Rancher Will
Member
Everyone should follow their own desires. Personally, I carry all of the time when out of the house, as does my wife.
I am now a retired LEO, County Undersheriff, Chief of Police, City Police Detective, 40+ years on duty.
With the two departments where I was in charge, I made it manditory that all officers be armed both on and off duty. The agency where I was a Detective required all officers to be armed both on off duty. There were two incidents in the two agencies where I worked where off duty officers were able to use their CW to prevent a homicide. In one, the officer was wounded, survived, but prevented the injury or death of the potential victim by killing the perp.
During my 40 years on duty as LEO I and my officers handled over 200 homicides. NONE OF THE VICTIMS OF THE HOMICIDES THAT I AND MY OFFICERS INVESTIGATED WERE ARMED WHEN THEY FACED DEATH. We also investigated many others that were not fatals but suffered injuries as unarmed victims. We also investigated numerous assaults and attempted robberies where the potential victim was armed and prevented the assault and/or robbery.
My personal experience also reminds me that I drew a concealed revolver twice before I first became an a LEO, and once while off duty in plain clothes. All three instances merely drawing and having the revolver in my hand stopped the attempted incident. No shots were fired in any of the three. I absolutely know that at least two of them prevented what would have been potential injury or death to me and/or my wife. The third prevented a robbery and possibly more.
I agree that the odds of having to use your CW are mathmatically slight. However, I believe that it only takes once to make the difference between life and death. I don't know if any of the homicide victims that I personally investigated ever thought about providing their own protection. Probably not. I often wonder, believe, that most would not have died as they did had they been armed.
It has been my observation that uniformed officers are less likely to be confronted by armed criminals than are plain clothes civilians or off duty officers. Not too many criminals are stupid enough to deliberately attack a uniformed officer that is identified before the attack.
I also believe that data over the years tend to show that fewer criminals use deadly force against citizens in those states, cities and areas where it is known that there is most likely to find CW carrying individuals. The opposite is also shown in the data, that is, more deadly crimes tend to be committed in those areas where the perp believes there is less chance of encountering an armed person who is carrying CW.
The decisison is made by all of us and I will not criticise anyone's choice.
I am now a retired LEO, County Undersheriff, Chief of Police, City Police Detective, 40+ years on duty.
With the two departments where I was in charge, I made it manditory that all officers be armed both on and off duty. The agency where I was a Detective required all officers to be armed both on off duty. There were two incidents in the two agencies where I worked where off duty officers were able to use their CW to prevent a homicide. In one, the officer was wounded, survived, but prevented the injury or death of the potential victim by killing the perp.
During my 40 years on duty as LEO I and my officers handled over 200 homicides. NONE OF THE VICTIMS OF THE HOMICIDES THAT I AND MY OFFICERS INVESTIGATED WERE ARMED WHEN THEY FACED DEATH. We also investigated many others that were not fatals but suffered injuries as unarmed victims. We also investigated numerous assaults and attempted robberies where the potential victim was armed and prevented the assault and/or robbery.
My personal experience also reminds me that I drew a concealed revolver twice before I first became an a LEO, and once while off duty in plain clothes. All three instances merely drawing and having the revolver in my hand stopped the attempted incident. No shots were fired in any of the three. I absolutely know that at least two of them prevented what would have been potential injury or death to me and/or my wife. The third prevented a robbery and possibly more.
I agree that the odds of having to use your CW are mathmatically slight. However, I believe that it only takes once to make the difference between life and death. I don't know if any of the homicide victims that I personally investigated ever thought about providing their own protection. Probably not. I often wonder, believe, that most would not have died as they did had they been armed.
It has been my observation that uniformed officers are less likely to be confronted by armed criminals than are plain clothes civilians or off duty officers. Not too many criminals are stupid enough to deliberately attack a uniformed officer that is identified before the attack.
I also believe that data over the years tend to show that fewer criminals use deadly force against citizens in those states, cities and areas where it is known that there is most likely to find CW carrying individuals. The opposite is also shown in the data, that is, more deadly crimes tend to be committed in those areas where the perp believes there is less chance of encountering an armed person who is carrying CW.
The decisison is made by all of us and I will not criticise anyone's choice.
