I hear what you're saying, and certainly there are former LE/military folks who have taken action that didn't turn out well. There are no guarantees on how things will turn out in every case, and in every line of work there are folks who are better at it than others.DEB wrote:Perhaps I didn't cover it succintly enough, not the first time. As former L.E./Military often one will revert to previous training by getting involved in situations that one shouldn't or by immediatly going after the bad guy without processing one's current age or etc. I read where individuals complain about one person's actions and then give former L.E. a by, when they do pretty much the same thing. I mentioned on a previous post how one of my friends, former L.E., lit out after a bad guy, while unarmed, when said bad guy stole a women' s purse at a funeral home. When L.E. arrived much of their time was spent questioning him as they felt he could have been the bad guy. Another former Border Patrol Officer ran down the street during a drive by, while armed, and was himself arrested when current L.E. arrived. I have also seen where current/former military have involved themselves in situations where they could be considered the aggressor...We all get old whether we like it or not, move on to other occupations and etc. When one says former others often say ex-. Not knocking anyone, just trying to explain my thought process, however difficult that becomes, especially for me. I was also trying to convey that training, previous experiences degrade over time, without one continuing to be exposed to the stressors one had in a previous life. As far as a President's experience goes, that would have to be in another thread. I haven't been to overly impressed with many of those in my life time, especially our current. But, I am sure there are those that could persuasively argue that as well.Excaliber wrote:
I'm at a loss to understand how experience in successfully managing the many challenges of multiple life threatening criminal encounters over time would put one at a judgment or performance disadvantage when compared to someone who has never done so at all.
That's a lot like saying we'd be better off with a president who has never run a business or served anywhere as an executive with profit and loss responsibility for anything.
How well that works out is on full display for all to see.
It's also an apples and oranges thing to talk about LEO's and military folks as close to the same in this area. While both may have seen combat under brutal circumstances, the rules of engagement are radically different in the two environments. LEO experience is much closer to what citizens will encounter on domestic soil.
I can't speak to your experiences, but I can speak to mine. All the current and former LEO's I know have a much more sophisticated set of criteria that must be met before action is taken, and they have an excellent understanding of the risks involved. You can see their thought processes and judgments on display frequently in this forum. They have seen the issues firsthand, have used virtually all the available alternatives under different circumstances in the past, and are pretty darn good about recognizing and applying the one that's most likely to produce the most desirable result.
My point is that starting with a blank slate with no prior errors and no prior successes is no advantage at all. What you don't think of can kill you, send you to prison, or ruin you financially, and there aren't any do overs in this game.
There are a lot of hard lessons to be learned before one reaches level of judgment that will be consistently successful in incident after incident is developed. Many of them come from mistakes made in the "blank slate" days. Everyone I know in the LE community can relate dozens of such incidents. They work real hard to learn from the mistakes of others and not to make the same mistakes twice, because so many new and creative ones are available.