway.
5. Their training was not good; they were incorrectly trained. A good LEO would know the local and state laws and would comply with them anyway, in essence, completing their own training. Someone who is less knowledgeable would follow the incorrect training.
6. They were never given any training on the lawful carry of firearms by citizens. Personally, I can't see how this might happen, but not being privvy to a police academy syllabus... While I would think all states have minimum training standards, I also think in some regions all training may be up to the local sheriff, in which case the training may be somewhat lacking.
7. Other (please explain in your answer)
THE QUESTION: Which of these seven reasons do you believe is the primary cause or causes behind inappropriate LEO contact and interaction with a lawfully-carrying OCer?
It's a multiple choice poll, so feel free to vote for more than one. Voting for all of them, however, defeats the purpose. The operative word is "primary." Pick 1 to 4 options you feel best describes the situation.
Last edited: