Identification Is Mandatory
Frank Borelli
Editor-in-Chief
Officer.com
Acrosst he span of the past two decades we have seen a strong evolution in police response tactics in reaction to various violent incidents such as Columbine, Beslan, Virginia Tech and now, Mumbai. Since I am a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment and believe that every legally armed citizen should play a role in “homeland defense” I have gotten the same question a number of times from said civilians: how do we identify ourselves to the arriving police so we don’t get shot?
I’ve shared that question and some of the response I’ve gotten from law enforcement professionals is, “Tell them to stay out of it. Escape or take cover and leave it to the police.” In my view this is the “big brother will take care of everything” answer that is unacceptable to those who refuse to be victims.
America was built by men (and women) of conviction. They had strong beliefs in such things as liberty and independence; liberty from government control and independence from government care. Such folks - and there are plenty of them in our country today - aren’t satisfied with the answer of “do nothing; let the police handle it.” Indeed, as legally armed and properly trained citizens they feel duty-bound to take SOME kind of action beyond escaping or hiding. In their mind it is just as wrong to leave others to needlessly die as it is in the mind of the responding law enforcement officers.
So what do we do? No matter what we (read “the establishment”) tell them, they will take action as they see fit within the limits of their background, training, equipment and motivation. In my view that just means that we law enforcement officers have more good guys to help us. If we can accept that we once again come back to the question of IDENTIFICATION to avoid unnecessary shootings of the good folks.
At one point I had suggested that every legally armed citizen should purchase and wear a “Concealed Carry Weapon Permit Holder” badge which can be bought online. My thinking was that most off-duty cops wear badges close to their weapons or in a manner permitting easy display in emergency situations, so the wear of such a badge would serve to slow the responding cops down enough NOT to shoot the good guys. However, there were several arguments that were immediately called to my attention in this regard.
1) ANYONE can buy a badge online including BAD guys. We don’t want to train our police to slow down JUST because they see a badge in a crisis situation.
2) The badge is a symbol of authority and we (any law enforcement official) shouldn’t be encouraging civilians to wear such a thing.
On the other side of the argument are the legally armed civilians who are, shall we say, slightly concerned about the motivations of law enforcement since so many leaders (Chiefs and Sheriffs) have publicly voiced very anti-gun sentiments. The thought I’ve encountered a lot is, “The police officer doesn’t need to know I’m armed. I’m not breaking the law. Him knowing that just gives him one more reason to harass me.” Having encountered my fair share of legally armed civilians and not ever having harassed any one of them, it’s difficult for me to see any reason why my brother officers would act in such a fashion. That said, it’s clear that some do, further justifying that stream of thought for the “good guy” citizens.
So, what do we do? Argument #1 above applies as much to off-duty or plain clothes officers as it does legally armed civilians. Given recent history (specifically Mumbai) we HAVE to develop a means - that can be trained across the board - for identifying those who are legally armed and exercising a justified use of force in response to a terrorist incident.
Any thoughts on what that could be? I’m open to all suggestions. It’s something we need to address as best we can and I welcome all intelligent comment.
I completely agree that we MUST develop a means for identifying the good guys as you state. Training is essential as well in my opinion. All I can think of right now on the ID front is that each person that is to be a part of this force be given some sort of article of clothing perhaps with a unique code (combination of letters, numbers and characters) printed BOLDLY on the front and back as well as a “go bag” with some sort of head gear? This is a tough one but given Mumbai and other recent events it is only a matter of time in my opinion. Thanks for the blog, good stuff sir.
Respectfully,
Robert
Frank; I’ glad you asked the question. And the response of tell them to stay out of it and seek cover or escape, shows how some officer’s dont realize that may not be possible.If there is an active shooter and no police are on scene,response time become’s a factor.I think that if good guy with the proper trianing can put down bad guy/active shooter it would be irresponsable to run for cover.
How to properly identify the good guy in this situation is something that needs to be worked on.I have a couple of t-shirts that have GOOD GUY on the frount and back in the same way would say POLICE for U.C. officers. Yes I know that bad guy’s could have on one of these shirts.But I get positive feedbak from people when I wear mine.
Tough question to answer. I think most cops have (or should have) it ingrained in them that if they are involved in an off duty use of force situation that they should ‘lie down on the floor and do what the nice police officer’ (the uniformed guys) tells them to do. In the majority of jurisdictions it is impossible for all officers to know everyone on their own department. How are the uniformed guys supposed to be able to differentiate a ‘good guy’ from a ‘bad guy’ - the bad guys most certainly will co-opt whatever methodology the good guys adopt to use to their advantage. Best advice I can think of is for anyone in plain clothes to immediately comply with any/all instructions of uniformed officers. I’d sure lots rather apologize to a fellow officer or good guy citizen than to have a bad result of a blue on blue………….
I have thought about this and cannot come up with a viable solution for something to wear or display as in all liklihood, if I am engaged in combat with some bad guys I either won’t be wearing the “good guy” article of clothing nor hive the time or wherewithall to get out my fake badge. So I will simply have to trust and hope that the first arriving officer (as well as other well intentioned concealed carry good guys) will be able to identify who the good guys and bad guys are by the way the scene is playing out. The innocent victims will be running away from the bad guys, etc. The bad guys will be obvious as the bad guys. And finally, hopefully, I will have dispatched the bad guys as quick as I do some IDPA stages and then I can lay down or holster my gun so as not to present a threat identity to the first responders.
Bottom line is there is no way to fix this problem completely and I just hope that I don’t screw up and shoot a fellow good guy by mistake myself.
Your personal deportment, and tactics and gun handling skills are the key factors in how LEs will perceive who and what you are. How you look and if you have a “badge” are not as key in LEs ability to sort out the good guys from the bad guys. If you stumble and fumble your gun like some juiced up gang banger, then that’s how LEs will perceive you. If you’re cool, confident, and handling your weapon with approved LE tactics, then the good guys are more apt to think you’re one of them. Another point; if you are holding a gun and looking at the cops, then you are a threat. If you are holding a gun and tracking the bad guy while ignoring the cops, then you may be perceived as a good guy.
The problem of persons carrying guns who are not adequately trained in their use can result in innocent persons being wrongly perceived to be bad guys and being shot by LE.
It mighty be wise for an armed civilian to keep his piece in its holster when police are present.
A sociologist at NYU attempted to replicate the incident in which Colin Ferguson shot twenty-five people the Long Island Ralroad on Dec. 7, 1993. they set out to see what would happen if some of the people on the train had guns, and in almost every case the person representing Colin Ferguson got shot, but very many persons who had also drawn their weapons were shot.
We have standards and required training for persons to drive automobiles, fly planes, and navigate power boats we might do well to demand training and qualification on tests for those who wish to carry concealable firearms.
W.
I am a citizen who lawfully carries whenever possible. I hope I never have to use deadly force to protect myself or a loved one but I am glad to know that the police (at least in most jurisdictions) are aware that not everybody who may happen to have a gun on them is a bad guy. If there was ever a situation where I had to draw and/or fire my gun and then the police arrived and controlled the area I would holster my gun if and only if I felt the threat to myself of my loved ones had been neutralized. I pray the whatever officers responded to the scene would be able to distinguish between a legitimate threat and a citizen lawfully protecting himself or his family. I’ll check back on this page to see if there are any replies. Thank you.
Frank,
In the video recordings of the Trolley Mall shooting (Salt Lake City, Utah Feb 2007) you can clearly hear Ofc. Ken Hammond, Ogden PD, yellig, “Ogden Police! OPD off-duty police officer!” as he engages the shooter. He continued to yell this identification over and over as officers responded and moved up to him. (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=pIpDSf7Nglc)
What is the appropriate ID for a private citizen? What will keep a responding officer or another CCW’er from engaging a “good-guy”? This problem has not been completely solved even within LE despite decades of training, policies and articles.
The fundamental problem is that whatever iron clad identifier is developed can be corrupted by the bad-guys. Ultimately, each person - LE or not - responding to a situation must make a decision of who to trust.
In Mumbai, the terrorists took control of at least one police vehicle and drove through the city shooting at random from that vehicle. They could have (but did not) put on police uniforms to increase the confusion. does this mean that I should not trust uniformed LE responding to a scene?
As someone else mentioned, it will likely come down to appearance, presence, actions and statements. The guy with the AK shouting “Allahu Akbar” is more likely the target of choice then the guy with a Glock and a high-n-tight.
Frank:
The primary indicator of a good guy v. a bad guy is that the good guy, given the opportunity, won’t point his gun at a recognized police officer and will likely obey commands to disarm as soon as he feels safe. Note the words, “opportunity” and “recognized” and “safe”.
Some follow-up questions then become:
How does a police officer positively identify himself without jeopardizing his own life, or the life of the lawfully armed citizen? (Yelling “Police” while blinding the individual with a flashlight making identification impossible would likely not make me feel particularly safe.)?
How does the officer respond if the armed individual, when naturally responding to the new perceived threat (large individual loudly yelling something, blinding you with a bright light and approaching you aggressively) turns head, body and thus hand with gun, toward the noise/light/aggressor? In other words, how does the officer judge an instinctive reaction from an attack?
The factors to balance in order of import: Safety of the victim (armed), Safety of the officer (armed), Situational tension, Safety of the perp (armed/not). The reason I place the safety of the citizen before that of the officer is that the officer should have had some form of training on how to deal with this circumstance, should have thought of how he or she will react in this circumstance, and had time in the approach to develop some kind of plan - three benefits which the victim likely does not have.
The only answer I can come up with is that the officer has to give someone who is armed the opportunity and time to respond to show by action whether he is a good guy or a bad guy - which, judging by the lack of high numbers of accidental shootings on behalf of the police departments, most officers seem to do.
Walter:
In the majority of states offering concealed carry, those citizens who wish to carry a weapon concealed must pass much more stringent training and exams than those required to operate a vehicle and certainly far more exacting than those required to operate a power boat. The exams are generally both written (concerning the laws of the jurisdiction, situations, etc) and physical (shooting qualification). Whereas I would not argue that most CCW holders have undergone the training equivalent of your standard police officer, I will strenuously argue that they are far more capable with a weapon than the majority of the populace. Proof of this statement can be found in reviewing the ratio of the number of accidental discharges, or even gun related crimes attributed to CCW qualified holders to the number of gun related crimes attributed to non-CCW holders.
I would agree there needs to be some type of identification which would be available to those who are legally armed citizens.
I am not a fan of the Police like badge idea for different reasons that I will not go into. I think the Identification should be a type that is hidden until needed. I for one would not want to be able to be picked out of a crowd as someone carrying a Concealed weapon by wearing a shirt that says so. Whats the point of carrying concealed if everyone knows your carrying?
I think there should be a Standard Hard ID card (as most Sheriffs just issue a paper permit). One in the same fashion as a Drivers License. As well as an incorporated nationally recognized logo. That way it could be kept under a shirt and displayed around the neck such as Police or Military IDs generally are. It would have a picture and other type of information to alert the responding officers that they are a friendly. As for those who want more of a “badge” like identification the Logo could be made into a “badge” that would look nothing like a highly recognized police badge design. This could also be displayed in conjunction with the ID.
Keep in mind any type of identification will always be forged by a criminal. Some criminals go as far as wearing a fully equipped Police uniform to carrying out their criminal behavior.
Training is also a key fact. It was pointed out if you are fumbling with your weapon or carrying it “gang banger” style you will be less likely to be taken as a friendly. Most legally armed citizens train often and are pretty good shots and don’t want to pull their weapons unless its absolutely needed. Heck I know some legally armed citizens who shoot more often and train more in depth with their weapons then some Law Enforcement Officers.
I believe if at all possible a defensive weapons course should be taken along with the standard class that is required by some sheriffs departments.
So I believe that with a combination of Training and a Standard Identification Credentials worn under the shirt and displayed when needed this issue could be resolved.
From the CCW perspective, it doesn’t seem that hard to identify us vs. the bad guy. The bad guy is going to shoot at random people until he either runs out of ammunition or gets shot. The BG will also not be running away or taking cover. The good guy will only point their gun at the BG, and will do as the LEO tells them. They will also generally try to make themselves as small a target as possible.
On the thread of ID, most Shall Issue states do have a standard laminated ID card, or put it on the driver’s license. The only states that I know of that have a paper permit are ones like Iowa that allow each county sheriff to make up their own rules for issue, training, and restrictions.
Get on the phone with a 911 operator, identify and describe yourself, and insist that the information be put out to any officers on the scene. Tell the operator that you want direction from the officers as to how they would like to deal with the fact that you are armed. This is the day of cell phones, there is no excuse not to be in communication with officers so they can know who and what they are dealing with.
I think, rather than attempting to ‘nationalize’ some type of ‘good guy’ identification, that it be far more cost- and time-effective to ensure that our LEOs receive appropriate sensitivity training to enlighten them as to the possibility of ‘friendly’ shooters at such scenes. It is their trust and jusdgement that is far more important than any badges, CC ID, or other emblems of good-guy-ness displayed by armed civilians that will ensure our safety as well as theirs. Join us: http://rtkba.com/forums/index.php?
First, thanks for bringing attention to this topic in the LE field. I’ve seen it discussed a lot in CCW circles, but not that much in LE circles.
As info, I’m a CCW holder who is also a non-sworn employee of a PD, and I’ve participated as a role player in Active Shooter Training for our department. I agree with a couple of other responders to this thread, that there is no perfect answer, but the best solution lies in training of both LEOs and CCW holders.
It would be beneficial if the LE community in general would stop thinking that an armed citizen is always a bad thing. For example, officers are trained that a call of a “man with a gun” is sort of an “OH S**T” situation, and I understand that sometimes it is, but at the same time, I think, “So what? I’m a man with a gun.” If officers would realize that more and more people are carrying, and understand that the first person they see with a gun is not necessarily the bad guy, it would go a long way in solving the problem.
At the same time, as a CCW holder, I accept several things about becoming involved in an Active Shooter situation. One is that if I’m not shooting my gun, or holding it on a violent subject, ready to shoot, the gun is going to be out of sight. The second thing is that if my gun is exposed and a uniformed officer shows up, my gun is going on the ground and my hands are going up as fast as they can, while making sure I’m out of the bad guy’s line of fire. I know that in sorting out the mess, I’m probably going to be handcuffed, probably at gunpoint. I know that simply holding a gun in an active shooter situation can make me a target of both the bad guys and the other good guys. I have to weigh these risks against the risks of going unarmed when I decide to carry.
For these reasons, there are situations in which I won’t engage. If I’m in a restaurant with my family and an armed robbery occurs, if I believe they’ll just take the money and run, then I’ll observe and let LE handle it when they arrive. I won’t make myself and my family a target and start bullets flying if not necessary.
As far as wearing some kind of ID, or carrying a CCW badge, I don’t think either is practical. There is nothing that I’d always wear when carrying that would be recognizable by a responding officer, and I can’t imagine reaching into my pocket or under my shirt for a badge when there is a nervous rookie cop holding his gun on me and yelling for me to put up my hands. There’ll be time to show him my ID when things are being sorted out.
“If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!” There is no ID solution. The first responders will just have to use their best judgment when arriving. Legally-armed citizens will just have to use their best judgment as well and decide for themselves whether or not the situation is desperate enough to justify their intervention. Earlier a poster noted correctly that the civilians need to follow officer instructions exactly…that is the best course of action! This day in age the public (and the police themselves) are used to the concept of plain cloth officers and armed civilians!
I agree with those that think there is no ID solution. I think the probability of being in an armed encounter where the police may be present before you have resolved the issue depends on a key item. Does the event occur right there in front of you or is it one of those things where its on the other side of the mall, away from you etc? If its right there, and you have been successful its likely over before police can respond. If not, and you either spend time to stay behind cover, or go to meet the threat, chances are you may see the cops before the encounter is over. If that does happen, following instructions like others have said will be the only thing that saves your life. I would fully expect to be ordered to the ground and hog tied until things are sorted out. Minor consequences considering the alternative.
The best option I have seen HERE is “call 911″. Identification by a “trusted dispatcher” to responding officers both by radio and by laptop to who you are, what your wearing,where you are, and a description of what is going on seems right to me. At the VERY LEAST, the officers are aware of a “friendly” with a weapon is on scene. This will, hopefully give the responders other options as to how and who to respond to with warranted deadly force. The 911 dispacher, to the officer is again trusted and the information is coming in over “secure” channels. Also, Shouting “Armed Civilian” WHEN you decide to take action “might” help with the posibility of there being an off duty officer responding as well and not shooting you by mistake. In my view, a person shouting commands at another while focusing there attention on that one person, shows there not a threat to others around. Trained police do this and recognize this as common procedure. Just my humble opinion!
I agree dial 911 ASAP or have someone (preferably a family member) dial 911 and describe you. Tell the dispatcher who you are and what you look like so they can inform the responding officers.
Thank you for posting that, I forgot to include that in my first post.
Presence is power, if you have a good command presence you will most likely not be considered a threat but once officers arrive try if possible to fall back and stick around for any questions they may have (this is if they don’t need any further assistance), But please let LEO’s do their job and stay out of their way.
After thinking it over and reading the other posts I agree there is really no good ID until after the situation is over. Just follow instructions 9 times out of 10 you will be treated like a criminal.
Just be safe and use your best judgment
This is a very tricky question, to which there is no correct answer. LEO and non-LEO, concealed or open, identification is crucial in a threatening situation, but time and circumstances permitting, there might not be time to display any kind of badge or card type of identification, and, under stress verbal communication could be perceived incorrectly. In such cases, it should be the behavioral action of any armed person which identifies themselves as a non-threat. The good guys, most likely, will NOT be doing any of the following: Pointing a gun at a uniformed officer, disobeying a police officer (unless there is a present threat that makes that command irrelevant at that exact moment, such as engaging the bad guy), handling a firearm inappropriately, or making any sorts of threats. I would certainly hope, that LEO would be able to identify the good guys based on how the situation is playing out.
On a somewhat related note, look at how the people that legally Open Carry firearms handle themselves. Most are well aware of the risks that displaying a firearm poses, especially when confronted with LEO such as a “man with a gun” call. Most do not carry a badge that says they are carrying because openly carrying is obvious. It is then, the behavior of such a person that will demonstrate a non-threat. The bad guys, I can almost guarantee, will not openly carry a firearm in a holster that is clearly visible. In fact, unless engaged at a target, the gun will not leave the holster. Those who open carry, hope, would be smart enough to never ever reach or point at their firearm when confronted by an officer. If currently engaging a target, again, I hope that LEO would be able to tell the good guys by assessing how the situation is playing out.
To Fred - “The guy with the AK shouting “Allahu Akbar” is more likely the target of choice then the guy with a Glock and a high-n-tight.”
VERY NICE! LOVE THE RACIST STEREOTYPING!
I’m sorry…Columbine, Utah, Jonesboro, OKC……those were all middle eastern suspects right?
Enough of that, I pray you aren’t on the job if thats how you think. If you are, I’m ashamed to share the same profession with you. WE are better than that.
C’mon Mitch,I got a big laugh at that comment,I think Fred was just throwing a little humor into the mix. Anyhow good comments all around.Hey Frank, merry christmas.
To Mitchell - That line was written with the recent events in Mumbai at the top of my thought process.
I would also retort that while the shooter in “Utah” (Trolley Square Mall, Salt Lake City, UT) was not Middle Eastern - he was born in Bosnia Herzegovina - he was Muslim and was reported to have shouted “Alluha Akbar” during the shooting.
How I think is that the Bad Guy - regardless of his race, creed or national origin - needs to be stopped as quickly as possible by the first person with the capability to do so. I think that innocent victims - regardless of who they are - need to be spared further death, injury and trauma as quickly as possible.
Sorry if my comments upset you, but I’ll bet we could ride a car together and get along.
Stay safe.
Just took the CCW course for New Mexico and wanted to mention that it is specifically prohibited by the law to to have any badges, patches, pins, etc. that identify you as a Concealed Carrier. The actual permit is all you can have.
How about an addressable badge, one that emits a silent signal that can be addressed and issued by the same athority that gives out ccw permits. if the badge is stolen, it would have to be reported ( or loss of ccw would be the result or legal prosecution if someone was hurt as a result of not reporting a lost badge) The lost badge could be traced through that signal or just turned off and not recognized as a good guy badge. All expenses associated with the badge would be that of the holding party (battery upkeep). You could even have the badge tell the issuing athority that the battery was getting low and generate a letter to change the battery or if you want to make it tamper proof top bring in the badge for maintenance or exchange.
Don;Thanks for that info.has the state of New Mexico made that a permanant ruling or is it up for review?Either way,Stay safe.
Ken,
A quick review of the NM laws posted on the Dept of Public Safety website revealed Title 10 Chapter 8 Part 2 Sub-part 16 (10.8.2.16.G) “G. Indicia of licensure. No person who is not a law enforcement officer, may carry a badge, patch, card, or any other indication of authority to carry a concealed handgun in New Mexico other than the license issued by the department or a license issued by a state that has been accepted by transfer, recognition or reciprocity by New Mexico pursuant to the act.” So this is actually a part of the New Mexico law, not just a ruling. (Source: http://www.dps.nm.org/lawEnforcement/ccw/docs/10.8.2NMAC_17Nov05.pdf)
Being an armed civilian, I have twice intervened/drawn against an armed BG. The statement of “holster weapon, follow orders” is the best way I can see of avoiding being percieved as a BG by LE arriving on scene. I have held suspects at gun point awaiting uniformed LE and have yet to encounter an issue of over-zealous LE by stating loudly & clearly that I mean them no harm & being focused solely on the BG & not waving the weapon helter-skelter. As stated in an earlier post, “usually the GG is acting much like trained LE do, focused & controlled. Acting like you have some sense about you, including even authoritatively, should let LE know which side you are on. I truly believe the times I intervened probably saved some poor family from a tragic call/visit. Knowing that I don’t have a vest, badge, and a radio should not stop me from stepping up to save a life just because LE may mistake me as a BG. I understand that risk, as should all GG/CCW persons.
Stay Safe,
Dennis
IMO, most perps would not be interested in the same subjects as the Armed Civilian. Having recently been introduced to the wonderful essay, “On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs”, I feel that if I keep shouting “Sheepdog” (short, easy to remember) it will give the responding officer a reasonable assurance that I am a GG and not a poser. That said, yes I will obey the nice officer, he has a lot on his mind and a lot of responsibilities at the moment, and so long as he isn’t a complete idiot about it (like tasering a guy carring a casket), I don’t intend to make any money if manhandled, handcuffed, or God forbid, shot. All my respects, be careful out there.
Are private citizens who are not engaged in criminal activity required to provide a peace officer with identification? Meaning if I’m sitting on a bench minding my own business and an officer asks for my identification can I decline his request?
There has never been a way to identify good guys from bad. The closest solution that has ever occurred is the uniform of an on-duty officer.
As an off-duty LEO who has been involved in a number of (plain clothes) incidents prior to police arrival, I can appreciate the question. There is however one fact that has not been considered throughly.
The on-duty officers ARE going to act quickly on arrival. No if, ands, buts or maybes. The civilians (and off-duty officers) have a choice).
If as a uniform officer you show up and two (plain clothes) sides that you don’t know are shooting at each other, what do you do? Universal answer [this is the important part] 1st side to comply with authority doesn’t get shot. The side that does not obey commands 1st catches bullets.
This is not a rule I wrote but in real life it is a rule, like it or not. There is no simple answer that can easily be applied for the civilian to follow. That is why we need only mature, intelligent citizens with good judegment to get permits.
There is not a question that they (good guys) need to stop shooting, put their gun down, yell he robbed the store, or do something to help the responding officers sort out the good guys from the bad.
Involving yourself in a gun fight is risky business (citizen or off-duty LEO). Prepare, preplan, use your head - or risk death. This is not a game!
I have had to arrest too many security guards, with badges, and a deputy or two for serious assualts and shootings. An experienced officer will look at behavior 1st, ID & badges maybe, if he sees them and if there is time. Bad guys behave badly. Good guys comply. This is not a game - please don’t set me up to shoot a good guy. That thought scares me.
Expecting LE Arriving at a Shooting to identify the Good gus is not safe bet in my opinion, unless you are in a LE uniform. All they will see is one guy shooting at another. your best bet is to be aware of their arrival and surrender immediately! Rememember they will be hopped on adrinaline just every one else as far as a fake badge always check with local LE before buying one some places it is illegal to carry one. I agree 100% With PD Sgt. SURRENDER! COMPLY! IMMEDIATELY!!!! stay safe. And know the laws where you live.