Offensive/Defensive Weapons

[ddennis]

I am a new Police Explorer, and was reading the Learning for Life organization's policies for the program. I was wondering why we can not carry any offensive/defensive weapons (e.g. Mace, Pepper Spray, Collapsable Batons, etc...). I understand that we are not Law Enforcement Officers, and are not permitted to carry firearms. But should'nt we be allowed to have some kind of a defensive weapon (other than a pocket knife and our fists) just in case hypothetically someone were to attack you? Personally I think that in order for a Police Explorer or Cadet to carry such a weapon, would need to be trained thouroughly in the use and application of such a weapon. But if a Police Explorer or Cadet were to complete such training successfully, then could'nt that Explorer or Cadet carry that weapon. I would greatly appreciate any feedback that anyone has to offer.

[Ten Six]

Your police department decides what weapons (if any) you may carry, even if you successfully complete training. Being trained on a particular weapon does not automatically mean an officer/explorer/cadet may carry it. The PD has to approve it.

[HailStorm]

The idea here is that Explorers are 'eyes and ears,' and nothing more. If you begin to get into a situation that is 'iffy,' the suggestion is to run, not walk, away. Could somebody randomly attack you because you're in uniform, absolutely. I lost count of the number of people who run up to me yelling "Officer, Officer, I have a question...." But when you're at the public events, hopefully there are Police Officers (better yet, your Explorer Advisors) that are there, and hopefully you have a way of communicating with them.
Explorers are not to be getting in situations like that. If such a situation arises, run away. If you're unable to, then you have your ability to talk, and if it comes to it, your fists.
That help?

[mlhelleckson]

. .

[ddennis]

Thank-you very much for your input. I do completely understand the whole liability situation. I guess that I just would like to have something that I can depend on to back me up in case there is that one in one million incident that a person attacks me and I can not get away or a police officer or assistance is out of reach. Then again the BSA does not have any rules against carrying a pocket knife or multi-tool. again thank-you all for your input I really appreciate it.

[TheDesire]

You should not be placed into the situation. LFL probobly feels that if you have the items to defend yourself, you will spend less time trying to avoid them. Most Explorers are young and dumb. It is a good idea in my opinion.

[mlhelleckson]

. .

[SpokaneExplorer]

"Getting in Dangerous situations"

Yeah I feel Explorers should stay away from Dangerous situations but its not real easy to sometimes. People still aproach you on calls and even though your staying back out of the line of fire, stuff can happen regardless. Anyone who disagree's with this is foolish!! There has been numerous of explorers killed while not being in danger and not able to defend themselves. And how many Explorers learn anything from sitting in a patrol car? NOT ONE!!Real Explorers are not Boy Scouts on an aventure they actually go out on patrol. No offense to the Boy Scouts I was one when i was younger for years and loved it but these are two different programs. Yeah your fist are great, if your a good fighter but not everyone is a great fighter. This is why officers carry guns. I think the BSA should look on changing their liability policy. Im not saying that explorers should carry guns but something concealed for defense and defense only. Now before anyone says that im a wantabe or ganghoe or ignorant im not. I am just a young man exploring and learning my future career. Thanks for your time.

[10-19]

Offensive/Defensive weapons really have no place on our duty belts as Explorers. In the kind of situation where the usage of such weapons arises, Explorers should not be there in the first place.

There are however the implications of working a public event while in uniform. Stuff can indeed happen and running away is not always an option. Mace, maybe. Asps/Batons, big IF on that one.

[ddennis]

Again thank-you all for replying to my question/conern. But I think that what I was attempting to get at is that while we are in uniform on ride alongs or working a detail that we should have something do defend ourselves with. I completely agree with the fact that a lot of explorers are too immature to handle the resonsibility that comes along with carrying such a weapon. I am not trying to imply that we should be able to carry it on our person all of the time. I am merely trying to say that we should be able to have it on us at such a time where the level of risk is at the highest that it should ever be for an explorer.

[10-19]

To that I would say sure, but as you point out a lot of explorers are indeed immature. Also, quite a few would have a hard time defending themselves to begin with.

[apowers]

Possibly limit the liability in such situations by making it department policy that any explorer that is permitted to carry and use defensive weapons be 18 or older. This would take care of the maturity issue; although I know a lot of 16 year olds that are more mature than some 18 year olds. I am not trying to step on anybody's toes here, just saying that possibly the issue is not the liability, but the ability to sucessfully carry out defensive procedures under pressure without the combative subject disarming you are using your weapon against you. That I believe would be the largest problem and/or concern facing most advisors and departments. Train, train, train, and maybe they will see your competence.

[Ten Six]

Possibly limit the liability in such situations by making it department policy that any explorer that is permitted to carry and use defensive weapons be 18 or older. This would take care of the maturity issue; although I know a lot of 16 year olds that are more mature than some 18 year olds. I am not trying to step on anybody's toes here, just saying that possibly the issue is not the liability, but the ability to sucessfully carry out defensive procedures under pressure without the combative subject disarming you are using your weapon against you. That I believe would be the largest problem and/or concern facing most advisors and departments. Train, train, train, and maybe they will see your competence.

Eighteen isn’t a magic number. I am an FTO and I question the maturity of most recruits in their early 20’s. A lot of PD’s will not hire people under 23 for that very reason.

One’s performance under stress isn’t the only measure of maturity. How someone acts while under no direct supervision, when dealing with a hostile “client”, and how one conducts him/her self off duty are a few ways a person expresses their level of maturity.

[TheOrteganator]

Maturity is the issue I see in our post. We are a Cadet post, and not under BSA regulations. However, if we were to decide to pursue some kind of defensive weapon training, and authorize our Cadets to carry defensive weapons... we'd have some serious work to do getting rid of those who can't handle it.

[10-19]

I believe authorization for "weapons" would be far better suited on a case-by-case basis. As already stated, 18 is not a magical number.