Blindly Trust No One

Congress is currently grappling with whether to extend section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that was passed by Congress in 2008 after the 9-11 attacks that killed nearly three-thousand Americans and brought down the World Trade Center Towers in New Your City. The reaction that followed by government officials and politicians was predictable. This section allows government searches without a warrant on foreign nationals. The question is what to do if American citizens are involved with those foreign nationals?

The country post 9-11 was in a state of fear of another attack. Fear based policy leads to overreach. Government authority expands at the expense of individual liberties. Citizens in a state of fear of another attack blindly trust what officials and politicians tell us. They convince us when we are in a state of panic that we must do everything we can so that an event like this can never happen again. If course, that is impossible to promise. History is full of examples where this statement was made after a man-made disaster, yet other large scale incidents occurred again.

Whether than wait for the dust to settle, have a rational discussion about how to move forward and then choose upon the best course of action from a few policy options, fear-based policy is developed. As citizens we are ripe for trusting and believing that what we are being told is in our best interest. It is not the wisest way to develop policy, and we are willing to give up civil liberties in pursuit of safety.

Section 702 of the  FISA bill allows government broad authority to collect data including text messages, phone calls and emails on foreign nationals abroad without a warrant. The problem is that many times the communications involved a US citizen in communication with foreign nationals with the American not suspected of terror or criminal involvement. In that case, a warrant has to be obtained. The claim by US intelligence agencies is that the proverbial national security interests would be threatened and that getting a warrant would delay preventing an attack. We always hear that sky is falling rhetoric when it comes to government warrantless surveillance. Even though I am a former career law enforcement officer with intelligence experience holding a master's degree in security studies, I still have a keen interest in protecting civil liberties and can navigate through the typical government alarmist rhetoric that killing section 702 would weaken the government’s ability in stopping urgent threats but they can demonstrate no examples. I have obtained numerous search warrants. It is not difficult nor tedious to obtain one. With today’s technology a search warrant can be applied for and obtained electronically in no time flat. Even in off court business hours there is a prosecutor and judge on call on a 24-7 basis.

Members from both sides in Congress are opposed to extending Section 702 because there are not enough safeguards to protecting privacy for Americans. To be blunt, they do not trust the FBI nor our Intelligence agencies. Nor should they. According to PEW Research, trust today in government and its institutions is at an all time low. Every time people trust political officials to do the right thing, the long-term result is a loss of liberty. There is plenty of evidence for not allowing government to oversee themselves. Between 2020 and 2021 the FBI unlawfully used section 702 almost 300,000 times in searches of January 6 suspects, racial justice protestors, and other Americans without first obtaining search warrants. In testimony before Congress, Inspector testimony discovered that the FBI and other intelligence agencies routinely gather up and search digital communications of Americans without first obtaining a warrant. The agencies promise reform and attribute the illegal activity to a misunderstanding by agents, yet the abuses continued. The Founders were very mistrustful of government spying on the citizenry when they set up the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement based on probable cause with a few narrowly defined exceptions before snooping into the privacy of Americans. What we have today is a long way away from what the Founders envisioned.

There appears to be no accountability when illegal searches are discovered. It is always a retraining issue. Every federal agent and every local law enforcement officer understands the warrant requirement under the U.S. Constitution Fourth Amendment. If they do not, they are unfit to serve. At the very least, these are civil rights violations. At worst these are criminal violations. No federal agent is ever charged with violating people’s civil rights. The final bill on section 702 that passed the House includes language stipulating that federal law enforcement must now seek attorney approval before targeting reviews of Americans’ information and that each query must have a written justification submitted to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and that misuse of the surveillance tool could result in criminal penalties of up to 5 years in prison. There are several problems with this added provision. Can the agent's testimony be trusted? This is a non adversarial process and highly secret. Recall that FBI gave false testimony in obtaining information to obtain warrants to spy on the Trump campaign. Nobody was investigated or referred for criminal charges for false swearing. And let us be honest. No agent will be criminally charged under this added provision. The agency will claim that there was no criminal intent or that it was an honest mistake. The language says could result in criminal penalties. The word could should be replaced with will result in criminal penalties for violating the warrant requirement.

Government officials and even many citizens believe this surveillance overreach is necessary to keep us safe. In the words of Benjamin Franklin when it comes to choosing between security and privacy, he said those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Moving Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

The Crisis of Exhaustion: Why Police Officers Average Only 6.5 Hours of Sleep

By: Joel E. Gordon

In the dead of night, a patrol officer pulls over a speeding car on a deserted highway. His eyes burn from back-to-back shifts and split-second decisions feel heavier than usual. This scene plays out too often, as police sleep deprivation cuts into the rest that officers need to stay sharp.

Studies show police officers get far less sleep than the seven to nine hours adults need each night. Reports from groups like the National Sleep Foundation point to averages around six hours or less for many in high-stress jobs. This gap builds up over time, turning short nights into a health crisis.

Shift work throws off the body's internal clock, known as the circadian rhythm. Officers on night duty often fight daylight when trying to sleep during the day. Research from the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine links this to shift work disorder, which affects up to 40% of workers in 24-hour roles.

These irregular hours mess with hormone levels that control sleep. Melatonin production drops when light hits at the wrong times. Officers end up with broken rest that leaves them groggy for their next call.

Staffing shortages push departments to add overtime. One officer might work 12 hours straight, then face another long shift soon after. This cuts deep into recovery time, leaving no buffer for real rest.

A report from the Bureau of Justice Statistics notes that over 50% of agencies deal with understaffing. That forces extra hours, which directly shortens sleep windows. Officer’s report feeling wiped out, yet they push through to cover the gaps.

Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) highlights sleep issues in public safety roles. Police officers average about 6.5 hours per night, based on surveys of thousands in the field. This falls short of healthy benchmarks and matches patterns in other emergency services.

Academic studies, like those in Sleep Health journal, back this up with logs from officers. They track actual bedtimes and wake-ups, showing consistent deficits. These numbers reveal a pattern: sleep deprivation isn't rare—it's the norm in policing.

The nature of police work doesn't stop at shift end. Stress lingers, and duties spill over into personal time. Even off-duty hours feel like extensions of the job, making solid sleep hard to grab.

After a tense chase or violent scene, officers' minds race. Adrenaline keeps them wired, delaying sleep by hours. This hyper-arousal state ties into trauma exposure, raising insomnia risks.

Links to PTSD show up in studies from the American Psychological Association. Officers with high-stress days take longer to fall asleep. They toss and turn, replaying events, which stacks more fatigue on top of physical tiredness.

Call-outs shatter rest plans. An officer might hit the pillow only to get paged for an emergency. Training drills or paperwork often eat into what should be downtime too.

Departments rely on quick responses; so on-call status is common. This unpredictability means sleep comes in fits and starts. Over time, it wears down even the toughest routines.Precincts buzz with radios and phones around the clock. Noise leaks into break areas, making naps impossible. Daytime sleepers deal with sirens or traffic outside stations.

Light from screens and fluorescents adds to the mess. Officers in urban areas face street noise that pierces thin walls. These factors turn potential rest spots into poor sleep zones.

Lack of sleep hits officers hard. It fogs the brain, strains the body, and ups accident odds. In a job where split-second choices save lives, these effects create real dangers for everyone involved.

Fatigue slows reaction times by up to 50%, per NASA studies on sleep loss. Officers might miss key details in a foot pursuit or misjudge a threat. This leads to errors that could cost lives.

Judgment slips under sleep debt. Research in Accident Analysis & Prevention ties tired shifts to more use-of-force incidents. Officers act on impulse when their focus fades.

Chronic short sleep raises blood pressure over time. A Harvard study on shift workers found higher hypertension rates among those getting under seven hours. Police face this plus job stress, doubling the toll.

Weight gain and diabetes risks climb too. Poor rest disrupts metabolism, leading to unhealthy eating habits during long shifts. Officers report more illnesses, pulling them from duty.

Drowsy driving claims lives—officers crash more after night shifts. Data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration shows fatigue factors in 20% of crashes. Police vehicles aren't immune.

On-duty injuries rise with tired muscles and slow reflexes. Slips during arrests or fights happen easier. Off duty, simple tasks like walking turn risky when exhaustion hits.

Change starts with small steps and big policies. Officers can tweak habits, while departments shift schedules. These moves build better rest into the job.

Block blue light from phones an hour before bed. It helps melatonin kick in faster. Set up a dark, cool room with blackout curtains and a fan.

Nap smart—aim for 20-30 minutes before a night shift. Avoid caffeine late in the day to prevent crashes. Track your patterns in a journal to spot what works.

• Use earplugs for noisy spots.

• Wind down with reading, not TV.

• Stick to a set bedtime, even on off days.

Some cities use 12-hour shifts and others 10-hour shifts over four days, giving longer recovery weekends. This cuts rapid shift changes that wreck sleep. Minneapolis PD tried it and saw fewer complaints about tiredness.

Mandate 10 hours off between shifts minimum. Track overtime to avoid burnout spikes. Training on fatigue signs helps supervisor’s spot issues early.

Best practices include peer support for rest talks. Departments like those in California now limit consecutive nights. These tweaks show real gains in alertness.

Wearable’s like Fitbit track sleep stages. Officers see data on deep rest and adjust habits. Apps remind them to unwind before crashes.

Wellness programs add sleep education to mental health checks. Group sessions share tips on coping with shifts. Some forces partner with sleep clinics for free advice.

• Download apps for guided relaxation.

• Use white noise machines.

• Join department challenges for better habits.

Police officers average just 6.5 hours of sleep due to grueling shifts, overtime, and stress that follows them home. This officer fatigue sparks cognitive slips, health woes, and accident risks that threaten everyone. Law enforcement shift work demands 24/7 coverage, but at what cost to those on the line?

Rest isn't a luxury—it's key to sharp decisions and safe streets. Departments must adopt better schedules and tools, while officers build strong sleep routines. Push for these changes in your community to support the thin blue line. Your voice can help make policing safer for all.

Joel E. Gordon, Managing Editor of BLUE Magazine, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Why We Chose to Become Law Enforcement Officers

By: Joel E. Gordon

Picture this: A young officer races to a chaotic scene, pulls a child from harm's way, and watches the family's relief wash over their faces. That moment seals a bond with the public that few jobs offer. Each year, thousands step up to join law enforcement, drawn by a mix of heart and grit.

Many who join law enforcement feel a deep urge to give back. They see the badge as a tool to shield neighbors and keep streets safe. This pull often starts young, sparked by real-world needs.

Helping others brings a quiet joy that money can't match. Officers often recall the glow of aiding a victim or stopping a fight before it turns ugly. That sense of impact sticks with them.

Personal stories fuel this fire. Maybe you watched a cop save your family from a break-in. Or you grew up in a rough spot and vowed to stop the cycle. These moments turn a vague wish into a clear path to serve.

Stats show it too. Surveys by the International Association of Chiefs of Police found over 70% of recruits cite "helping people" as their top reason to join. It's not just talk—it's action that builds safer towns. Fair play matters. Officers commit to laws that keep society steady, no matter the pressure. They stand for justice, making sure rules apply to everyone equally. This sets policing apart from jobs like teaching or nursing. While those roles heal minds or bodies, cops enforce the backbone of order and work to keep the peace through regulation of human behavior. It's a tough spot, but one that draws those who value structure.

Think of it like being a referee in a big game. You call the shots fairly, even when fans boo. That dedication to impartiality pulls in folks ready to hold the line.

Some officers stay close to home, driven by ties to their own streets. They know the shortcuts, the families, the hidden troubles. Building trust here turns strangers into allies. Community policing backs this up. Programs let cops chat with locals, spot issues early, and team up on fixes. It's hands-on work that makes real change in neighborhoods. One officer shared how patrolling his childhood block let him mentor kids like he once needed. That local root keeps motivation high, fostering bonds that last.

Government jobs traditionally have meant less fear of layoffs. Life's ups and downs make steady work appealing. Law enforcement offers a solid base with perks that ease worries. It's a smart choice for those who plan ahead.

Variety keeps things fresh. Start as a patrol officer, then move to SWAT for high-action ops or K-9 for dog-team work. Narcotics hunts or forensics add layers of skill.

Promotion tracks shine bright. Training hones expertise, opening doors to leadership.

Clear rules and ranks suit team players. Like the military, policing builds on orders and backup. You know your role, and others have yours. Intense drills forge tight bonds. Shift work demands trust—your partner's got your back in a pinch. This setup pulls in those who shine in groups. It's not chaos; it's organized push. That framework lets officers focus on the job, not the mess.

Not everyone wants desk drudgery. Policing throws curveballs that test your edge. The buzz of uncertainty hooks adventure seekers. Running to trouble? That's the draw. Officers face risks head-on, proving their mettle when others flee. It builds a tough inner core. Courage isn't blind—it's trained response. A quick chase or tense standoff sharpens skills and boosts pride. Many say it feels like a personal win. Data from the FBI notes officers handle 10-15 high-risk calls per month on average. That pace tests limits, rewarding the bold.

One shift might mean traffic stops, then a theft report, topped with a medical aid. No two days match, beating office ruts. White-collar gigs often loop the same tasks. Policing solves puzzles on the fly—lost kids one hour, disputes the next. Variety keeps the mind sharp. Big city patrol officers often log over 20 calls per 8-hour shift, per department logs. From calm chats to urgent aids, it never dulls. You act, and results show right away. Calm a yelling crowd? See smiles return. Crack a case? Hear thanks pour in. This quick loop beats long waits in other fields. It proves your worth daily, fueling drive. Officers thrive on that clear payoff. Imagine cuffing a thief—victims hug you moments later. Tangible wins like these cement the choice.

Your past shapes the badge you pin on. Family tales, tough times, or hero stories mold the urge to join. It's personal fuel.

Kids of cops often follow suit. Dad's war stories or mom's shift yarns plant seeds. It's a family thread, passing pride down. Mentors count too—coaches or vets who show service's worth. Anecdotes abound: One department has clans spanning generations, per recruitment tales. This legacy builds identity. You step into shoes worn by kin, honoring their path while carving yours.

TV shows glamorize chases and heroics. Films like cop thrillers spark dreams of glory. They paint policing as epic quests. Reality bites harder, but the spark remains. Young viewers see justice win, urging them toward the field. It's a cultural nudge. Still, vets warn: Screens skip the paperwork. Yet that initial pull often leads to real service.

Training never stops. De-escalation classes, legal refreshers, tech updates—it's constant. Stay sharp or fall behind. This suits lifelong learners. New laws or tactics demand quick shifts. Officers adapt, growing with the role. Annual hours top 40 for most, keeping skills fresh. It's a pledge to evolve.

Eyes watch every move via body cams, news, reviews, and integrity rules. One slip draws heat from all sides. This pressure builds character. Officers own their actions, earning trust through transparency. It's the job's heavy weight. Public faith rests on it. Handle it right, and respect follows.

Becoming a law enforcement officer blends heart, head, and hustle. Altruism drives the service side, stability offers a firm ground, thrills add spark, and personal roots tie it all. These forces converge into a career of real purpose.

It's no snap choice—it's layers of drive meeting daily tests. Now step up, serve strong, and continue to make your mark.

Joel E. Gordon, BLUE Magazine’s Editor-in-Chief, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Making The Same Mistakes

We are just coming out of the anti police era where the cop haters were advancing and the law enforcement community was in stand-down mode and where police executives were willing to have the profession reformed by people looking to not just defund it but to defang it. Law enforcement officers were being replaced by social workers as first responders with the social engineering model that sought to defuse situations instead of arresting dangerous individuals many of whom were suffering from mental illness and capable of violent reactions. Cops were also being replaced on public transportation systems and in schools.

Most of the so-called reform was being pushed from the outside by groups that did not have the best interests of police or public safety in mind. That finally dissipated when communities realized that police are necessary to a functioning society. There is a balance that needs to be struck between people having a say in how they want to be policed and law enforcement deciding the best way to accomplish that. Government after all derives its authority from the consent of the governed. We can agree that keeping the peace is the goal.

But now the reform efforts are coming from within. And again, the reform is not necessarily in the best interest of the community or the officers tasked with carrying enforcement out. About ten years ago the now former police chief in Milwaukee, Wisconsin enacted a policy in response to a growing number of police vehicle pursuits that resulted in uninvolved motorists being struck and seriously injured and killed by the fleeing vehicle. Politicians on the city council wanted police to be prohibited from pursuits saying it was not worth engaging in this dangerous activity. What was needed was a serious discussion and then finding something in the middle, not going all the way, and outlawing them entirely. The chief yielded to political pressure and enacted a policy on vehicle pursuits that for all intents and purposes disallowed vehicle pursuits unless the officer can determine that a serious crime has been committed.

Most pursuits start with a simple traffic violation. The suspect driver flees. The officer does not know at that point why the driver is fleeing. There is more unknown than known initially until an investigation can be commenced. An officer will not know why flight from police is occurring until they apprehend the driver. That means they have to continue the pursuit taking into account time of day, weather conditions and surrounding traffic in order to find out. The new pursuit policy stated the reason for flight has to be known first. These type of policies in my view come from police executives who either forgot what life is like on the street as they moved up or they were not very good street officers to begin with. Officer discretion is watered down and even eliminated with policies such as this.

The result of the new policy was predictable as the law of unintended circumstances struck. The number of drivers fleeing police increased when drivers knew the officers could not pursue them in most cases. Most drivers who flee do so because they are wanted on warrants, some of them serious felony warrants, or are driving without a valid drivers' license. A simple traffic stop can yield a treasure trove in criminal activity such as guns, illegal drugs and people wanted n serious felony warrants.

After several years of making things worse, the same chief rescinded the policy and returned to allowing officers to pursue fleeing vehicles leaving the officer to use their discretion and experience on whether to continue or terminate the chase.

These are difficult decisions that an officer has to make in real time based on many circumstances. Officers are already constrained by the legal theory of due regard for the safety of others where they have to weigh whether to continue the pursuit or terminate it because it is too dangerous and unreasonable. They have to decide if the identity of the fleeing driver allows for apprehension to be done at a later time. The nature of the crime must be considered, and that termination of the pursuit allows the suspect to go putting the community at risk by not apprehending a criminal who may later commit added serious crimes.

Now fast forward to a different chief of police in Milwaukee. He recently enacted a policy that for all intents and purposes prohibits officers from engaging in foot pursuits. Yes, foot pursuits. In an eleven-page policy, it says that foot pursuits are are inherently dangerous. No kidding. It further states that the officer must have articulable reasonable suspicion to believe that the suspect has committed, is committing or is about to commit a crime to pursue a suspect on foot. Not once does the chief remind the public of their obligation to comply with an officer’s lawful commands to take them into custody. That means pulling over for a traffic stop or not fleeing on foot. Instead, he wants to tie the hands of the officer.

Just as with vehicle pursuits, the reason for fleeing is not always known up front and only after the suspect is apprehended does an officer know why the suspect took off on foot. The reason for the policy according to the chief is to strike a balance between protecting the safety of the public and the officer. It says that the policy incorporates national best practices. Really? What best practices and determined to be best by whom? Usually, these so-called best practices are designed as some social engineering project. Were front-line street officers consulted? Officers know how to protect themselves and where is there danger to the public in a foot pursuit?

In a Supreme Court case, Illionois v. Wardlaw the Court determined that flight upon seeing an officer in a high crime area is the height of suspiciousness. This in and of itself forms reasonable suspicion for an officer to lawfully pursue the fleeing suspect to find out why he is fleeing. That is not good enough for the Milwaukee police chief. He apparently does not trust his officers to use their experience and discretion on whether to pursue fleeing subjects.

Just like with the decision years-ago to prohibit most vehicle pursuits, it is not difficult to predict that disallowing most foot pursuits will result in more perps fleeing on foot from police and leaving dangerous criminals to roam the city committing more crime.

There is an old saying attributed to Winston Churchill, Edmund Burke and George Santayana that I find appropriate to say on this foot pursuit policy change by the Milwaukee Police Department. It says that those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of America’s Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Romanticizing Goon Behavior

The latest craze sweeping across America is young black teens gathering in public spaces and engaging in thuggish behavior. These incidents are organized on social media. It enables for swarms of people to be notified where and when to quickly gather. This is something that was hard to do before the invent of communication technology. Previously, when word got out, police had time to respond. If law enforcement agencies were paying attention and had good intelligence capability, they could pre plan, marshall the resources and be able to appropriately respond and even disrupt the event in the preliminary stages.

These types of events are not new. In the past they were called “wildings” then “flash mobs.” Today however the media must have a cute reference as if to glorify public disorder. “Teen takeovers” they call them. This is public disorder at least and criminal offenses at best. These incidents are usually held in retail places. They are a burden to business owners who provide jobs while already struggling to keep the doors open and show a profit. These incidents frighten shoppers and consumers and dissuade them from frequenting the area. They inevitably turn into vicious fights. In addition, they are a drain on limited police resources. This costs money yet no one attaches an estimated dollar amount of money lost by businesses and the cost of government resources used to police these events. If we did, people would stop seeing this as a group of kids just looking to have fun or with nothing better to do.

What is even more startling to me are the responses from local politicians, community activists, and parents. I mentioned earlier that the organizers and participants are black teens. That was pointed out purposely. First because it is true and second because it speaks to an aspect of black culture. These incidents end up being video taped by people involved or bystanders. Look at the viral videos and see for yourself who is involved in this. I listened to politicians excusing the behavior. I heard people naming themselves as community activists saying that we need to provide more opportunities for young people. Media accounts report that these young people were on spring break looking for something to do. We did not hear from the parents of these marauders. That is telling.

Here are a few questions and observations I make while reading about this out-of-control unlawful behavior. It is all cultural. My first question is why aren’t white teens organizing these mods to take over public spaces in the suburbs? Is it because they have been better socialized by involved parents and therefore know this behavior is unacceptable? And as for offering more opportunities for young black people, I will ask why it is government’s responsibility to provide things for young people to do? How about telling them to look for a job? That is an activity. And as for spring break, it is time to end this practice. Keeping them in school would be a better way to occupy their time.

By the looks of the reading and math scores of young blacks in urban public schools across the country, they could use more classroom time. How about that as an opportunity?

With a swing and a miss, adults who should know better have become apologists for the unruly behavior on display in these disorderly events. Is it out of racial sensitivity? No politician came to the defense of the business owners who pay a high percentage of the property taxes in a city. Nobody called on parents to provide better parenting and for them to get more involved in the lives of their children. Instead, many want government to produce a solution to end this like giving more opportunities for young people. This is a big part of the problem in urban black America. Uncle Sam is doing what the parents and family have a responsibility to provide. And the results have been disastrous.

Here is what the response to these mob takeovers should be. An immediate repudiation to this unacceptable behavior. Upon arrest, participants should be charged with state charge of disorderly conduct instead of municipal ordinance charge and citations issued. A dollar total should be calculated and those arrested including their parent and the on-line organizers should be presented with a bill from the municipality. If they are receiving any government aid, the dollar loss should be subtracted from the government assistance like a person has part of their wages taken away to satisfy civil action nonpayment of a lawsuit until the judgment has been satisfied.

When a parent sees that their SNAP benefits or rent assistance are being taken away to pay for their dependent's wrongdoing, we are more likely to get their attention about responsible parenting.

It is a simple behavior concept. If you want more of a certain behavior, reward it. If you want less of a certain behavior, punish it.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of America’s Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Can Police Officers Truly Leave Work at Work? Navigating Trauma, Responsibility, and Off-Duty Life

By: Joel E. Gordon

Sound familiar? A cop finishes a grueling 12-hour shift, drives home, parks the car, and steps inside. But that knot in the stomach? It doesn't untie. Every siren in the distance pulls him or her back. Can police officers really leave work at work? This question hits at the heart of their lives. Their job demands constant alertness and it often spills over into off-duty moments. We see how this affects families too. Spouses worry about moods that shift like weather. Kids sense the tension without knowing why. High-stress police work changes everything, from quick decisions on the street to quiet evenings at home.

Police officers face strict rules even when they're off the clock. These guidelines shape how they act outside work hours. Understanding them helps explain why leaving the job behind feels tough. Most departments have clear rules about off-duty behavior. Officers must carry their badge and ID at all times. They can keep their firearm, but only if trained and permitted. Secondary jobs, like private security, need approval first. This stops conflicts of interest.

Policies stress that the badge never fully comes off. If an officer sees a crime while shopping, they might step in. But they report it right away. Disclosure matters too. Telling others you're a cop can de-escalate or complicate things. One department in California bans off-duty gigs without a supervisor's okay. This keeps focus on the main role. These rules aim to protect both the officer and the public. They remind everyone that duty lingers. Officers learn this from day one in training.

What happens if a cop uses force while not on shift? Courts look at cases closely. In self-defense, it's often okay. But if it ties to the job, liability kicks in. Take the 2019 New York case where an off-duty officer stopped a robbery. The court ruled he acted as a citizen, not the state.

Personal fights get tricky. If an officer's status escalates a bar argument, they could face charges. Departments train on this. They teach when to back off. One study from the Police Executive Research Forum shows off-duty interventions lead to lawsuits 20% more often than on-duty ones. The line blurs fast. Officers must know when they're private folks versus public servants. This knowledge shapes daily choices.

Cops want normal lives, but the public watches close. Social media rules ban posting anything that harms the department's image. A viral video of an off-duty mishap can end a career. States like Texas have laws letting agencies probe off-shift actions if they link to work. This creates tension. Officers deserve privacy, yet they hold power. The Supreme Court case Garcetti v. Ceballos limits free speech for public employees. It applies here. One officer lost his job over an off-duty tweet that mocked a suspect. Balance is key. Departments push for high standards without invading every moment. Public trust depends on it.

The mind doesn't clock out like a time card. Police work builds habits that stick around. Trauma from the job makes simple days feel loaded.

Hypervigilance keeps officers safe on patrol. At home, it means jumping at loud noises. Sleep suffers too. A 2022 study by the National Institute of Justice found 34% of cops show PTSD signs. That's double the general rate. This state comes from real threats. Shootings or chases wire the brain for danger. Turning it off takes effort. Doctors say it mimics a fighter pilot's mindset—always scanning.

Families notice. A spouse might ask, "Why so jumpy?" It's the job's echo. Without tools to manage it, rest feels impossible. Officers carry stories home without saying a word. That weight hits partners and kids hard. Spouses deal with mood swings after bad calls. Children pick up on silence at dinner. Research from Johns Hopkins shows 40% of cop families face higher stress levels. It's called secondary trauma. One wife shared how her husband's distant stare after a fatal crash lasted weeks. Talks help, but not always.

Daily life shifts. Vacations turn tense if sirens blare nearby. Bonds strain without understanding. Yet, many families grow stronger through it.

Stigma runs deep in police culture. Admitting stress feels like weakness. Fear of losing the badge stops many. A survey by the International Association of Chiefs of Police notes that only 25% seek help. Job rules add pressure. Some departments flag therapy visits in records. Access lacks too. Rural areas have few specialists for cops. Change comes slow. Programs offer anonymous lines. But trust builds one step at a time.

You can build walls between shift and home. Small habits make a big difference. Officers who try these often feel more grounded. Start with the drive home. Blast music or call a friend to vent. At the door, change out of uniform right away. Leave gear in the garage. Debrief alone first. Jot notes on the day, then close the book. Mindfulness apps guide quick breaths. One officer swears by a 10-minute walk around the block.

These acts signal "shift over." They ease the mind into family time. Consistency turns them into reflex.

Hobbies pull you away from the blue. Fishing, coaching soccer, or painting offer escape. Join groups outside work—no cop talk allowed.

Partners help here. They nudge toward classes or trips. One cop took up woodworking; it quieted his thoughts. Studies show diverse roles cut burnout by 30%. This builds a fuller you. The badge becomes part, not all. Friends from other walks remind you of normal joys.

Talk without details. Say, "Rough day, but I'm glad to be home." Set rules: No work stories at meals. This cuts anxiety. Share the big picture. Explain risks once, and then focus on fun plans. Books like Emotional Survival for Law Enforcement offer scripts.

Listen too. Ask kids about their day first. It flips the focus. Strong ties weather the storms.

• Use "I feel" statements to express without scaring.

• Schedule weekly check-ins for open chat.

• Celebrate small wins, like a calm evening.

Departments must lead the way. Healthy policies let officers recharge. Without them, the cycle of stress continues. Good agencies require wellness checks. Workshops teach stress tools. 24-hour hotlines provide quick aid. Peer groups shine. Cops talk to cops—no judgment. The FBI's program cut suicide rates by 15%. Sharing stories normalizes struggles. These setups save lives. They show care beyond the badge.

Long shifts wear you down. Four 10-hour days beat five 8-hour ones for recovery. Rotating schedules mess with sleep. A RAND study links fatigue to 25% more errors. Departments should cap overtime and mandatory days off help too. Smart plans boost focus on and off duty. Rest equals readiness.

Bosses set examples. If chiefs email at midnight, everyone follows. They should log off and take vacations. Train leaders on empathy. Praise officers who unplug. One force saw morale rise after chiefs shared family time stories. This tone trickles down. It makes boundaries the norm.

Police officers can't fully leave work at work. The job's demands—legal ties, mental scars, daily habits—linger like shadows. Yet, with rituals, support, and smart policies, they manage it better. Key takeaways include building transition habits, seeking peer help, and pushing for department wellness. Families play a role too, through open talks and patience.

Maintaining balance isn't optional. It's vital for safe streets and happy homes. If you're an officer or love one, start small today. Reach out for resources. Your well-being keeps the community strong.

Joel E. Gordon, BLUE Magazine’s Editor-in-Chief, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Back To The Future

Twenty-five years ago, can seem like a long time because of how fast time goes by due in part to technology. Saying that 25 years ago is a quarter of a century makes it seem like like a long time ago. I put it these terms because it was 25 years ago on September 11, 2001, that the United States suffered its biggest and most deadly attack from a foreign source on the mainland, killing nearly 3,000 people. Think about this for a moment. If a person in the U.S. was born after 2001, the September 11 attacks had to be learned about in history book or old news accounts. This includes people who were toddlers at the time. For the rest of us, we lived it. We saw it in real time. Time stood still. We could not believe that this actually happened here in America. In the aftermath, many politicians promised, never again. The result of that never again mantra led to changes in the way we viewed homeland security.

Federal government officials including politicians did what they usually do in a crisis. They over react and over correct never taking the time to do something meaningful. They convened what was called the 9-11 Commission to study what failed and what corrective measures needed to be put in place to prevent this from ever happening again even though many more have occurred but not on the scale of 9-11. The focus centered on intelligence failures. These failures were not something that had not happened in U.S. history in fact the failures have happened despite the attempts by the U.S. intelligence community to give advance warning to prevent an attack.

Certain words and phrases became common not only in the intelligence and law enforcement community but in the media. We heard about fusion centers, sleeper cells, lone wolfs, on-line radicalization and steps were put into place to counter these things before another terror attack could occur. That is the goal of intelligence-to prevent and disrupt by the collection, collating, analyzing and dissemination of information prior to an attack. One of the weaknesses discovered in our intelligence operation is that stove pipes prevented information to be disseminated up down and across the spectrum to people who play a role in preventing attacks. Important information was hoarded by the entity that produced it. After the 9-11 attacks, it was learned that local law enforcement was not receiving critical information even though they were in position on the front lines to prevent, disrupt or respond to an attack. Fusion centers were established to improve exchanges of information down to the local level.

Recall that before the 9-11 attacks the perpetrators were freely and openly moving about. They were on no-fly lists but continued to fly in and out of the U.S. planning their attack. They were known to the federal agencies but not local law enforcement agencies. Recall that a Maryland State Trooper stopped several of the high jackers in a traffic stop several days before the attacks. He did not have any information about the hijackers. So that gap in the exchange of information was supposed to have been filled by the creation of the Department of Homeland Security. Fusion centers were created.

Since 9-11 however, numerous terrorist attacks have occurred by home grown terrorists. Most of the attacks were committed by perpetrators who were radicalized on-line. In nearly every incident, the FBI indicated that the actor was known to them and “on their radar screen.” If that was the case, then why were they not able to disrupt the attack? Government seems to have taken their eye off the ball in the 25 years since the 9-11 attacks. In fact, since the election of Donald Trump as President in 2016, many of the key agencies responsible for homeland security turned away from this important role and identified what they believed to be more important threats to the homeland. They called moms attending school board meeting, MAGA supporters and white supremacy to be the biggest threats facing the homeland and began monitoring them instead of terror sleeper cells or people spewing  radical Islam rhetoric on open social media sources. One story reported that the CIA tied homemaking and traditional mothers as indicative of violent extremism. That is why they miss so many people committing acts of terror like the recent ones at Old Dominion University and the Synagogue in Michigan.

If you look at most of the terror incidents that have happened since 9-11, the actors were posting their intention in open sources yet none of the agencies responsible for counterterrorism at the federal level took any substantial action that could have interrupted the act.

So here is where we are at, just like we were pre-9-11, 2001. Our intel agencies remain one step behind the terrorist who are hiding in plain sight. Taxpayers spend hundreds of million if not billions for counterterrorism efforts. We need more of a return on investment. I have no concern whatsoever that moms, MAGA supporters or even white supremacist are serious threats to the homeland. The Iran military operation should serve as a reminder that terrorism threats have not gone away nor will they ever again.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of America’s Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Detecting A Pulse

I have written about and interviewed extensively about what is a failure of leadership among law enforcement executives ever since the incident in Minneapolis where George Floyd a career criminal who was high on fatal levels of fentanyl resisted police officers trying to take him into custody. I watched people in positions of law enforcement leadership, who in my view are unfit to lead the men and women on the front lines cave to the demands of groups who make it clear that they hate cops.

Black Lives Matter and Antifa are among the more prominent groups. These law enforcement executives went along with police reform efforts that made it tougher for officers to do their jobs. They silently stood by during calls to defund the police. They ordered their forces to stand down as criminals rioted, looted businesses, set fires. Rioters destroyed police cars, threw rocks and bottles at officers some of whom were not allowed to dress in riot gear after being told that it might inflame the agitators. And these law enforcement executives said nothing when officers were charged with serious crimes by overzealous prosecutors. In Wisconsin recently, the Milwaukee chief of police and Milwaukee County sheriff attended and spoke at a community meeting organized by a rabid pro illegal immigration group Voces de la Frontera to advise on ways for illegal aliens to avoid detection.

It is important for me to remind you of all these things because many of them fade into our subconscious as time goes by. Law enforcement agencies are still reeling from the effects of this onslaught. Mass resignations and retirements have left agencies short handed in personnel. Cops are fatigued working long hours with some not getting adequate days off. Although this theory has not been tested, these attacks on this profession are related to the extremely high incidents of cop suicides. No other profession is experiencing these rates of suicide.

The police find themselves once again being used as pawns but this time the culprit is the political class that I detailed this in a previous column. I pointed out that politicians are driving a wedge between local and state police and their federal counterparts in the Department of Homeland Security namely Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. The Governor of Maryland for example has ordered that all local or state agencies dissolve any agreement they have to assist ICE in illegal immigration enforcement. This includes existing agreements under the 287g program that deputize local law enforcement officers to enforce immigration laws. The Maryland House of delegates recently passed a measure that if passed by the state Senate and signed by the Maryland governor, which surely will happen, would allow Maryland residents to sue ICE agents in state courts for violations of the U.S. Constitution. The Founding Fathers referred to that as pretended legislation. But there is finally some pushback on these state laws and against state and local leaders.

A group of nine sheriffs in Maryland held a news conference denouncing state and local officials who put politics over public safety. They said they will ignore the Governor’s ban on existing agreements to work with ICE officials on immigration screenings. This is a bold step. It creates a needed confrontation about keeping politics out of the mission of sheriffs to serve and protect.

In a man bites dog story, there is one state elected official who seems to understand the value of having local law enforcement officials cooperate with ICE in keeping residents safe from the ravages of criminal illegal aliens. Maine Governor Paul LePage sent out a letter to all county sheriffs threatening to remove them from office for not cooperation with federal immigration officials. He ordered that, “I am directing you to cooperate with immigration officials and follow the provisions of Executive Order 001-2011 that I signed on January of 2011.” Several sheriffs have already said that they would not work with ICE officials to which the Governor announced the consequences for ignoring his order. He said that should any citizen of Maine notify him of any undocumented, illegal alien who was released by a Maine sheriff following a written United States ICE request that the alien be detained pending federal enforcement action, he will commence the specific process afforded him under the Maine State Constitution Article IX Section 10 to remove that sheriff.

Sheriffs are constitutional officers meaning that their authority, responsibility and duties are described in the state constitution. They report directly to the voters of the county, not a county official. Governors are constitutional officers as well and are elected statewide. In Maine as in most other states, a governor can remove a sheriff or other constitutional officer for cause. Defining cause can be nebulous except for instance when a sheriff is accused in the commission of a crime. Removing an independently elected official can be messy politically. Maine may be headed for an intrastate showdown over illegal immigration.

In Virginia, the newly elected governor is refusing to turn over to ICE an illegal alien charged with murder. She is demanding a judicial warrant signed by a judge. She obviously does not understand administrative law. Administrative law was set up for civil process. It gives officials specific authority such as issuing an administrative detainer. In my view the governor is obstructing ICE from carrying out their immigration function and authority. This reminds me of a case in Wisconsin where a state circuit court judge interfered with ICE agents who tried to take an illegal alien into custody. He was able to escape. State Judge Hannah Dugan was charged in federal court with felony obstruction and convicted by a jury. She now faces sentencing that includes prison time and a fine. The Virginia Governor should be indicted federally just as Dugan has. The United States Department of Justice can change the direction of the resistance if they have the heart and the will.

Sheriff David Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of AmericasSheriff LLC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Rural Policing: Keeping Communities Safe in Wide Open Spaces

By: Joel E. Gordon

Rural policing looks much different than city law enforcement. Wide-open spaces and fewer people make police work tough. It can take much longer for help to arrive. Often, there are not enough officers or equipment for everything. Officers often work alone more than in big cities. These factors, plus local economies and crime types, mean rural police need special plans. Their approach really differs from what you see in towns.

Rural officers often cover huge amounts of land. Imagine one deputy watching an area the size of several small cities. This can make it hard to get to a crime scene fast. Longer response times can also make people feel less safe. It also means officers can get tired quickly.

Departments in the country often have smaller budgets. This leads to fewer officers and less specialized gear. One officer might handle everything from a traffic stop to a serious crime. They often rely on help from other towns or the state. These teamwork agreements are critical for safety.

Good cell service and internet are not always available. This can make talking between officers and dispatch tough. People might struggle to report crimes online, too. It also means officers can't always check records or get information quickly. This makes coordinating responses in a crisis much harder.

Fewer people living far apart changes crime patterns. This isolation sometimes leads to more property theft or drug problems. Without many eyes watching, criminals might feel bolder. Getting everyone involved in preventing crime also becomes harder.

Rural economies often rely on farming or mining. When these industries struggle, it can affect everyone. Hard times might cause some types of crime to go up. For instance, more thefts could happen if jobs are scarce. Police need to understand these local money matters.

People in small towns often know everyone else. This can be a good thing for police. Officers might have an easier time talking to people. But it also means personal connections can complicate investigations. Officers must act fairly for everyone to trust them.

Technology helps rural police do more with less. Drones can search large areas quickly. GPS trackers help keep an eye on vehicles or evidence. Special radios ensure officers can talk even in remote spots. These tools boost how well officers do their job.

For instance, one county uses drones to find missing persons. Another equips all its patrol cars with advanced GPS. This makes sure the nearest officer always responds. These smart tools help rural agencies work better.

Even small departments use data to spot crime trends. They can look at past incidents to guess where problems might pop up. This helps them put officers where they are most needed. Collecting good data can be tricky in spread-out areas, but it's worth the effort.

Working with other police groups is key. Neighboring towns or state police often share resources. This can mean sharing officers for a big event. It might also involve combining efforts on a complex case. These partnerships make everyone safer.

Officers need to be part of the community. They can attend local fairs or school events. This helps people see them as helpful neighbors, not just authority figures. An officer who is visible and friendly builds good relationships. These connections are vital for trust.

Police also look at specific problems a community faces. Maybe there is a rise in ATV thefts. Officers would then create a plan just for that issue. This might involve patrols or teaching people how to secure their vehicles better. It addresses unique local crime trends.

Helping crime victims in remote areas is important. Officers often connect people with support groups or counselors. They might partner with local charities for this. Access to help, like mental health services, should be easy for everyone, no matter where they live.

Stealing farm equipment or livestock hits farmers hard. These crimes cause big financial losses. A stolen tractor can put a farmer out of business. It's a serious offense in many rural communities. Police work closely with farmers to track these items.

Illegal dumping scars our natural spaces. People sometimes abandon trash or chemicals in remote areas. This harms the environment and costs taxpayers money to clean up. Policing vast wildlands for these crimes is a real challenge. Special units sometimes focus on protecting the land.

Poaching, which is illegal hunting, hurts wildlife. It can also be linked to organized crime. Catching poachers in huge forests or fields is tough. Police often team up with wildlife agencies to stop these offenses. Together, they protect natural resources.

Rural roads and highways can become routes for drug runners. Small towns might seem like easy targets for dealers. This brings dangerous drugs into quiet areas. These networks exploit the isolation of some communities.

Drug addiction tears families apart in rural America. The opioid crisis has hit these areas hard. Overdose rates can climb, and treatment options are often far away. This creates big health and safety problems for everyone.

Police fight drug problems with different methods. They try to stop drugs from coming in. They also help people find treatment for addiction. Education programs teach young people about the dangers of drugs. Sometimes, special drug task forces handle these complex cases.

Some towns offer help with student loans for new officers. Others provide housing aid or good salaries. These perks make rural police jobs more attractive. These incentives help departments find good people. We need strong officers for our country towns.

Finding new officers in small, remote towns can be tough. There might not be many job applicants. Things like limited housing or job options for a spouse can make people hesitant. Schools might also be far away for families.

Officers who grew up in the area often connect better with residents. They know the roads, the people, and the local issues. Having local ties helps them earn trust quickly. Some departments look for recruits right from their own towns.

Rural officers need training for unique situations. They might learn about crash investigations on country roads. Wilderness survival skills are also useful for remote calls. Special training for farm accidents or natural disasters is also important.

De-escalation skills are crucial when backup is far away. Officers must handle tough situations calmly and effectively. Training like Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) helps officers deal with mental health emergencies. These skills keep everyone safer.

Police work can be stressful, especially in isolated areas. Departments need to support their officers' well-being. This might include peer support groups or easy access to counselors. Looking after mental health helps officers stay sharp and ready.

Rural policing is a demanding job. It asks for flexibility, smart thinking, and a deep understanding of local life. The challenges are clear: vast lands, few resources, and special crime patterns. Yet, new ideas and a focus on community help overcome these hurdles.

By using technology wisely and building strong ties with neighbors, rural law enforcement grows stronger. Investing in good training and officer support is also vital. This work helps police build trust and keep the people they serve safe. The future of rural policing depends on being proactive and putting the community first.

Joel E. Gordon, BLUE Magazine’s Editor-in-Chief, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional rural regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

The Evolution of Police Videos in Law Enforcement

By: Joel E. Gordon

Body cameras and dash cams have changed policing. They started as simple tools for safety. Now, they build a bridge between officers and communities. Over 50% of U.S. police departments use body cams, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics. These devices record interactions in real time. They help sort fact from fiction. Police videos trace back to basic tools. They have grown with tech. This shift helps officers and the public alike.

Fixed cameras in patrol cars marked the start. In the 1980s, these recorded from dashboards. They caught basic scenes but missed close action.

Then came portable gear. After the 2014 Ferguson protests, body cams surged. The U.S. Department of Justice pushed for them. By 2016, about 40% of large agencies had them, per DOJ reports. Small towns followed suit. This boom came from demands for proof in tense stops.

These cameras clip to uniforms. They film from the officer's view. No more he-said-she-said stories.

Dash cams lead the pack. They mount in cars and film roads and talks. High-definition lenses catch details day or night. Body cams offer more. They record hands-free with wide angles. Some add GPS tags to clips. Drones join in too. They hover above for bird's-eye views in big scenes.

AI steps up the game. It spots faces or flags fights in real time. Journals like Police Chief note these boosts. Footage stays sharp, even in rain or dark. This tech makes videos reliable tools.

• Dash cams: Auto-start on lights or sirens.

• Body cams: Battery lasts full shifts.

• Drones: Fly safe with remote pilots.

Videos replay real events. Departments watch them after shifts. This refines moves and cuts errors.In reviews, trainers spot weak spots. A tense call might show better talk skills. Simulations use clips to practice de-escalation. Officers learn to calm crowds without force.

For better training, departments can do these steps:

1. Log all footage in a safe system.

2. Review with teams weekly.

3. Tie lessons to policy updates.

This approach saves lives. It builds skills that stick.

Videos raise tough questions. Who sees them? When do they stay private? Laws try to balance this. The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) opens doors. It lets people request federal files. States have their own rules, like sunshine laws.

People deserve privacy. Videos might show kids or victims. Redactions blur faces or homes.

Fake clips spread easy online. Real ones need proof. Chain-of-custody tracks each step from camera to court. Officers seal devices right away. Tech firms add watermarks. This fights edits.

Viewers, check these:

• Look at metadata for dates.

• Stick to news or official sites.

• Spot jumps in action as red flags.

Solid checks keep facts straight.

Cases teach hard truths. Many cities now require body cams. New York mandates them for all patrols.

Reforms include quick reviews. Bans on rough tactics spread.

Advocates, try this:

• Gather local video data.

• Meet council members.

• Push for audits yearly.

Change starts with action. Trust grows or fades with clips. They show real work. Surveys back this up. Open releases build faith. The NYPD shares clips on its site. This lets folks see daily duties. Routine posts prove fairness. No cover-ups erode doubt.

Agencies, share more:

• Post training vids.

• Explain big incidents.

• Invite questions online.

Steps like these connect people.

Addressing Misinformation and Public Perception

Short clips twist truths. A punch out of context looks bad. Full videos clear the air.

• Watch whole footage.

• Read news from both sides.

• Share facts, not rage.

Context fights lies. Police videos transform how we see law enforcement. From old dash cams to AI boosts, they trace a path to better days. Legal rules balance access and privacy. They build trust by opening doors and fighting fakes. New tech promises more insights, if handled right.

Key points stick: Videos demand accountability. Push for open policies. Use them to heal rifts between cops and neighbors.

Joel E. Gordon, BLUE Magazine’s Editor-in-Chief, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Police Shootings at Moving Vehicles: Legal Precedents, Tactical Realities, and Public Scrutiny

By: Joel E. Gordon

In 2023 alone, over 1,100 people died from police shootings in the U.S., and a chunk of those involved moving cars. Picture this: an officer chases a speeding driver through city streets, heart pounding, as the vehicle swerves wildly. Was the car a deadly threat, or just a means to flee? These moments test the line between safety and overreach. We face a tough balance here—protecting officers from real dangers while ensuring force stays fair.

Laws around police use of force aim to keep things reasonable, but vehicles add a twist. Officers must prove they faced real danger before pulling the trigger.

Courts lean on Graham v. Connor from 1989 to judge if force fits the threat. That case says officers act on what they see in the moment, not hindsight. For moving cars, "objectively reasonable" means asking: Did the vehicle pose immediate harm? In Tennessee v. Garner from 1985, the Supreme Court limited deadly force against fleeing suspects unless they threaten lives. A car barreling toward an officer changes everything—it becomes like a 3,000-pound bullet. Judges now weigh speed, direction, and if the driver aimed to hit someone. This standard evolves with cases, pushing for proof of clear peril.

Back in the day, cops could shoot any fleeing felon. But Garner ended that broad rule. Today, deadly force needs a deadly threat, even in chases. A driver speeding away isn't enough; they must endanger others directly. Think of it as a red line: If the car rams toward a crowd or officer, shots might justify. Courts look at intent—did the suspect gun the engine at people? Without that, force crosses into excess. This shift cut down unjust killings, but it leaves gray areas in fast pursuits.

Federal law sets the floor, but police departments often raise the bar. The Constitution demands reasonableness, yet many agencies ban shooting at moving cars unless lives hang in the balance. For example, the LAPD's policy requires officers to avoid fire if the vehicle alone is the target. Training stresses this gap—cops learn constitutional basics plus local rules. Some places mandate de-escalation first, like calling in backups. These policies aim to dodge lawsuits and rebuild community faith. Still, they vary by city, creating uneven standards across the country.

On the streets, vehicles turn chases into chaos. Officers train to spot when a car shifts from getaway tool to weapon. Accuracy drops fast in motion, so choices matter.

A car hits like a truck in a fight—pure force. Training flags scenarios like a driver veering into pedestrians or charging at cops. If it rams a patrol car, that's assault with a deadly weapon. Officers assess distance and speed: At 60 mph, impact kills. Crowded areas amp the risk; one wrong swerve endangers bystanders. Real cases show drivers using cars to attack, like plowing through barriers. Spotting this shift saves lives, but split seconds decide.

Shooting from a speeding cruiser? Hits land one in ten times, tops. Bullets veer with the sway, risking stray shots into homes or traffic. "Weapon containment" means holding fire until safe—park and aim if you can. Officers face wind, bumps, and adrenaline blur. It's like aiming a slingshot from a rollercoaster. Departments push steady positions over wild gunfire, cutting collateral damage. Yet, fear of harm pushes some to shoot anyway.

Why not skip bullets? PIT maneuvers nudge cars off the road safely. Spike strips pop tires without a chase's end. Drones or GPS trackers follow from afar, letting pursuits cool. These tools work best in teams— one car blocks, another deploys strips. Less-lethal options like beanbag rounds stop drivers short of lethal shots. Cities like Seattle swear by them, dropping vehicle shootings by half. Training drills these swaps, making gunfire the last resort.

Famous incidents light up the debate on police shooting at moving cars. They show how evidence sways courts and crowds. Video often tips the scales.

Take the 2016 Philando Castile case in Minnesota. During a traffic stop, Castile reached for his ID, but fear led to shots in his car. The dashboard cam showed no aggressive move, yet the officer claimed threat. Courts ruled the force unreasonable, highlighting panic over proof. Another: The 2020 Breonna Taylor raid, where a car chase precursor ended in tragedy. No direct shots at a moving vehicle, but it fueled talks on pursuit risks. These cases stress intent evidence—like dash footage proving or debunking danger.

Vehicle incidents make up about 5-10% of all officer-involved shootings, per Mapping Police Violence data through 2025. That's roughly 50-100 cases yearly, mostly in urban spots like LA or Chicago. Southern states see more due to longer pursuits. Overall use-of-force drops 15% since body cams rolled out, but car chases lag. Black drivers face these stops twice as often, sparking equity cries. Trends point to fewer fatalities with better tech, yet hot spots persist.

Cameras capture the blur of a chase like nothing else. They show if a car truly threatened or if shots flew too soon. In reviews, video sways 70% of decisions, per DOJ stats. Prosecutors use it to charge or clear officers fast. Public eyes footage too, fueling protests or support. Dash cams pair with body cams for full views, cutting disputes. But angles miss details, so experts still debate. Overall, they push for clearer calls in vehicle threats.

After shots ring out, questions flood in. How do we check if force fit? Training and reviews build better habits; internal affairs jumps in right away. They pull logs on speed, distance, and witness words. Boards replay the scene: Was the car closing in? Experts measure threat levels frame by frame. Officers face psych evaluations too, spotting stress flaws. Most cases clear if policy holds, but 20% lead to discipline. This process ensures fairness, weeding out bad calls. Families get reports, closing loops on trust.

Drills mimic real chases to sharpen skills. Close-quarters stops practice disarming threats without fire. Aggressive maneuvers teach PIT timing on mock tracks. VR sims throw in rain or crowds for stress tests. Departments run these weekly, cutting errors by 30%. Focus on angles: When does a swerve become a lunge? New hires log hours in cars, building gut calls. It's like flight school for cops—prep beats regret.

Behavioral pros say to slow down pursuits to think more clearly. One analyst notes: "Back off, track later—lives first." Legal voices push policy tweaks for non-violent flees. Under stress, breaths calm the trigger finger. De-escalation works in 80% of stops, per studies. Experts call for team calls over solo heroics. Blending calm with readiness saves officers and suspects alike.

Police shooting at moving vehicles sits at a crossroads. Law demands proof of danger, tactics stress smart choices, and the public wants proof of restraint. We've seen how cases and cams shape views, while training bridges gaps. Clear rules and honest reviews can ease tensions. In the end, it's about protecting everyone without excess force.

Key Takeaways for Legal Clarity and Procedural Justice

• Prove imminent threat: Officers need evidence the vehicle endangers lives right then—no guesses.

• Prefer non-lethal tools: Use PIT or strips first to avoid bullets in most chases.

• Rely on video proof: Body cams clarify decisions, helping courts and communities agree.

• Train for stress: Regular simulations build habits that keep force measured and fair.

Stay informed, stay safe.

Joel E. Gordon, BLUE Magazine’s Editor-in-Chief, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

It Was Inevitable

The recent use of deadly force by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent that occurred in Minneapolis, Minnesota has thrown the nation into widespread protests once again. Recall that Minneapolis was the site of the death of George Floyd who died after coming into contact with Minneapolis police officers.

You know how this works. After the death of someone at the hands of a law enforcement officer, subversives on the American left begin organizing staged protests. They are able to summon a mob of people to show up at moments notice. They are well funded. The goal is to overwhelm government’s ability to adequately respond our counter. Government operates from a reactive position early on and usually for the entire event. Media shows up and films events from the mob’s perspective. One that portrays the mob as peaceful people just out exercising their first amendment right to protest. Any footage they can capture that shows a first responder using any kind of force is exploited without objectivity or balanced descriptions. The response to this shooting by an ICE agent is no different.

This use of force was going to happen and not because these agents are itching to use force. In my view ICE agents have been putting up with too much for too long. They have absorbed assaults, they have been doxxed, they and their families have been subjected to threats, they have been made into villains and all with no assertive response. That is not an effective counter to this violence. These groups are reservoirs of hate and violence. Their goal is to foment violence and to initiate contact with agents. They want the physical fight. These are not your typical peaceful protestors regardless of how they or the accomplice media defines them. These are well organized and well funded insurrectionists using guerrilla warfare type tactics used to topple governments in third world countries. I am encouraged that President Trump has indicated that he may invoke the Insurrection Act in Minneapolis if he has to, in order to keep the peace. They want to burn our republic down. This is a rebellion. It is important to identify this for what it is, otherwise, the wrong tactics and resources will be applied. The mob has seen that the response so far from the government has been tepid at best.

Assaults against these officers has risen 1300% since these operations began about a year ago. Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice have issued numerous warnings about holding people accountable. In one instance, a memo warned the agitators not to cross the red-line. What and where exactly is the red line? This mob has not only crossed the red line, but they have also sprinted past it and still no effective counter response.

Asking ICE agents to fulfill their mission in the face of this opposition makes their’s an impossible task. They are getting no help for the most part from state and local law enforcement because local Democrat politicians have turned this into a political fight against the federal government. Local law enforcement would be very helpful in covering ICE agents flanks as they are attacked as they search for and arrest illegals. Instead, ICE must use their own limited resources that thins their ranks not to mention that these agents are not really trained to do that type of enforcement. We are talking about mob or riot control.

So, we end up with a situation where ICE agents must resort the use force to protect themselves because the mob continues to raise the ante. Irresponsible political rhetoric has dehumanized these agents. This sends a message that it is all right to attack and assault agents.

Agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement now realize that they are going to have to use a higher level of force to keep themselves safe. That is job one. In four different instances agents who were under attack have applied deadly force, twice in Portland and twice in Minneapolis. In one of the incidents in Minneapolis an agent shot and killed a woman who weaponized her motor vehicle and drove at the agent after being given several orders to stop her car and get out. It is a classic case of not complying with a lawful order given by an officer. It has been reported that she had received anti-ICE training. Really? Who is conducting this training and who is funding it? This is part of the intelligence gathering operation that I hope is going on to dismantle the infrastructure of this insurrection

I have reviewed numerous videos of the incident. While that is only one piece of the investigation, I am qualified to make some assessments early on. I have investigated many officer uses of deadly force as a detective with the Milwaukee Police Department. I have interviewed involved officers and made conclusions to the local district attorney reviewing the shooting to decide if it was justified or not.

I do not want to hear from the cop hating group, talking heads on television or news reporters. None of these folks know what they are talking about. The only thing that matters to determine whether it was justified is the legal standard. That legal standard is codified in a landmark Supreme Court Decision named Graham versus Conner. In a nutshell it says that officers are faced with making split second decisions under circumstances that are tense, uncertain and rapidly evolving. The officer’s use of force cannot be judged under the lense of 20/20 hindsight. It further says that determinations of its reasonableness must be made under the objective reasonableness of a law enforcement officer on the scene who used the force, not what you or I should have done or would have done but what that officer did taking all the facts and circumstance into account.

Taking into count what the Graham v Conner finding says, it is easy for me to determine at this stage that the ICE agent using deadly force did so to save himself from death or great bodily harm of being struck or run over by a car. It was justified.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of America’s Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

The Unbreakable Shield: Mastering Mental and Emotional Toughness in Modern Law Enforcement

By: Joel E, Gordon

Picture this: You're a police officer facing a chaotic street brawl at midnight. Shouts echo, fists fly, and one wrong move could end it all. In that split second, toughness isn't about who hits hardest—it's about keeping your head clear, your heart steady, and your choices right.

Old-school views paint cops as tough guys who shrug off pain like it's nothing. But today's policing demands more. It's mental and emotional strength that lets you handle trauma, doubt, and pressure without breaking. Think of it as an inner shield against the storm.

Law enforcement throws curveballs that test your limits every shift. You deal with violence, loss, and endless red tape. Without solid mental toughness in police work, these hits can wear you down fast. Officers face a mix of sharp shocks and slow grinds. Both chip away at your edge if you're not ready.

Sudden events hit like a punch to the gut. A shooting, a car wreck, or a child's cry in danger—these acute stresses flood your brain with fear. Your body kicks into fight-or-flight mode, heart pounding, thoughts racing. Then there's the daily drip of chronic strain. Endless paperwork, rude calls, or seeing the same sad stories repeat. Over time, this builds up. You might pick up vicarious trauma just from hearing victims' tales, feeling their pain as your own.

Stats show the toll. About 20% of officers deal with PTSD symptoms after big incidents. Chronic stress? It leads to sleep issues and short fuses for half of all cops, per recent surveys. Spotting these early helps you fight back.

Every move you make is on camera now. Body cams, dash cams, cell phones—it's all recorded. One viral clip can twist your actions into something ugly, even if you did it by the book. Then social media amps it up. A quick post calls you out, and suddenly you're the bad guy. This constant watch adds a layer of doubt. Do I act? Wait? The fear of backlash makes split-second calls tougher. You need emotional toughness for cops to push through. It builds that inner voice saying, "Stick to your training." Departments now train on this, teaching you to tune out the noise and focus on the facts.

Trust cracks in this job. You see the worst in people, and sometimes in your own ranks. Protests yell "defund," and colleagues turn quiet about their struggles. This leaves you alone in a crowd. Friends outside the force don't get it; inside, you fear looking weak. Isolation creeps in, making every shift feel heavier. Building walls helps at first, but true toughness means letting in safe support. It's knowing when to talk without shame. Many officers say this shift cut their stress in half.

Toughness in law enforcement isn't vague—it's skills you can sharpen. On the street, it shows in how you think, feel, and stand your ground.  These traits keep you effective. They turn chaos into control.

Your brain is your first weapon. In a crisis, adrenaline clouds it, shrinking your focus to basics. Toughness here means quick thinking—spotting threats, weighing options, and picking the safe path.

Take a foot chase: Suspect darts into traffic. Do you follow? Call backup? Stress inoculation builds this muscle. Its practice under fake pressure so real stress feels familiar. Psych studies back it. Trained officers make 30% fewer errors in high-heat drills. You stay sharp, avoid rash moves, and save lives—yours and others'. Real strength is ice-cold calm when tempers flare. You breathe deep, read the room, and talk folks down.

De-escalation works because of this. A yelling suspect calms when you stay even. It's not weakness—it's control that ends fights before they start. Think of it like a pressure valve. Let emotions build, and boom. Regulate them, and you steer the ship. Training drills this: Role-play arguments until calm becomes habit.

• Spot your triggers: Anger from past calls?

• Pause and count: Three seconds to reset.

• Use open questions: "What's going on?" invites talk, not fists.

Pressure comes from all sides. Buddies bend rules; bosses push quotas; crowds boo. Toughness means holding the line—doing right even if it costs you. This fights cynicism, that trap where you stop caring. Instead, you choose integrity.  Stand firm; it's your badge's true weight.

You don't wake up tough—you train for it. Like gym reps for muscles, mental drills build your shield. Departments and you can make this happen. Start small, build big. Consistency wins.

Stress Inoculation Training (SIT) puts you in the fire without real risk. Simulators blast noise, lights, and actors playing perpetrators. Heart rate spikes; you practice calls under load. Real examples shine. LAPD's program cut use-of-force complaints by 15%. Officers say it feels like game day—predictable, not panic.

Try it yourself:

1. Find a trainer or app for stress drills.

2. Start low: Simple talks with timers.

3. Ramp up: Add distractions like alarms.

This habit turns fear into focus.

Mindfulness quiets the storm inside. Box breathing: In for four counts, hold four, out four, hold four.

Tactical pause? Before acting, breathe and scan. Asks: Threat level? Backup near? It buys seconds that save minutes.

Officers who use this report clearer heads. One study found breathing cuts reaction time errors by 40%. Practice daily: Morning coffee? Breathe through it.

• Box method for calm.

• Grounding: Name five things you see.

• Night wind-down: Five-minute scan of the day.

No one toughs it out alone. Peer groups let you vent safe. Share a bad call; get nods, not judgment. Mentors guide newbies. They spot signs of strain early. You're part of a team—lean on it.

Skip mental toughness, and the job eats you alive. Wellness ties straight to it. Strong mind means long career, happy home. Lack it? Burnout hits hard. Burnout sneaks up—exhaustion, doubt, no joy in the badge. Toughness balances hard shell with soft care. You help without draining dry.

Self-care fits in: Gym time, hobbies, and days off. It keeps empathy alive. Without it, you turn numb, missing real threats. Balanced toughness keeps you giving without giving out.

The job's dark side shows in numbers. Officer suicides top line-of-duty deaths. Stigma says "man up," but asking for help is peak strength.

PTSD hides in silence. Flashbacks, anger bursts—signs you need aid. Therapy isn't quit; it's reload. Toughness saves lives, starting with your own.

Shifts end, but stress lingers. You bring home the edge, snapping at kids or zoning out. Off-ramping clears it. Try routines: Drive home slow, music on. Shower off the day. Journal: What went right? Wrong?

Family’s notice. One officer's rule—no gun talk at meals—saved his marriage. It protects what matters most.

Toughness in law enforcement is your core gear. We've covered the strains: Trauma hits, scrutiny bites, trust fades. Key parts include quick thinking, calm control, and ethical grit. Building it takes work—SIT drills, breath tricks, peer backs. Link it to wellness: Dodge burnout, face struggles head-on, switch off clean.

The best shield? Your trained mind; It guards you, your team, the public. Start today: Pick one tool, use it. Your next shift will thank you. Stay tough—stay true.

Joel E. Gordon, BLUE Magazine’s Editor-in-Chief, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Amputee Police Officers: Inspiring Stories from the Front Lines of Law Enforcement

By: Joel E. Gordon

Imagine a cop chasing a suspect down a dark alley, prosthetic leg steady on uneven ground. That scene once seemed impossible. Now, it's real for amputee police officers who prove strength comes in many forms.

Police work has long demanded peak physical fitness. In the past, strict rules kept people with limb loss out. But new prosthetics and fair laws change that. Departments now see value in diverse teams. This article looks at how amputee police officers face challenges, win successes, and shape modern law enforcement.

Old police fitness tests often shut doors on folks with disabilities. Push-ups, runs, and climbs favored those without limb differences. Many lost jobs due to medical checks that saw amputation as a flaw. Back in the 1980s, rules labeled amputees unfit for duty. This led to lawsuits and shifts in views. Today, those barriers fade as departments rethink what "fit" really means. Historical police physical requirements once meant exclusion, but change brings hope.

Disability discrimination in law enforcement hurt many veterans too. They served in wars, lost limbs, and then faced rejection at home. Stories of denied badges pushed for reform. Now, more agencies test true skills over body parts. Modern prosthetics let officers run, jump, and fight like never before. Running blades mimic natural strides for quick pursuits. Rugged lower-limb systems handle rough terrain and long shifts.

Take the Ottobock C-Leg, a smart prosthetic that adjusts to steps. One officer used it to pass academy trials with ease. These tools make high-demand work possible for amputee police officers. Tactical prosthetics add features like quick-release for gear. They cost more but save lives in action. As tech improves, more cops with limb loss join the ranks. Prosthetics for active duty police turn limits into strengths.

The Americans with Disabilities Act, or ADA, forces changes in hiring. It requires reasonable steps to let qualified people with disabilities work. Police must adapt tests and duties for amputees. In the US, courts back this for public safety jobs. Departments now offer modified gear and training. ADA compliance in police departments builds fair teams.

Other laws, like the Rehabilitation Act, aid federal roles. These rules push for inclusion over exclusion. Reasonable accommodation in public safety helps everyone serve better. Amputee officers shine in desk and support jobs. They solve crimes as detectives, piecing clues together. Forensics work needs sharp minds, not just strong legs.

Training new recruits draws on their grit. Community outreach builds trust in neighborhoods. Administrative leadership sets examples for all. Amputee police officer roles show talent matters most. These spots let them avoid heavy patrols if needed. Yet many choose them for passion, not limits. Non-patrol law enforcement careers open wide doors.

Some amputees handle street duty full-time. They drive cruisers, scan scenes, and apply force when required. Reports show they meet core tasks with adapted tools. One study from the FBI notes 15% of disabled vets now serve as cops. They navigate crowds and use radios just fine. Amputee officer patrol duties prove doubts wrong.

Functional capacity testing checks real skills, not assumptions. Officers with prosthetics pass chases and arrests. This builds a stronger force overall.

• Drive patrol cars safely in traffic.

• Secure perimeters at incidents.

• Use tasers or batons as trained.

Academy life tests everyone hard. For amputees, tweaks help pass firearms qualifications. They adjust stances for steady aim. Defensive tactics change too, like balance aids in grapples. Ongoing checks ensure skills stay sharp. Police academy requirements for amputees focus on function.

Talk to recruiters early about your prosthetic. Ask for demo days to show abilities. Police disability certification rewards those who prepare. This path leads to badges for all.

Teams must trust each member in crises. Bosses learn to value amputee strengths. Peers train together to build bonds. Studies in team psych show diverse groups solve problems faster. They adapt plans on the fly. Law enforcement team dynamics with disability create tougher units. Workshops teach how prosthetics work. This cuts fear and boosts support. Peer support for disabled officers saves the day.

Custom gear fits unique needs. Vests strap over prosthetics without snags. But upkeep takes time and cash. Departments budget for repairs after rough days. Officers track wear from daily use. Police equipment customization keeps them ready. Prosthetic maintenance in law enforcement budgets covers extras. Delays can sideline good cops. Smart planning avoids that pitfall.

People stare at visible differences on duty. Some worry about safety, but facts show skill trumps looks. Departments share stories to shift views. Media spotlights wins, like rescues by amputee heroes. This paints positive pictures. Public perception of disabled police officers warms up. Positive media representation in law enforcement inspires kids. It shows service open to all. Questions like "Can they really do it?" fade with proof.

Highlighting Trailblazing Officers

Meet Officer Mark Wright who made history as San Diego PD's first prosthetic-wearing motorcycle officer, proving determination overcomes physical limitations through resilience. His story motivates many.

Then there's a Suffolk County police officer who is believed to be the first double amputee in the U.S. to serve on a force. Officer Matias Ferreira, 36, lost both of his legs below the knee in an IED explosion while serving in Afghanistan in 2011, when he was 21. In addition to living out his dream as a police officer, he also worked in the police academy training hundreds of officers.

Inspiring amputee police officers like them break molds. Successful disabled veterans in law enforcement rise high. They promote to ranks and mentor others. Their paths light the way.

Groups like the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund aid those with challenges. They offer tips and connections. Internal clubs in departments share advice too. The Police Disability Network fights for fair rules. Join them for events and resources. Support networks for disabled law enforcement officers ease the road.

For aspiring cops, contact the ADA National Network. They guide on rights and steps. Police disability advocacy builds community strength.

• Find local vet groups for job leads.

• Attend inclusion seminars yearly.

• Share your story to help others.

Tech like advanced prosthetics wipes out old walls. Amputee police officers now thrive where once blocked. True skill shows in job tasks done well, no matter the body. Departments gain from varied views and tough spirits.

Look ahead: More amputees will join, making forces smarter and kinder. This shift helps all of us feel safer. If you're inspired, reach out to a recruiter today—your story could be next.

Joel E. Gordon, BLUE Magazine’s Editor-in-Chief, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. He is also a recent below knee amputee, Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Decoding the Blue: Police Argot and Law Enforcement Slang

By: Joel E. Gordon

Imagine you're driving home late at night and hear sirens blare. Over a police scanner, crackling voices spit out terms like "10-4" or "perp in custody." You wonder what it all means—does it signal danger nearby? This scene plays out in real life and on TV, but most folks scratch their heads at police argot outside of the law enforcement world.

Police argot, often called cop talk, is the special lingo cops use every day. It's not the stiff legal words in court or basic police jargon anyone can pick up. This dialect grew from the early 1900s, when officers needed quick ways to chat without outsiders catching on. It builds team spirit, speeds up talks in chaos, and keeps some secrets safe.

Police argot fills reports, radio chats, and locker room banter. You hear it in news clips or cop shows, but true meanings hide behind the shorthand. These words pop up often in daily patrols and big busts.

Ten-codes started in the 1930s with the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials, or APCO. Cops used them to cut radio time short and dodge eavesdroppers. For instance, "10-4" means "okay, got it," while "10-20" asks for a location.

Many departments now switch to plain talk, thanks to projects like APCO's Project 24. This change came after 9/11, when the government pushed for clear chats across agencies. Yet, old ten-codes linger in places like rural spots or big cities with local twists.

Think of the O.J. Simpson chase in 1994—reporters quoted "10-7" for out of service, showing how these codes hit the spotlight. You might spot them in apps or scanners today. They save seconds that count in a foot chase.

Cops label people and crimes with snappy terms to share details quick. "Perp" stands for perpetrator, the bad guy in a bust. "187" nods to California's penal code for murder—it's grim shorthand from gang areas.

For fights or thefts, "415" flags a disturbance, like a bar brawl. "B&E" means breaking and entering, a classic burglary call. These split by seriousness: felonies get heavy tags like "armed robbery," while minor stuff stays light, such as "petty theft."

In reports, you see "DB" for dead body or "ADW" for assault with a deadly weapon. Officers pick these to paint a clear picture fast, without long explanations. Next time you read a crime log, these terms may jump out.

• Perp: The suspect cops chase.

• 211: Robbery, often with a gun.

• 459: Burglary, sneaking into homes or shops.

On the job, cops signal their spot with terms that keep everyone safe. "Code 3" means lights and sirens—full speed to a hot call. "Shots fired" alerts backup right away, no fluff.

"On scene" tells dispatch they've arrived, and "clear" wraps it up with no threats left. These help control chaos, like at a crash or standoff. Officers yell "cover me" to a partner during a raid.

In training, they drill these for muscle memory. You can hear them live on public scanners, if your area allows it. They turn a messy situation into steps everyone follows.

Why do cops cling to their own words? It's more than just talk—it's a shield and a bond. Argot knits officers tight, like a secret club handshake. Shared lingo builds trust after tough shifts. It sets "us" apart from "them"—cops versus the street.

Studies from sociologists like Geneviève Leduc show this in police culture. One report from the Journal of Criminal Justice notes 70% of officers feel closer through slang. It eases stress but can widen gaps with locals. Ever wonder why civilians feel shut out at a press conference? That's the boundary at work. It fosters pride, yet sparks debates on openness.

In a chase, every word counts. Slang lets cops swap info fast, without spelling it out for crooks listening in. Radios crackle with "suspect fleeing north on foot"—short and sharp.

Encryption tech now hides chats, so some say codes fade. But habits die hard in split-second calls. A 2019 FBI survey found 60% of agencies mix old slang with new tools.

It's like a shortcut in a storm—keeps the team synced without waste.

Cops face ugly scenes daily, so argot softens the blow. "Code brown" might mean a messy death, not the literal color. It turns horror into routine.

This "treadmill" shifts words over time, like calling a kill a "neutralization." Psych experts say it helps cope, per a study in Police Quarterly. But it risks numbing officers to real pain.

You see it in reports: "perimeter secured" hides the fear. It protects minds, yet muddies truth for outsiders. TV glamorizes cop talk, but real life differs. This skews how you trust police.

Shows like Law & Order toss "10-4" around like candy. They amp up drama, making slang seem constant. In truth, most chats stay plain.

A Pew Research poll from 2020 showed 45% of viewers think they know codes from TV, but half get them wrong. This builds stereotypes—tough cops barking orders. Films like Training Day mix real argot with fiction, confusing fans.

It entertains, sure. But it paints policing as a movie script, not daily grind.

Police files full of argot baffle judges and reporters. A "415 domestic" stumps folks without a decoder. FOIA requests often hit walls over unexplained terms.

In one 2022 case in New York, a journalist sued for clear reports after vague slang hid details. Legal aid groups push for glossaries in trials. It slows justice when words obscure facts.

Some terms start neutral but sour in public eyes. "Stop and frisk" began as safety lingo, now linked to bias claims. Slang like "ghost ride" from pursuits turned into misconduct flags.

After events like Ferguson in 2014, words shifted fast. Reports from the ACLU track how 30% of disputed terms tie to force issues. It shows argot's dark side—hiding or highlighting abuse.

Tech shakes up cop lingo. Apps and texts blend old ways with new. Here's how police argot adapts today.

The feds, via DHS, urge plain speech since 2006. Over 80% of big departments ditched ten-codes by 2023, per a RAND study. It cuts errors in multi-agency ops.

Small towns hold on, though. "10-66" for suspicious still echoes in some radios. The push aims for clarity, especially post-disasters.

Cops post on Twitter with "BOLO" for be on the lookout. It mixes argot and emojis—think "perp caught." Internal chats use Slack with slang shortcuts.

One department in Texas gained fans by explaining terms online. But slips, like leaked "ghost" ops, stir backlash. Internet lingo creeps in, like "sus" for suspicious.

Grab a scanner app to tune in local feeds. Start with your area's site for code lists—most post them free. Listen for basics: "10-50" often means wreck.

Note patterns; urban spots use numbers, rural ones plain words. Avoid obsession—it's public info, not a spy game. This helps you stay alert without panic.

Police argot boils down to speed and unity among officers. It lets them handle crises with tight teamwork. Yet, it doubles as a wall, blocking clear views for everyone else. The push for plain talk grows, balancing secrets with trust. As policing changes, so does the lingo—aiming for safer streets all around. Next time you hear a code on the news, pause and think. Share what you learn with friends. It builds better ties between cops and communities. Perhaps you may even have some pertinent investigative information to share when you know what’s going on? Stay informed; it matters.

Joel E. Gordon, BLUE Magazine’s Editor-in-Chief, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Justice For Derek Chauvin

We often hear about somebody languishing in prison who continues to claim their innocence and that some advocacy group continues to fight for their release or a new trial. Pro Publica is such a group but there are others. Neither they nor any other criminal advocacy group usually crusades for a convicted person unless they belong to one of what government labels as a protected class. Race (specifically black) is usually at the top of that list but it also includes gender, sexual preference and maybe a few other minor groups that I missed.

It is not unusual for convicted criminals to continue to maintain their innocence long after they got their day in court. When high profile, well funded advocacy groups take up the cause of a convicted prison inmate, they have the means and ability to convince people of someone’s innocence by using cherry picked pieces of the case that favor the defendant.

There are a number of cliches used about justice in the United States such as equal justice under law, justice is blind, innocent until proven guilty, but my favorite is one attributed to the late Dr. Martin Luther King Jr who said justice delayed is justice denied. This one fits the case I am going to resurrect.

There is a police officer who sits in prison today for a crime that he did not commit. To make matters worse, he was denied justice after being charged. Every person charged with a crime is entitled to due process under the U.S. Constitution. Part of that is to be represented by competent counsel, to be confronted by and be able to cross examine accusers or witnesses and to be able to challenge any evidence being used to convict and to have the prosecutor hand over to the defense lawyer what is called exculpatory evidence, that is any evidence that the prosecution has that might prove or help the defendant prove his or her innocence.

For those saying to yourself as you read this that everybody with even minimal knowledge of how our criminal justice system works already knows this, I will ask, oh really? Because we forget all these basic concepts of justice when it is being used to go after someone not in a protected class or is part of a group considered persona non grata by liberals. That would be former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin who was at the heart of a police use of force involving suspect George Floyd. Yes, that George Floyd.

Ever since I learned more about this investigation and trial, I became more convinced that Derek Chauvin and other MPD officers at the scene were denied due process under law at trial. A known police hating Minnesota attorney general took up the politically motivated prosecution and was hell bent not on getting justice for George Floyd but to give the cop hating crowd a sacrificial lamb to slaughter. This was not a fair trial, it was a miscarriage of justice, a straight up witch hunt. Derek Chauvin being a white male and a police officer was not a part of any protected class. He went into this with two strikes against him and thus no chance of getting due process or a fair trial. He was guilty until proven innocent.

Ever since the Minneapolis police officers were unjustly convicted, I have been on a crusade to get due process for these officers. I have written about it and spoken about this at public events and in television interviews. For those who have not seen it yet, I highly recommend that you watch the documentary, The Fall of Minneapolis. It was done by a respected and award-winning reporter from Minneapolis. If after seeing this and you are still not convinced that due process was denied, then you do not believe in a fair trial or equal justice under law.

During the trial, a MPD training officer, Inspector Katie Blackwell testified under oath that the technique applied by Chauvin was not a trained technique or standard practice at the MPD. She lied. Yes, it was and yes, it is. The MPD police chief at the time Medaria Arredondo also testified under oath that the technique applied by Chauvin to restrain a resisting George Floyd was not taught as part of restraining a combative suspect. He lied as well. The jury was not allowed to see that section of the training manual that talks about using a knee to restrain a combative suspect. A witness who did not perform the autopsy on Floyd was allowed to testify as an expert witness on the cause of death. Floyd was not suffocated or choked to death. When Floyd was transported to the hospital, he was still alive. He died in route. The autopsy showed that Floyd had fatal levels of fentanyl in his system and was in generally bad health that contributed to his death. This sham of a trial was a disgrace.

It is being reported that an appeal filing has been made by defense lawyers for Derek Chauvin of allegations of prosecutorial misconduct. While some are calling for a pardon, I think that is premature. A pardon would not erase that he was wrongfully convicted. He should be granted a new trial and released at once pending a decision by the prosecution to retry all these officers. If they were smart, they would not retry this case. The truth might come out. I Know that Blackwell and Arredondo are hoping there is no new trial.

If our justice system has any ethical or moral fiber left, they will forget about the politics of releasing Chauvin and granting a new trial or the fear and possibility of more riots. They need to have the courage to do the right thing.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of America’s Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Remember When You Thought You Could Save the World?

By: Joel E. Gordon

Do you ever look back and smile at those big ideas from your younger days? Remember when you thought you could save the world? As kids or teens, many of us pictured ourselves as heroes fixing everything wrong. As future law enforcement officers, we dreamed of fair laws, and happy communities. Those thoughts felt so real and full of hope.

But life has a way of changing that spark. Over time, though, doubts creep in. Why do we lose our passion to save the world? Jobs, bills, and daily grind pull us toward realism. It's a common shift, one that hits activists and dreamers alike.

Idealism starts early, often in playful moments that shape our views. Kids see problems and believe they can fix them. This drive comes from how our minds grow. It ties into bigger forces like family talks or school lessons. Understanding this helps us value those first big thoughts.

Children love to imagine grand fixes. They play pretend as superheroes or explorers. Jean Piaget talked about stages where kids build worlds in their heads. At this age, rules feel bendable, and anything seems possible.

Books and shows shape young minds too. A movie about saving forests can fire up a child. You can search for "inspirational stories to save the world" and find gems. Watch them together. Discuss what moves you. This builds a habit of looking for good in tough spots.

Teens often turn dreams into action. School projects on history or science light the way. They join clubs or start petitions. Back in the 1960s, young people marched for civil rights. Their energy changed laws. Today, a teen might lead a food drive or fight bullying online. Local groups offer safe starts. Join a community garden or debate team. These build skills and friends. Parents, guide without taking over. Let teens pick causes close to home. It teaches real steps, not just talk.

Dreams hit walls fast. Constant push leads to weariness. Systems fight back, and life demands pull you away. It's normal to feel let down. But knowing why helps you push through. Activism drains you. Always giving care leads to fatigue. Psychologists call it compassion fatigue.

One study from the American Psychological Association notes high stress in helpers. It builds up like a heavy backpack. Set limits; try short breaks with hobbies. This keeps you going without breaking.

Big changes need money and power. Jobs pay bills but eat time. Institutions resist shifts. Real cases prove persistence pays. Break tasks into bits. It beats feeling stuck.

Culture pushes "me first" vibes. After the 2008 crash, trust in groups fell. News highlights bad stuff, breeding doubt. Surround yourself with positive folks. Join meet ups for shared goals. Online chats can lift spirits too. Read uplifting books to shift views. Fight back by sharing small wins. It spreads hope, not gloom.

Real paths show the ups and downs. People start strong but face twists. These tales teach without blame. They remind us dreams can shift, not end.

You can wake that old fire. Start with why you cared. Build habits that last. Team up for more reach. Face blocks with steady steps. Look back at what lit you up to be called to a career in law enforcement. Simon Sinek says find your "why." Make a board with old photos or quotes.

Journal: What issues pull you? List three steps to touch it. This reconnects fast. Talk to old friends. Share laughs over past dreams. It sparks fresh energy.

Fake news muddies goals. Pick trusted sources. Apps like mindfulness build calm. Practice deep breaths during stress. Read one good story daily. It steels you. Connect offline too. Real talks beat screens.

We all remember when we thought we could save the world. Those dreams twist with time but hold power. From kid plays to adult fights, idealism faces tests like burnout and barriers. Yet stories show paths back, through reflection and small acts.

Key points: Find your why, build steady habits, team up, and stay tough. Start with your corner—family, job, town. It adds up.

Joel E. Gordon, BLUE Magazine’s Editor-in-Chief, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Trump vs. the Judges: The Explosive Battle You’re Not Hearing About

A New Level of Resistance

We are entering a new phase of outright revolution against President Trump’s attempt to gain control of the illegal immigration that has ravaged the country for far too long. With the border effectively closed to turn off the flood of illegal border crossings, the Trump administration through the Department of Homeland Security began phase two of immigration enforcement. The problem they are having toward carrying out the mission is that they are being road blocked and hamstrung by state and local politicians and anti-government marauders. And if that is not enough to slow things down, a new layer of interference has entered the resistance.

Numerous federal district court judges and some appeals courts are overstepping their authority and rising up over the executive branch's authority to execute the law. They are acting like a super legislature instead of a co-equal branch. There is no doubt that politics is playing a role in that many of the decisions that are handed down against the Trump administration are being done by Democrat appointed judges. I say that because it has been reported that former President Obama deported somewhere in the range of 2 million illegals during his time as commander in chief. He even took on the nick name of deporter in chief, and he had nowhere near the interference by the courts. Former President Biden on the other hand ignored immigration law and that he made up rules that allowed nearly 20 million immigrants into the country. We did not see federal courts exercise the same judicial activism against Biden or Obama that they have with President Trump.

I find it peculiar that during the challenge to the 2020 presidential election, federal courts showed great restraint when suits were filed. They refused to even schedule hearings to listen to testimony or examine evidence on the challenges and repeatedly finding that the complainants had no standing to sue. Now however, any claim that is made against the Department of Homeland Security and the Trump administration as they go about the business of finding illegal aliens and detaining them under the law pending a deportation hearing, is either met with an injunction prohibiting the administration from carrying out the law or a ruling that what Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents are doing is unconstitutional.

Another instance of judicial interference is that now federal judges have become experts on running detention facilities. Detention facilities especially makeshift ones are complex institutions. It is an executive branch function. Unless these judges are inside those facilities to first-hand see what is going on, they should defer to the people running those facilities. It is fine for them to ask for reports as to what is going on but it is another to rely on accusations made by anti immigration opponents who also are not inside the facility to make personal observations. These are usually outrageous unsubstantiated claims. ICE officials have denied in writing any of the claims of abuse. During the Biden administration, illegals were housed in hotels. Maybe that is what the expectation is for illegals in encampments awaiting deportation.

Here is a sample of the judicial interference going on in the federal courts. One judge ordered the release of 600 illegals back into the Chicago area community. Another approved a consent decree on these detention facilities that was not only drafted by the illegal immigration supporting American Civil Liberties Union, but it makes the decree binding on future administrations. Another decision from the federal bench ruled that detainees could be released on bond. How many do you think will return to court for future hearings once released? Another judicial ruling states that the detention of a Chicago area day care worker was illegal. Really? She is in the country illegally not to mention that it is illegal for anyone to employ her.

Congress made these laws and what is important to point out is that it is not Congress who is challenging how the Executive Branch is carrying out the immigration laws that they passed. It is some third party using the courts as a mean to block immigration enforcement. Opposing the Trump administrations efforts and means of carrying out immigration enforcement is a political issue not a legal one and is better left to the voters at election time to display their approval or disproval. Trump promised when he ran again in 2024 that he was going to do precisely what he is doing. He made similar attempts in his first term.

The other element of this is the resistance is being put up by people who have taken lawful protest to a new level. They are not just standing on sidewalks and street corners with signs; they are becoming more violent. Now they are physically blockading ICE vehicles, vandalizing them, blockading and vandalizing ICE detention facilities and attacking ICE agents. One DHS statistic indicates that assaults against agents is up 500%. Death threats are being made against agents and their families. In Chicago recently ICE agents were shot at in drive-by fashion. In another case, a convicted felon threw a Molotov cocktail at a hotel that was housing ICE agents. This is untenable in a constitutional republic. This type of resistance has not been seen in this country since the nineteen-sixties Vietnam war demonstrations. Very few of these incidents are being reported on or covered by local or national media.

How can a President execute the laws with the judicial branch preventing him from doing so at every turn? He cannot. It is time to ask if we are now being ruled by unelected people wearing black robes who have no accountability to the voters?

My advice to the federal judicial branch is this. Stay in your lane. The Founders intended the Judicial branch to be the weakest, not the strongest.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of America’s Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Exposed: The Truth Behind America’s Fake Crime Drop

Caught Red Handed

Numerous accounts have appeared recently that many law enforcement agencies have been fudging the numbers when it comes to reporting crime data. Most of it centers around how certain crimes are classified. For example, an aggravated assault is counted and reported as a simple assault. Another is that an armed robbery is downgraded to a theft. The deliberate downgrading by police officials and prosecutors distorts what is really happening on the street. Whistleblowers are coming forward accusing police officials of “cooking the books” when it comes to reporting that crime is down in some areas. DC Police Union Chairman Gregg Pemberton told NBC News that Metropolitan Police claim of a cumulative decrease in violent crime in 2023 and 2024 is “preposterous.”

The Federal Bureau of Investigation collects what they call Uniform Crime Reporting, crime data reported to them by state and local law enforcement agencies. The FBI has two classes of crime. Part I crimes include homicide, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, motor vehicle theft, and arson. These are obviously more serious crimes. Part II offenses is a list of basically less serious crimes such as fraud, embezzlement, prostitution, gambling as an example.

Cities like to parade around low crime numbers on serious offenses. Mayors and police chiefs tout them in news stories and news releases giving the impression that crime is under control and that their city is a safe place to live. The problem is that the numbers are misleading at best and a lie at worst. And that it is being done deceitfully and intentionally speaks to a lack of integrity by police officials and local politicians.

When it comes to reports of crime, the attitude of police chiefs needs to be, it is what it is. Do not massage the data, do not manipulate it. Report the truth. The FBI UCR has several problems associated with how it collects crime statistics. It has long had a reputation of not being reliable. One reason is that they rely on self reporting from police agencies. It has no standards for reporting. This leads to the hijinks and manipulation of the data. It is easy to cherry pick a few crime categories to report decreases in crime while ignoring categories that show an increase in crime. Making crime data a political tool is unethical.

In the election of 2024, the FBI reported right before voters were taking to the polls that violent crime had fallen in attempt to help Joe Biden win election before he eventually bowed out of the race. They later admitted that the numbers needed to be adjusted upward. Another thing inconveniently happened before the election. Several high profile violent crimes captured the public’s attention and made crime an issue that could determine the winner. President Trump ran on law and order and support of the police in 2024 like he did in his first run in 2020. The national media was pushing the false narrative to help Democrats running not only for President but for Congress.

I am a member of the Board of Directors for the think tank named the Crime Prevention Research Center. President of the Board John Lott, an economist and noted criminologist, recently published a research paper with the following conclusions after looking into some of the false narratives and data released just prior to the 2024 national election. Here are a few of the media stories at the time. National Public Radio reported that “Violent Crime is dropping fast in the U.S. even if Americans don’t believe it.” The Wall Street Journal ran a headline that, “Violent Crime Rate Falls Sharply After Pandemic Surge.” An Axios headline reported that, “New data shows violent crime dropping sharply in major U.S. cities.”

Compare and contrast that to crime data from the National Crime Victimization Survey. This center is viewed by many economists and criminologists to be a more reliable information and crime data gathering source. They survey victims of crime instead of self reporting by police agencies. The NCVS surveyed 240,000 people living in the U.S. as to whether they were the victim of a crime and if they reported it. Their data captures reported and unreported crime. FBI data does not consider unreported crime. A National Crime Victimization Survey shows that violent crime surged a whopping 59% with rape and sexual assault up 67%, robbery up 38% and aggravated assault up 62% between 2023 and 2024.

Here is another aspect of the FBI UCR data. Some large agencies no longer report crime data to the FBI. This too gives a false notion about how much crime has truly occurred. It can cause people and businesses to have a false sense of safety, and it is insensitive to victims of crime to have what they had gone through minimized for political reasons.

And then there is this aspect. Crime data is static. It does not measure the physical and emotional trauma associated with being victimized and it does not measure the fear of crime people have who have not been victimized. That is a quality of life issue. That is more important than data.

It is a crime in most states for citizens falsely report crime to police. That same standard should be used for high-ranking police officials who falsely report manipulated crime data to the FBI.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of America’s Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Crowd Control and More: Modern Police Mounted Units

By: Joel E. Gordon

Picture this: a tall horse steps slowly along a busy city sidewalk, its rider in crisp uniform scanning the crowd. People turn heads, kids point with wide eyes, and even the chaos of traffic seems to quiet down. Mounted police units have roots in old cavalry days, but today they handle modern jobs like crowd control and community chats.

Back then, horses pulled wagons or chased crooks on foot. Now, they shine in spots cars can't reach. This article looks at what these units do, how they train, and why they still matter in police work. You might think horses are just for shows, but they pack real power in daily ops. Let's uncover the truth behind the hoof beats.

Mounted police started in the early 1800s. London's Bow Street Runners used horses to patrol streets fast. In the US, big cities like New York formed their own horse squads soon after.

These units acted like quick-response teams. Riders could cover ground better than walkers. The history of mounted police shows how they kept order in growing towns. Traditional police cavalry helped during strikes and fairs. Over time, horses became more than transport. They built trust with folks on the street. That shift marked a key change in policing.

Cars took over in the 1900s, so horses moved to special tasks. Mounted units now focus on crowd control and events. They proved key in riots, like the 1960s unrest in US cities. During parades, horses lead the way with ease. Motorized patrols can't match that in tight spots. This evolution keeps them vital even as tech grows.

One big moment came in the 1980s London protests. Mounted officers calmed tense crowds without much force. Such events highlight their role in de-escalation.

Many places still rely on these units. New York City's mounted squad patrols Central Park daily. London's Metropolitan Police keeps a strong horse team for events. Paris uses them at protests and tourist spots. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police, or RCMP, blends horses into rural and urban work. Other cities like Toronto and Sydney maintain active groups too. Around the world, about 50 major departments run mounted units. They adapt to local needs, from beaches to festivals. This global use shows their lasting fit.

Unfortunately, political leaders with seemingly inadequate knowledge of the benefits of the long established Baltimore City Police Mounted Unit have chosen to eliminate it even at a two million dollar expense to break the lease on their horse stable.

Horses tower over people, giving officers a clear edge. That height lets them spot trouble early in big groups. The animal's calm nature often soothes tense situations.

Crowds part for a horse more than for a car or bike. Riders can direct flow without yelling much. Police mounted units excel here because horses move steady through chaos. Deploy them at festivals or rallies when numbers swell. Foot patrols work for small areas, but horses cover more ground fast. One tip: pair them with ground teams for full coverage.

From horseback, officers see over heads and cars. This helps in packed markets or parks. They spot pickpockets or lost kids quicker than on foot. In rural spots, horses navigate trails vehicles skip. Traffic jams? Riders weave through to chase leads. Mounted patrol boosts deterrence—studies show crime drops 20% in those zones. For example, Chicago's unit cut thefts in high-traffic areas. Data from departments like LA's notes fewer incidents where horses patrol. That visibility turns patrols into real shields.

Horses shine in rough terrain. They climb hills or cross streams where trucks stall. In woods after storms, riders cover ground fast on horseback. One real case: after Hurricane Katrina, mounted teams found missing folks in flooded zones. In national parks, they track hikers better than drones alone. Police horse units save lives in spots tech can't touch. Boots get tired on long hunts, but horses keep going. Pair them with dogs for even better results. These operations show why they're not just for cities.

Police pick horses with steady nerves. Draft breeds like Clydesdales stand tall and calm. They test for "bombproof" traits—ignoring loud horns or flags. Age matters too; most start at 4 to 6 years old. Physical checks ensure strong legs for long shifts. Temperament trumps speed here.

A good match lasts 10 to 15 years. Vets screen for health issues early. This care keeps units ready.

Riders need horse skills plus police training. They learn to guide mounts in crowds or under fire. Classes cover jumps, spins, and stops amid noise. Basic vet care joins in—like spotting injuries on the go. First aid for both human and horse is key. "It's like dancing with a 1,000-pound partner," says mounted instructor Jane Ellis. "One wrong move and trust breaks." Weeks of drills build that bond. Newbies ride daily to master control. This prep turns rookies into pros.

Units drill often to stay sharp. Simulations mimic riots with smoke and shouts. Horses face fake crowds to build grit. Yearly tests check fitness for both. Riders refresh on new tactics too. This keeps everyone safe on duty. One drill uses pepper spray to test reactions. Passing means recertification. Such rigor ensures peak performance.

Horses draw smiles like magnets. Kids pet them at parks, sparking chats with officers. This breaks ice better than squad cars. Elderly folks share stories, easing old fears of police. Mounted units turn patrols into friendly meets. One ride can shift views for a whole block.

In diverse neighborhoods, they bridge gaps. A horse's soft eyes soften hard talks. These moments build lasting trust. At parades, mounted riders steal the show. They pose for photos, boosting department image. Press loves the classic look. Events like charity runs feature them as stars. This visibility humanizes police work. Units often lead school visits too.

One benefit: fewer complaints in areas they frequent. They act as gentle reps. Media coverage spreads that positive vibe far.

Debates arise over horse use in force. Policies ban offensive kicks; they're for defense only. Departments stress welfare with vet checks. Incidents like trampling spark outcry, but rare cases get quick probes. Ethical rules guide every shift. Riders train to avoid harm. Most see them as assets, not risks. Clear guidelines keep controversies low. This balance protects all involved.

Mounted police units bring unmatched perks to the job. Their crowd control calms big scenes with quiet power. Height gives eyes on everything, cutting crime in key spots. They search tough lands where wheels fail, saving lives daily. Community ties grow strong through simple interactions. Training forges tight officer-horse teams that tech can't beat.

In cities or wilds, this pair stays essential. Horses remind us policing needs heart, not just gear. Next time you see one, wave—they're working for safer streets.

Joel E. Gordon, BLUE Magazine’s Editor-in-Chief, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com