(NM) Unarmed LEOs in the public schools

pax

New member
from http://www.abqjournal.com/news/118832news09-07-00.htm
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
Unarmed APS Officers Called Liability Risk

By Jeff Jones and Rudi Keller
Journal Staff Writers


The Albuquerque Public Schools district is leaving itself open to huge liability by not allowing its 25 police officers to carry guns, a consultant says in a new report.

The consultant's report recommends that APS officers immediately stop handling all alarm calls, driving marked police cars and responding to calls of armed students or adults until they are allowed to arm themselves.

Board members said the report, which they received Wednesday, caught them by surprise. Dated June 29, the report urged immediate action by the board.

Two board members who voted against giving the officers guns in 1995 said Wednesday that they hadn't changed their minds.

APS Superintendent Brad Allison and Associate Superintendent Michael Vigil, who oversees police operations, said they weren't ready to endorse the idea.

Armed Albuquerque police officers or Bernalillo County sheriff's deputies are assigned to all high schools and middle schools. Some elementaries also have so-called resource officers.

The study cost APS $18,000, board president Aggie Lopez said.

"I would never support" arming APS police, Lopez said. "When you are not armed, you use your head a little more."

She said she can tolerate armed city and county law enforcement because "they are not our employees."

The study, an assessment of the police force, was conducted by National School Safety and Security Services of Cleveland.

The report says APS may have a hard time explaining in potential lawsuits why it chose to keep its own officers — many of whom are retired city police or county deputies — from carrying guns.

"Perhaps the best response to this question would be for APS to sign a blank check right then and hand it over to the plaintiffs," the report says. It later adds, "APS has been exceptionally fortunate ... to have not been the target of lawsuits for negligent security or related actions."

The report notes that an unarmed APS officer "miraculously" apprehended two rape suspects after coming upon the crime in progress. The report doesn't note when the incident occurred.

The report praises APS police, dispatchers and Police Chief Gil Lovato, saying officers are "performing very effectively" given the size of staff and budget.

And it adds that, although some may argue APS officers in the past haven't needed guns to protect themselves, students or staff members, "the potential for such an incident to occur is foreseeable."

The Journal requested a copy of the report more than two weeks ago. Lopez said she first heard about the report when that request was relayed to her. Lopez said she demanded that the report be given to board members first.

The board didn't have to approve the study in advance because it cost under $20,000, Lopez said.

Board member Leonard DeLayo joined Lopez in saying he was against giving the officers guns.

Lovato said he has serious concerns about the safety of unarmed officers, but he believes the recommendations to stop responding to alarms, driving police cars and handling calls of armed students are too strong.

The vast majority of burglar alarms at schools turn out to be false, he said, and armed city police or deputies respond with APS police to reports of armed students or adults on campuses.

"We need to really take an in-depth look at arming the officers," he said.

Kenneth Trump, president of the consulting firm and co-author of the report, said in an interview that arming school police shouldn't be a political issue.

"Do we vote on whether we send our (deputies) and police onto the street without firearms?" Trump asked. "A firearm is an industry standard for police officers. Period."

The report says one common concern about arming school police is the potential for losing control of a gun to someone who is violent. But it adds most law officers are trained on how to keep control of their weapons.

The report also urges the district to immediately boost its "extremely low" annual police training budget of $800 — which equals $32 per officer. Trump said that amount wouldn't even cover learning materials, such as copies, for police training.

Trump said APS police have "wheeled and dealed" with city police and the sheriff's department to get training, and they have done "a miraculous job." But he added "they shouldn't be put in that type of a position."
[/quote]

What a lot of morons reside in this world...

pax

"A lot of people can cover their mistakes, but not teachers. Their mistakes grow up to be school board members." -- John Leo
 
Well LEO are at very high risk from their and other LEO weapons. IIRC the majority of gun related injury's and deaths among LEO's comes from their own gun or another LEO's gun.

I have not made up my mind yet, but I think that not all LEO's should be allowed to carry guns. At least in my area many are just not up to carrying guns safely. I suspect their isn't a practical cost effective way to insure that ALL LEO's have acceptable gun handling skills, so my thought is to only allow the ones that can demonstrate the ability to safely carry and handle guns to do so in public.
 
I would agree that untrained LEO's should not have firearms.

But, IMHO, the solution is to add the requisite amount of training. I would wager that we would find plenty of expenditures much less important in this budget.

Parents should recognize the inadequacy of this 'police force'. Not to mention the great message this sends to BG's. I can see it now ... a fateful attack by an armed nutcase, and we'll see glowing admiration for the APS officer(s) who gave his / her life to save the student(s) who perished.

Some of these debates are truly idiotic, from my perspective.

Either don't have police officers, and just have parent volunteers for security, or hire real peace officers.

Regards from AZ
 
I guess in the case of Albuquerque's Public Schools, the market will decide if their officers shall be armed. If there is no lack of candidates to be unarmed APS officers, then what's the fuss? If all the officers quit and no one can be found to replace them, then APS either decides to arm their officers or forget about having a police force.
 
Originally posted by Glamdring:
"IIRC the majority of gun related injury's and deaths among LEO's comes from their own gun or another LEO's gun."

The majority? Where did you find this? Do you have any research and statistics to back this up? Since I am an LEO I follow the yearly reports of LEO on-duty deaths compiled by the FBI. I have NEVER found a report that said the MAJORITY of LEO firearm related deaths are from LEO guns. Not to flame but this sounds like the propaganda that the antis spew without any research or by using slanted research.

"I have not made up my mind yet, but I think that not all LEO's should be allowed to carry guns. At least in my area many are just not up to carrying guns safely. I suspect their isn't a practical cost effective way to insure that ALL LEO's have acceptable gun handling skills, so my thought is to only allow the ones that can demonstrate the ability to safely carry and handle guns to do so in public."

My God!!!!!!!!! Do you know what you are saying. We are hearing the California lawmakers making these same statements regarding citizens being allowed to posses guns. A bill that will return next year address this issue with written tests, proficiency tests, license, etc. Please don't take this the wrong way but your statements above are exactly what the antis spew. I can hear the antis now: If we can't trust trained and tested LEOs to carry guns how can we trust average citizens?




[This message has been edited by mrat (edited September 12, 2000).]
 
They have an $800 training budget but just paid $18,000 for this consulting report? Am I the only one who thinks this is wrong? How about using those funds to pay for Police training and weapons??? I for one would not work on a police department without weapons.

Do they buy hoses for the fire department??? Or would they rather the fire fighters use their heads more to fight fire. " Just throwing water on it may not be the best course of action".....



------------------
"Some people spend an entire liftime wondering if they made a difference. Marines don't have that problem."
Semper Fi
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mrat:
Originally posted by Glamdring:
"IIRC the majority of gun related injury's and deaths among LEO's comes from their own gun or another LEO's gun."

The majority? Where did you find this? Do you have any research and statistics to back this up? Since I am an LEO I follow the yearly reports of LEO on-duty deaths compiled by the FBI. I have NEVER found a report that said the MAJORITY of LEO firearm related deaths are from LEO guns. Not to flame but this sounds like the propaganda that the antis spew without any research or by using slanted research.

"I have not made up my mind yet, but I think that not all LEO's should be allowed to carry guns. At least in my area many are just not up to carrying guns safely. I suspect their isn't a practical cost effective way to insure that ALL LEO's have acceptable gun handling skills, so my thought is to only allow the ones that can demonstrate the ability to safely carry and handle guns to do so in public."

My God!!!!!!!!! Do you know what you are saying. We are hearing the California lawmakers making these same statements regarding citizens being allowed to posses guns. A bill that will return next year address this issue with written tests, proficiency tests, license, etc. Please don't take this the wrong way but your statements above are exactly what the antis spew. I can hear the antis now: If we can't trust trained and tested LEOs to carry guns how can we trust average citizens?
[/quote]
No flame taken. I said injuries and deaths...meant as a group. I think vehical's are the biggest threat, but I did come across some research that indicated that a large % ofgun related injuries and fatalities among LEO's were caused by LEO's weapons. About 6 or so years ago I did a research project on murder rates across cultures trying to determine if gun laws reduced murder. LEO related deaths were not the focus of that project so I don't think I kept those notes.

If I recall correctly the problem is mainly due to AD/ND's, weapon retention, and lines of fire.
 
Not meant as a slam against LEO's. Gun handling is a skill, one that I don't think most LEO's spend much time at maintaining. And I can understand the reasons why they don't. I think that it would be wise to add annual gun safety qualifications in force on force training for LEO's in addtion to their shooting qualification.

I suspect that Ayoob or Lindell could provide some stats on the issue of LEO's guns in connection to LEO's being shot.

I don't know how reliable the source was, and that research project taught me never to trust stats :D

But the fact that a LEO is around LEO's guns far more than he/she is around non LEO's guns made it sound possible. Just like your more likely to get injured at home or work, because that is were you are most of the time...doesn't mean home or work are more dangerous than say church or the mall. Just that your at home or work for 40+ hours every week and only at church or the mall for a couple of hours per week.

A greater exposure.

[This message has been edited by Glamdring (edited September 12, 2000).]
 
The positive side to this is that it is truly nice to see the grabbers grabbing from the chosen few. I think the APS should ban LEO's from carrying on school property at ALL times. The more they grab, the more people wake up to their lunacy, the better we are in the long run. One can only hope that the "if youre unarmed youll use your head more" logic will spread to the city council and they can start eliminating guns from the hands of the local LEO's. Just think of all the good LEO's could do if they only used their heads more. Utopia would be just around the corner.

------------------
"Liberty is never unalienable; it must be redeemed regularly with the blood of patriots or it always vanishes."
-R.A. Heinlein
 
Mrat and TAz both have good points.
That accidents have occurred is being used against officers and civillians.
I dont wont to have to prove that Im worthy of a right because some fool across town who isnt old enough to smoke twirled a loaded revolver like a toy.
Taz brings out a great one too their are far more officers supporting the anti-gun Fraternal order of police than the pro-gun rights LEAA (www.leaa.org) part of the reason for that may be is that most officers are treated like elite superpeople who are special and above all the millions of gunlaws that restrict the idiot gunowner like myself who's not employed by the gov/state/city.
If they were maybe police as a group would be more concerned about the gunrights fight.
www.ccops.org www.jbs.org www.jpfo.org www.gunowners.org

------------------
"those who sacrifice
liberty for security deserve neither"
 
ruger45,
The topic of fraternal order of police and chiefs of police supporting gun control has been done to death. The LEOs here have said again and again that we are not asked our opinion on this topic. Just like regular unions support gun control without asking their members. The question that needs to be asked is how to get these people out of positions of power. I don't know how, I am not even a member of the FOP. Also, these people are masters of gaining power and keeping it.

Glamdring,
I agree with you, most LEOs don't practice with their firearms enough. I think the reason is two fold. One is human nature, people don't practice at something unless they like it or they are forced to. Law Enforcement agencies do not dedicated enough training to firearm skills or require enough. They are to busy making us take yearly classes on sexual harassment, culture diversity, sensitivity training....etc. Basically whatever training that is PC at the time. The private citizens need to demand the proper training.
 
It seems stupidity runs in the school halls. the local Community College is taking their 43 police officers out of uniform and putting them into maroon suits and ties. They can't even display a badge. The reason for this? The quotes from the college vice president give you some idea. "Uniforms foster violence" and "Promote an unneccesary emphasis upon laws and regulation." Need I mention this idiot came to Austin from a major California university? I can't wait for them to attempt to direct traffic (Which is 80% of their job) when dressed like a used car salesman. I still haven't figured out how they're going to wear a duty belt, body armor, ride a bike around campus, or make arrests. Or, most importantly how other officers in emergency situations are supposed to recognise them. Poor buggers are begging for a friendly fire incident.
 
Seems to me if there is a need for the police to be on campus to begin with then they should be armed same as they should be on the beat. I don't like the idea of unarmed police, if a cop is going to be expected to confront potentially armed suspects then he should have the propper gear to deal with the situation. Now if they do not deem this as a situation where armed police are necessary then maybe they need to rethink whether or not they need the police to be there to begin with. maybe they should just hire some security guards. With the amount they charge for tuition they should be able to cover it.
 
When I was in college, the uniformed college cops mostly carried guns, and were regarded as LEO's...at least, they got as much respect as Barney Fife. :)

There were a few low-grade college cops (a redundancy, to be sure) who were not armed. These were uniformly ignored - and to be fair, they never tried to get anyone's attention.

I spoke to one once - a retired Chicago cop - and he told me that as long as he was unarmed, his sole response to ANY report of ANY problem would be to call for backup by the "real" campus cops.

Period.
 
Back
Top