• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Observation of cops at a festival...

MaggieD

MaggieD

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,664
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Many know that I'm a great supporter of cops, so please don't misinterpret this post.

Was at a festival in Melrose Park IL today. As we were leaving, I was standing around waiting for Tom and noticed three cops standing together chatting it up...I watched them for 10-15 minutes or so. All spiffed out, to be sure, including bullet-proof vests. Melrose Park is a nice blue collar town in suburban Chicago. Average suburban crime, I'd guess. Guessing a few thousand fest goers. So here's the deal.

I couldn't help but think that, if I were Queen of the World, I'd make sure their presence was totally different.

If something were to "go down" in that area, those three cops were dead. They had beautiful targets on their backs in yellow marked POLICE and seemed to have no situational awareness at all. If a gunman or two wanted to make a statement in that area, the cops would, of course, be targeted first off.

They were there to establish a police presence, to be sure. But how they did it, the way things are today, was haphazard and reckless . . . I'm assuming this short observation carried on before and after, of course.

I don't think they should have been standing together. And I think that, other than occasionally greeting a fest goer, they should be situationally aware. Friendly but professional.

What do you think?
 
MaggieD said:
Many know that I'm a great supporter of cops, so please don't misinterpret this post.

Was at a festival in Melrose Park IL today. As we were leaving, I was standing around waiting for Tom and noticed three cops standing together chatting it up...I watched them for 10-15 minutes or so. All spiffed out, to be sure, including bullet-proof vests. Melrose Park is a nice blue collar town in suburban Chicago. Average suburban crime, I'd guess. Guessing a few thousand fest goers. So here's the deal.

I couldn't help but think that, if I were Queen of the World, I'd make sure their presence was totally different.

If something were to "go down" in that area, those three cops were dead. They had beautiful targets on their backs in yellow marked POLICE and seemed to have no situational awareness at all. If a gunman or two wanted to make a statement in that area, the cops would, of course, be targeted first off.

They were there to establish a police presence, to be sure. But how they did it, the way things are today, was haphazard and reckless . . . I'm assuming this short observation carried on before and after, of course.

I don't think they should have been standing together. And I think that, other than occasionally greeting a fest goer, they should be situationally aware. Friendly but professional.

What do you think?
Click to expand...
Several thoughts...

1) I think they absolutely should be easily and readily identifiable. One, it's part of them establishing their presence, and two, it's just honest portrayal.

2) I agree they shouldn't have been so careless while being chatty. Sounds like they did need to be more aware of their surroundings, but...

3) ...I don't think they need to walk around all SWAT-like with their rifles up and constantly aiming at somebody or something all the time, either. There can be a happy medium.
 
They are like anyone else at times, if nothing tragic has ever happened to them, or if these festivities are normally peaceful, they get lax.
Familiarity breeds carelessness, whether on patrol(walking /driving), gun handling, out in the water, etc.

Here's an example:
About 5 years ago, I was visiting in a town south of the SF Airport. I was at an Arco gas station, pumping gasoline into my car and I look across the lot, over near the street and a CHP has pulled a woman over. She pulled off the street and onto the station property. He got out, talked with her for a minute or so and went back to his car. I stopped looking, finished what I was doing and hung the nozzle back on it's cradle, replaced my gas cap and walked around my car. When I looked up again, the woman was gone, but the cop was still sitting in his patrol car with his head down. I figured he gave her a warning about something and she left. But what was he doing. I was the only one left at the station, so I wasn't in anyone's way and I just stood there and watched for about a minute. The officer had not moved. So I walked the 20 yards over to his car. and I didn't want to walk right up on him and startle him, so I stood back about 6 feet from the car. His window was up and he never saw me. He was writing in a notebook. I stood there for over 2 minutes as he wrote.
Finally, I was feeling rather uncomfortable and waved my hands outwardly and he spotted the movement, causally looked up and rolled down the window and asked me if I needed something.
I told him that I was retired from the job, noticed how young he was and wondered if he was old enough to be in the unit. I said "you look about 17 or 18", he laughed and said he was 23. We chatted for a couple minutes and we parted company.
Had I been an evil doer, I could have easily shot him, dumped his body out of the car and stolen the car.
I thought him to be very careless.
 
Last edited:
I timed out above......

My final thought here is that this stuff happens way too often and when one boring shift happens after another, day in and day out, year after year.......cops get lax....and careless.
I don't know how quiet this town is, on average, but in many places, there just isn't much going on.

When gun play happens, and for most cops it rarely does, they are not ready for it. Never having to draw your gun out, under stress, in 15, 20 years, or longer, you can see why they miss at times and collateral damage happens.
 
Last edited:
MaggieD said:
Many know that I'm a great supporter of cops, so please don't misinterpret this post.

Was at a festival in Melrose Park IL today. As we were leaving, I was standing around waiting for Tom and noticed three cops standing together chatting it up...I watched them for 10-15 minutes or so. All spiffed out, to be sure, including bullet-proof vests. Melrose Park is a nice blue collar town in suburban Chicago. Average suburban crime, I'd guess. Guessing a few thousand fest goers. So here's the deal.

I couldn't help but think that, if I were Queen of the World, I'd make sure their presence was totally different.

If something were to "go down" in that area, those three cops were dead. They had beautiful targets on their backs in yellow marked POLICE and seemed to have no situational awareness at all. If a gunman or two wanted to make a statement in that area, the cops would, of course, be targeted first off.

They were there to establish a police presence, to be sure. But how they did it, the way things are today, was haphazard and reckless . . . I'm assuming this short observation carried on before and after, of course.

I don't think they should have been standing together. And I think that, other than occasionally greeting a fest goer, they should be situationally aware. Friendly but professional.

What do you think?
Click to expand...

The New Orleans PD has decades of experiance in dealling with Mardi Gras crowds.
 
Verthaine said:
The New Orleans PD has decades of experiance in dealling with Mardi Gras crowds.
Click to expand...

Yes they do and that town is pretty active at times and I would think the cops there have to keep their wits about them and their eyes open at all times.
Even back in the 70s, when I was a rookie cop, we were instructed not to congregate in one place very long and never more than two at a time. Unless of course we were assembling for a raid or some other action.
 
At least some of the cops should be in uniform and readily identifiable because it is a LOT more likely someone is going to look for a cop for help than to shoot him or her.

And while I don't want them congregating in large groups to BS while on the job, I actually think cops should work in pairs whenever logistically possible.
 
BrewerBob said:
At least some of the cops should be in uniform and readily identifiable because it is a LOT more likely someone is going to look for a cop for help than to shoot him or her.

And while I don't want them congregating in large groups to BS while on the job, I actually think cops should work in pairs whenever logistically possible.
Click to expand...

I agree, for the most part. Often times the budget prevents that, and sometimes a guy just doesn't want certain partners.

There was a Capt. in Daly City, Ca. back in the 60s and 70s. He was a ridged, straitlaced, no nonsense type of guy, who believed that all cops should be solo and if they couldn't take care of themselves, they shouldn't be on the job. Daly City at the time, was a small town and still isn't that big, so backup wasn't far away and the surrounding towns, like SF, would provide backup as well.
He was one of the last of the tough old cops, and emulated Gen. Patton. His dress uniform was complete with two ivory handled revolvers, one on each hip.

Not pearl handled, "pearl is for pimps" said George Patton.
 
The yellow hi.vis POLICE is fine. Cops should be talking to the public more. More approachable. Have some just assigned to talking to kids.
 
MaggieD said:
Many know that I'm a great supporter of cops, so please don't misinterpret this post.

Was at a festival in Melrose Park IL today. As we were leaving, I was standing around waiting for Tom and noticed three cops standing together chatting it up...I watched them for 10-15 minutes or so. All spiffed out, to be sure, including bullet-proof vests. Melrose Park is a nice blue collar town in suburban Chicago. Average suburban crime, I'd guess. Guessing a few thousand fest goers. So here's the deal.

I couldn't help but think that, if I were Queen of the World, I'd make sure their presence was totally different.

If something were to "go down" in that area, those three cops were dead. They had beautiful targets on their backs in yellow marked POLICE and seemed to have no situational awareness at all. If a gunman or two wanted to make a statement in that area, the cops would, of course, be targeted first off.

They were there to establish a police presence, to be sure. But how they did it, the way things are today, was haphazard and reckless . . . I'm assuming this short observation carried on before and after, of course.

I don't think they should have been standing together. And I think that, other than occasionally greeting a fest goer, they should be situationally aware. Friendly but professional.

What do you think?
Click to expand...


I dont think any police chief is going to assign his best to a festival.
 
katzgar said:
I dont think any police chief is going to assign his best to a festival.
Click to expand...

That's funny. The chief of police doesn't handle assignments. The patrol division chief doesn't handle assignments. The patrol captain doesn't handle assignments. The lieutenant and sergeant make the assignments to festivals, funeral, foot patrol, and whatever unless you city is so rotten and corrupt the union does it.

Two thoughts. One is that almost all the time police officers interact with citizens it's negative. People are angry, hurt, disappointed or whatever and the cop is the one to hear about it. Pretty soon he really does believe no one cares. The department needs to force the officers to have positive contacts with citizens.

One of the worst things I heard about the incident in Ferguson, Missiouri, was that in a town of 60,000 the police officer didn't know a thug as big as Mike Brown. In the city where I worked, of a similar size, almost all the cops would have known Mike Brown on sight.

Officers need to meet people talk to people but that takes time and time is money. I can remember shifts where we ran from call to call, dumping some calls because others came in that were more urgent.
 
Patrickt said:
That's funny. The chief of police doesn't handle assignments. The patrol division chief doesn't handle assignments. The patrol captain doesn't handle assignments. The lieutenant and sergeant make the assignments to festivals, funeral, foot patrol, and whatever unless you city is so rotten and corrupt the union does it.

Two thoughts. One is that almost all the time police officers interact with citizens it's negative. People are angry, hurt, disappointed or whatever and the cop is the one to hear about it. Pretty soon he really does believe no one cares. The department needs to force the officers to have positive contacts with citizens.

One of the worst things I heard about the incident in Ferguson, Missiouri, was that in a town of 60,000 the police officer didn't know a thug as big as Mike Brown. In the city where I worked, of a similar size, almost all the cops would have known Mike Brown on sight.

Officers need to meet people talk to people but that takes time and time is money. I can remember shifts where we ran from call to call, dumping some calls because others came in that were more urgent.
Click to expand...


small forces dont have a lot of bureacracy... focus dude
 
katzgar said:
small forces dont have a lot of bureacracy... focus dude
Click to expand...

I was on a small force in 1966, Dude. I was on a much larger force in 1996. I am focused, Dude. Oh, wait, Dude is kind of rude. Change that to, Sonny.
 
MaggieD said:
Many know that I'm a great supporter of cops, so please don't misinterpret this post.

Was at a festival in Melrose Park IL today. As we were leaving, I was standing around waiting for Tom and noticed three cops standing together chatting it up...I watched them for 10-15 minutes or so. All spiffed out, to be sure, including bullet-proof vests. Melrose Park is a nice blue collar town in suburban Chicago. Average suburban crime, I'd guess. Guessing a few thousand fest goers. So here's the deal.

I couldn't help but think that, if I were Queen of the World, I'd make sure their presence was totally different.

If something were to "go down" in that area, those three cops were dead. They had beautiful targets on their backs in yellow marked POLICE and seemed to have no situational awareness at all. If a gunman or two wanted to make a statement in that area, the cops would, of course, be targeted first off.

They were there to establish a police presence, to be sure. But how they did it, the way things are today, was haphazard and reckless . . . I'm assuming this short observation carried on before and after, of course.

I don't think they should have been standing together. And I think that, other than occasionally greeting a fest goer, they should be situationally aware. Friendly but professional.

What do you think?
Click to expand...

Understand your concerns but you can not 100% of the time be in condition RED!
Jeff Cooper developed this color code. The officers use their training, experience and
where they are to determine threats if any. I think you would be very surprise how
quick they could react to a problem.

Thanks so much for supporting the police. They need all the support they can get!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Cooper
White: Unaware and unprepared. If attacked in Condition White, the only thing that may save you is the inadequacy or ineptitude of your attacker. When confronted by something nasty, your reaction will probably be "Oh my God! This can't be happening to me."
Yellow: Relaxed alert. No specific threat situation. Your mindset is that "today could be the day I may have to defend myself". You are simply aware that the world is a potentially unfriendly place and that you are prepared to defend yourself, if necessary. You use your eyes and ears, and realize that "I may have to shoot today". You don't have to be armed in this state, but if you are armed you should be in Condition Yellow. You should always be in Yellow whenever you are in unfamiliar surroundings or among people you don't know. You can remain in Yellow for long periods, as long as you are able to "Watch your six." (In aviation 12 o'clock refers to the direction in front of the aircraft's nose. Six o'clock is the blind spot behind the pilot.) In Yellow, you are "taking in" surrounding information in a relaxed but alert manner, like a continuous 360 degree radar sweep. As Cooper put it, "I might have to shoot."
Orange: Specific alert. Something is not quite right and has your attention. Your radar has picked up a specific alert. You shift your primary focus to determine if there is a threat (but you do not drop your six). Your mindset shifts to "I may have to shoot that person today", focusing on the specific target which has caused the escalation in alert status. In Condition Orange, you set a mental trigger: "If that person does "X", I will need to stop them". Your pistol usually remains holstered in this state. Staying in Orange can be a bit of a mental strain, but you can stay in it for as long as you need to. If the threat proves to be nothing, you shift back to Condition Yellow.
Red: Condition Red is fight. Your mental trigger (established back in Condition Orange) has been tripped. "If 'X' happens I will shoot that person" — 'X' has happened, the fight is on.
 
Common Sense 1 said:
Understand your concerns but you can not 100% of the time be in condition RED!
Jeff Cooper developed this color code. The officers use their training, experience and
where they are to determine threats if any. I think you would be very surprise how
quick they could react to a problem.

Thanks so much for supporting the police. They need all the support they can get!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Cooper
White: Unaware and unprepared. If attacked in Condition White, the only thing that may save you is the inadequacy or ineptitude of your attacker. When confronted by something nasty, your reaction will probably be "Oh my God! This can't be happening to me."
Yellow: Relaxed alert. No specific threat situation. Your mindset is that "today could be the day I may have to defend myself". You are simply aware that the world is a potentially unfriendly place and that you are prepared to defend yourself, if necessary. You use your eyes and ears, and realize that "I may have to shoot today". You don't have to be armed in this state, but if you are armed you should be in Condition Yellow. You should always be in Yellow whenever you are in unfamiliar surroundings or among people you don't know. You can remain in Yellow for long periods, as long as you are able to "Watch your six." (In aviation 12 o'clock refers to the direction in front of the aircraft's nose. Six o'clock is the blind spot behind the pilot.) In Yellow, you are "taking in" surrounding information in a relaxed but alert manner, like a continuous 360 degree radar sweep. As Cooper put it, "I might have to shoot."
Orange: Specific alert. Something is not quite right and has your attention. Your radar has picked up a specific alert. You shift your primary focus to determine if there is a threat (but you do not drop your six). Your mindset shifts to "I may have to shoot that person today", focusing on the specific target which has caused the escalation in alert status. In Condition Orange, you set a mental trigger: "If that person does "X", I will need to stop them". Your pistol usually remains holstered in this state. Staying in Orange can be a bit of a mental strain, but you can stay in it for as long as you need to. If the threat proves to be nothing, you shift back to Condition Yellow.
Red: Condition Red is fight. Your mental trigger (established back in Condition Orange) has been tripped. "If 'X' happens I will shoot that person" — 'X' has happened, the fight is on.
Click to expand...

Wish I could give you more likes. VERY interesting. Thank you!
 
Patrickt said:
I was on a small force in 1966, Dude. I was on a much larger force in 1996. I am focused, Dude. Oh, wait, Dude is kind of rude. Change that to, Sonny.
Click to expand...

:lamo:lamo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom