Funny and Sad

[CHS]

Well some cops aren't very smart. My dad is in L.E. and he has co-workers who don't even know how to clean their guns lol I've had to clean 3-4 guns for corrections officers. Its sad when a civilian knows more about your firearm than a "trained" L.E. officer.

I don't think it's sad or unreasonable. You have to realize, an officer's job is to enforce the law. That's it. They SHOULD know the law pretty well, at least they should have an area of law that they show competence and expertise in. But a firearm is simply one of MANY tools that an officer has in order to accomplish his job.

Imagine it another way.. Police officers also drive patrol cars. Should they know how to rebuild an engine? Of course not. That's a mechanics job. It's a Police Armorers job to know the guns, not the individual officers, as long as they are trained in their proper use (just like they are trained in the proper use of a patrol car).

The problem that we see, is that most people find it perfectly reasonable that a cop is not the person to ask advice about rebuilding an engine, yet they are some of the FIRST people some folks go to for gun advice. I don't really get it.

[VegasND]

It would be nice if an officer was capable of checking the water and oil so the expensive car taxpayers, myself included, are paying for doesn't get prematurely ruined.

In the same way it should be expected an officer is capable of maintaining the rest of the equipment required for daily use -- y'know, like cleaning a handgun and laundering a uniform.

...
Imagine it another way.. Police officers also drive patrol cars. Should they know how to rebuild an engine? Of course not. That's a mechanics job. It's a Police Armorers job to know the guns, not the individual officers, as long as they are trained in their proper use (just like they are trained in the proper use of a patrol car).
...

[CBlacksheep]

Lastly..don't complain...become a cop and make the world better...if you can.

More cops = better?

[tbhracing]

this- It's a fast paced environment with the scanners . And add in they simply do not want any type of CONTRABAND within the court for liability reasons. Not siding with the LA County Court, but I can see that with time a factor, it's better to just hold off on any type of CONTRABAND and be safe then hold court outside debating what is acceptable and what isn't.

[forgiven]

I vote stupid.

Idiotic is more like it.

[Travis590A1]

I don't think it's sad or unreasonable. You have to realize, an officer's job is to enforce the law. That's it. They SHOULD know the law pretty well, at least they should have an area of law that they show competence and expertise in. But a firearm is simply one of MANY tools that an officer has in order to accomplish his job.

Imagine it another way.. Police officers also drive patrol cars. Should they know how to rebuild an engine? Of course not. That's a mechanics job. It's a Police Armorers job to know the guns, not the individual officers, as long as they are trained in their proper use (just like they are trained in the proper use of a patrol car).

The problem that we see, is that most people find it perfectly reasonable that a cop is not the person to ask advice about rebuilding an engine, yet they are some of the FIRST people some folks go to for gun advice. I don't really get it.

Lol no I don't expect a cop to be a mechanic but I expect him to know how to drive it. A firearm is a tool that can potentially take a life, so in my opinion a L.
E. Officer should know how to opperate all of his or her tools to a certain extent especially their weapons. Kinda like seeing a butcher as asking him to cut you a slab of ribs and he replies "I would but if I dull my knife I don't know how to sharpen it"

[Ron-Solo]

Funny and Sad

It is funny that this is in the general gun discussion, rather than the Off Topic or Law Enforcement forums..... No, wait, the OP has been banned from both of those areas because of past indiscretions.

It is sad that so many members would jump on the band wagon against the court screeners without any fact of knowledge of what they do, why they do it, and how they do it.

Los Angeles County Superior Court security is provided by members of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department. The screening stations are manned by armed Sheriff's Security Officers, unarmed Sheriff's Security Assistants, and vacancies are filled by a private contract security company, which was Securitas at last count. Occasionally, a vacancy will be filled by a deputy sheriff. Bailiffs in the courtroom are deputy sheriffs, are are the lockup personnel, with the exception of a few Custody Assistants at some courts.

Security Officers receive basic firearms training and are required to qualify on a quarterly basis. Security Assistants receive no firearms training and their job is to operate the screening equipment and screen visitors to the courthouse. The contract security have a guard card and firearms card.

Retired Judge Cecil Mills is the Superior Court Director of Security. His assistant is a retired Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department Commander. In addition to being a retired judge, Cecil Mills is a former prosecuting attorney and a former Lieutenant with the LA County Marshals Department before they were absorbed into the Sheriff's Department in 1994. He is not a harmless oaf as someone described, nor is he clueless. Although he and I disagreed on many issues, he has a grasp on the situation, but his decisions are motivated bt retaining his power in the system.

Most people do not realize that almost every courthouse has a lockup or jail facility inside. Inmates are transported to court from the various county jails every day, at an average of 1,600-1,800 per day. This is one of many reasons that items that might seem innocent or innocuous to the average individual are restricted from the courthouse environment. Inmates and the public intersect inside the actual courtrooms. Although every effort is made to prevent the transfer of contraband from the public to the inmate, it does happen occasionally.

Items such as handcuff keys, are restricted because they could be used to aid in an escape. Certain keys, such as some that are used in gun locks or firearms locking or takedown (such as the one that came with my Ruger MKIII) could also be used to unlock handcuff keys.

In Los Angeles County, Court Restricted items are determined by the Superior Court's Judicial Security Committee which is comprised of several judges and has a representative of the Sheriff's Department (Lieutenant or higher) at every meeting. The Sheriff's representative does not have a vote in any manner and is there in an advisory capacity only. I was that representative for over two years as a collateral duty to my regular assignment.

Items become restricted based on past use, or potential future use as a weapon or a means to aid in an escape of a prisoner. In the outside world, some of these items are innocent and would not have any real purpose as a weapon. In the courtroom, in the hands of an experienced criminal, they can be used to fashion effective deadly weapons or escape tools. The average individual would be amazed at what can be used to fashion a weapon or homemade handcuff key. All it takes is some minor distraction for an item to be passed to an inmate.

For example, in LA County custody facilities, the cardboard core is removed from toilet paper because it is used to make handles for "shanks" or stabbing instruments. The wire staples used to secure boxes are used to make handcuff keys.

Before you chime in and call people stupid or idiots because they aren't firearms experts, maybe you should look at yourself and wonder what you know about court security, including lockup and screening operations. One of the courts I supervised screened over 10,000 people every day. Over a one year period where we closely watched complaints, we averaged 1 personnel complaint (discourtesy, rudeness, etc) for every 250,000 people screened. This did not include general complaints regarding screening policy or procedures.

The screening personnel work hard to make the courthouse as safe as possible, and are constantly bombarded with slurs and insults like those seen here. Do some of them make mistakes? Yes, and they are held accountable for those mistakes. I was frequently consulted regarding training issues associated with the screening operations and was a Department instructor in screening operations for many years.

If you are planning to visit an LA County courthouse, leave all your little doodads, handcuff keys, pocket knives, etc in your car. Any sharp object, blunt object, or heavy object can be denied entry if there is a possibility of its use as a weapon. The less you have with you when you go thru the screening process, the quicker you will get thru.

If you don't know something about a particular subject, it is better to remain silent than to chime in and jump on the bandwagon without any facts.

[Travis590A1]

^^^ ok so what did any of that have to do with the gaurds silly remark? Lol if your in l.e. or security I think its expected of you to know basic firearm skill etc. Id expect a cook to know how to work a stove.

[Ron-Solo]

It means the security person knew it had no business in the courthouse, so he did his job correctly.



It doesn't matter what the tool is designed for, it is the potential harm it could be used for that prevents its entry into the courthouse.

[rt66paul]

I don't think it's sad or unreasonable. You have to realize, an officer's job is to enforce the law. That's it. They SHOULD know the law pretty well, at least they should have an area of law that they show competence and expertise in. But a firearm is simply one of MANY tools that an officer has in order to accomplish his job.

Imagine it another way.. Police officers also drive patrol cars. Should they know how to rebuild an engine? Of course not. That's a mechanics job. It's a Police Armorers job to know the guns, not the individual officers, as long as they are trained in their proper use (just like they are trained in the proper use of a patrol car).

The problem that we see, is that most people find it perfectly reasonable that a cop is not the person to ask advice about rebuilding an engine, yet they are some of the FIRST people some folks go to for gun advice. I don't really get it.

It may be the armorers' job to check out and rebuild weapons, but ANYONE who carries a gun(as far as I am concerned, anyone who owns one) should be able to maintain his weapon. They should be aware of the safety and know where to look on other models, they should know how to clean their weapon as well as how to load and unload it. Working as a peace officer, they should also know how to clear all weapons, and make sure they are not loaded. It is very hard to believe that any LEO can't do that. We pay them a great wage to do a very disagreeable job, but as taxpayers, we expect to get the best.

[Travis590A1]

^^^^ exactly. Say a cop pulls a felon over and then finds a loaded handgun. Is he going to wait for a more knowledgable peace officer to arrive and clear it? I expect officers to know how to operate most firearms on thr street today.

[tbhracing]

It means the security person knew it had no business in the courthouse, so he did his job correctly.



It doesn't matter what the tool is designed for, it is the potential harm it could be used for that prevents its entry into the courthouse.

Exactly. It's called CONTRABAND and has been determined not to be allowed in the courtroom, done deal. There is no time to challenge and debate in the scanning process.

If you dont like management's stance, then DO NOT come to the courthouse to plead your case. It's that simple, no contraband in the courthouse and that is their final word. If you no Iikey, then take your business elsewhere or don't show up. They simply do not have time for these silly games.

[cannon]

Ron-Solo, I called Judge Mills harmless and clueless because I was being polite. I actually have a very low opinion of him. Yes, I know him and his actions too. We'll have to agree to disagree about him.

[Ron-Solo]

Cannon, we may actually have a very similar opinion then. He wields a LOT of power within the Superior Court, which is why he isn't harmless. He knows a lot about court security, making him far from clueless, but his priorities are different and he is politically motivated in what he does to retain that power.

The Superior Court recently started buying a different brand of metal detector of significantly lower quality. My contact at the previous vendor said he kept hinting at kick backs and they wouldn't play his game.

[cannon]

Cannon, we may actually have a very similar opinion then. He wields a LOT of power within the Superior Court, which is why he isn't harmless. He knows a lot about court security, making him far from clueless, but his priorities are different and he is politically motivated in what he does to retain that power.

The Superior Court recently started buying a different brand of metal detector of significantly lower quality. My contact at the previous vendor said he kept hinting at kick backs and they wouldn't play his game.

Not horribly shocked at the thought. I can tell you the new machines all seem to be turned to the max. I wonder why?

As long as the Judges Personnel and Budget Committee (Or whatever they call it today.) wants to keep him he'll keep his overpaid job. Frankly the court could save money and increase the security level by replacing him with someone who actually cares about the job.