The realities of the job

This is for interests sake.

http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/stabbed-officer-recovering-surgery-his-face-5609014

I work on the same section as the stabbed officer and have known and worked with him for 5 years. He is a good friend. At 0.36 of the video you can see me and my taller colleague crossing a field to locate the offenders "residence" in an old WW2 era gun emplacement bunker.

This incident was incredibly tough to deal with. It's not easy seeing a friend and colleague bleeding profusely all over himself.

The Australian cops think we are crazy because we don't routinely carry firearms....I think they're right.

Really sorry to hear about your friends attack. It brings home the just how much a somewhat low level Police incidents can almost instantaneously become life threatening ones.

It reminds me of the two unarmed Police officers in Manchester, England, last year (PC Fiona Bone and PC Nicola Hughes)
Who had been ambushed by a gunman after being called to a fictitious report of a burglary, both were shot dead by the gunman who then handed himself in to a Police station. He was already wanted on suspicion of two other murders.
Police have to deal with the unexpected most of the time, its not an easy job.

Mr Nobody a couple of questions if you will:
1) Do all NZ patrol cops routinely carry Taser?
2) Prior to the offender pulling the knife and attacking your colleague was there any intelligence and or information that this male was in possession of a knife?
3) If there was no prior warning about the knife, would firearms and or Taser officers being present have stopped this incident occurring?

Hi Dave,

The incident with the two ambushed female PC's was felt over here by my colleagues and I as we are very similar police forces. Obviously NZ's police stem from the UK model. Both forces are routinely unarmed and it was another wake up call, of which there have been many over the years, that we are very vulnerable.

In response to your questions:

1. No we don't routinely carry tasers as there aren't enough to go round. Furthermore, they recently decided to have two levels of responders, Level 1 and 2, which means level 1 get full firearms and taser training while level 2 responders don't. However, a level 2 Constable's job is in reality no different to that of a level 1 responder's as they are exposed to the same risks. This is an absolutely stupid policy which was done to cut spending yet gambles with our lives. Of note, my injured friend is a level 2 responder as am I and I want my firearms training back at the very minimum or, and this is preferable, generally arm us.

2. No there was no intelligence that suggested he was armed. However, we must assume everyone is armed until proven otherwise. Apparently some people have previously made some complaints or expressed concerns that the offender is a nutjob due to his behaviour in the area. He is currently being held in a secure mental health facility because he probably is a complete nutjob.

3. This is a very good question because if my colleagues were armed with Glocks and tasers the situation would have probably unfolded differently if the offender knew it was possible he would get shot. As it happened the cops weren't armed so the offender was safe in the knowledge that he could stab one or more of them and know he was not going to get shot. Do you understand what I am getting at? In my experience, when people see the Glock on your hip, they can become very compliant and passive. During the times I've worn a Glock, I don't change the way I'm talking to someone just because there is a gun on my hip but they see it's there and it does, subconsciously, make a difference to how they respond to me. One of the big bugbears I have when our bosses analyse such situations, is they assume an incident where a cop has been injured would have still played out EXACTLY the way it happened even if they had been armed and like to say that, like in this instance, that carrying a gun wouldn't have made a difference. This is utter bollocks to anybody with an ounce of common sense.
One of the officers was carrying a taser during this incident. He was also fresh out of college and didn't have it in his hands because, IMO he made a tactical era due to inexperience. However, over time we can become complacent and, had I been in his shoes, who's to say I wouldn't have made the same decision.

I hope this helps Dave and thanks for your support.

Thanks for the prompt answer,

Any update on your colleagues state?

I know people in the UK who are in the Greater Manchester Police Force who are cops some of them armed and some unarmed. Their situation sounds similar to yours, as in they have Firearms officers who all routinely carry Glocks and Tasers, and have access to more specialized lethal and less than lethal firearms and equipment.

Then there are Response officers who are not armed with firearms but some do carry Tasers.

The main difference being that the Firearms officers are not routinely dispatched to everyday Police incidents, such as burglary, criminal damage, assaults, car theft etc. They only appear to be sent to incidents involving people with firearms or have access to firearms or are considered to be 'otherwise so dangerous'. (before you ask, Idont know what this entails)

I have been told by Firearms officers that often they are treated with more caution, and dare I say respect, by suspects due to them simply being firearms officers, whether this is recognized by their vehicles or from carrying a sidearm (Glock).

In your reply you say
'we must assume everyone is armed until proven otherwise'.
Does this mean that officers will routinely 'red dot' someone with a Taser until that person is in such a position where it is obvious that they are unarmed or if level one would they draw their side arm again until it is apparent that the suspect is unarmed?

Interesting discussion to which I have nothing to add apart from my sympathy and good wishes to your friend Mr Nobody.
Pete

All hopes and prayers for your mates swift recovery Mr N.

Echoing what Chris and Peter have said !

combatnige wrote:Echoing what Chris and Peter have said !

Ditto from me.

Dave,

Sorry mate, I didn't myself very clear. A level 1 responder doesn't routinely carry firearms. They are stored in a safe in the patrol car and accessed when needed. We have followed this model from the Norwegian Police who used to do that before they realised that it was pointless and have now opted for routine arming. Considering the cost involved in storing firearms safes in hundreds of police cars, and that NZ Police are constantly looking at way's to save money, general arming would be a cheaper option.

The we must assume everyone is armed until proven otherwise is a Senshido quote regarding any physical confrontation with someone and one that I adhere to. It's not one that is said amongst the NZ Police fraternity. So, in answer to your question, sometime we laser paint or draw a bead with a firearm depending on the situation but mostly not.

Peter, Chris, Combatnige and Ade,

Thanks for your support guys. My friend Toddy is doing well and I have been to see him several times. He's recovering at home and only has a slice on the side of his nose where the knife entered. He had to have surgery on his tear ducts and sinus passages but the surgeon agreed that he was incredibly lucky to have not been stabbed in a fatal place and that the knife was sharp enough not to cause more damage.

He passed on a horror story about passing old blood that had pooled in his stomach though...that wasn't nice.. 

Couldn't agree more about the armed patrols always having their side arm with them. Glad to hear your mate is making a good recovery.