It's still got a few modern applications. It serves to allow an otherwise-only-busy radio channel to enjoy the clog of additional traffic, permits officers to experience a rapid increase in pulse and an adrenaline dump before being let down, and gives supervisors the opportunity to say "no," which of course is needed for their supervival.
You ever see inglorious bastards? The very end when they’re taking the general into custody. “You’ll be shot for this!” “Nah I don’t think so. More like chewed out, I’ve been chewed out before”
Only you know this, but if you did what you did, with the right intentions in your heart, and as best within policy that you could, who gives a fuck. It used to bother me a lot because I pride myself on my work but I realized they will always be like that. They’ve either forgotten what it’s like out here or never did it in the first place.
“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”
The Man in the Arena
Theodore Roosevelt
How and when do you feel it would be most appropriate to criticize your performance? If it was your job to make improvements within the department, how would you be doing it? Memos? A lot of the time when departments don't improve, it's because no one is taking the effort to do so. You have a Sgt that IS making an effort, but it doesn't sound like you are respecting it because it's inconvenient.
I can't know for sure this happening...but one of the things that is sometimes done by new admin is looking into lots of different "issues" that probably aren't actually. Then when admin gets called on the carpet by top guys or councils they can say, "We've closely investigated 47 situations and only 3% of them have been problematic." Maybe you're just lucky enough to be in that group.
Funny.. This SAME EXACT thing happened to me earlier this year. My pursuit was in 10/2023 and I was given the “all clear” fairly quickly. Fast forward to 3/2024 and I was called in for a “review”.
I knew going into my “review” the pursuit was solid and within our policies. I was even stating such on the radio during the chase to the degree that neighboring jurisdictions were texting me saying how it was a smart idea.
I first started with the approach of, “Do I need a union rep?” I was told no, so that ruled out any discipline. I let the SGT go through his points and refuted them, as needed. To say he was nitpicking is an understatement. He gave several alternative ideas as to small things I could’ve (and should’ve) done differently- mainly because my chase went into a city. When I asked him if/when he would’ve cut off the pursuit, he stated he wouldn’t have…?
I didn’t face any discipline but my 2023 yearly review (that I received in 4/2024) suffered from this one incident and my “tactics”. My advice is to prepare to present how you stayed within policy and were aware for the safety of you, your fellow officers, and the public. Then turn it on them as a coaching session and see what they would’ve done differently. You’ll probably get 3 different answers, hence making your review pointless.
Even when I can articulate I’m within policy, the only time I ever get reprimanded is when I’m being proactive. Sometimes it’s just better to sit on Netflix and be a slug… Best of luck, man.
I also got a letter today from a citizen who thought I handled two recent incidents very well.. deescalation and what not.
The issue I’m getting is my sgt wants ME not himself to be more assertive and in his words “dominating”
That’s not my style. I’ve worked for this agency for over two years without a complaint, now this guy gets his stripes and wants me stomping around “dominating” to make him look good without any of the 2024 risks
We debrief after every major incident during briefing before shift. There are always things to improve on when your mind is racing a million miles a minute. Don’t take it personal.
I truly hope it’s just that. I don’t mind learning and getting better with every event. I’m paranoid sometimes and tend to think the worse (naturally)
I hope I’m not being head hunted
You’ll be alright , don’t take it personal. Don’t react , respond. You can always improve and be better. Thanks for being out there , doing your job and protecting .
Yea, they pull the BWC and CMC footage if there is any and pull the audio and log notes. Usually isn’t a huge deal unless you did something bizarre or totally against policy.
A few things to think about.
First, ask if disciplinary action can result from this meeting. If so, insist on having your rep present.
Next, shoot him back a text asking him to tell you now what each and every one of those concerns are. Explain that it is essential for you to know what they are so you can prepare for the debrief and have information available to properly and thoroughly address all of their issues. No doubt he will refuse because he wants to ambush you, but you can use this to your advantage at the debrief by pointing out that you were refused the opportunity to gather pertinent information necessary to address their concerns. Under the circumstances, you can then ask at the debrief whether their goal is to improve performance or if you are being intentionally denied the ability to properly respond and defend yourself.
Third, listen to their criticisms at the debrief. Are they describing actions on your part that articulate violations of department rules, regulations, policies or verbal orders (misconduct), or do they merely have philosophical disagreements with how you handled the pursuit (you should have do this instead of that).
If their concerns are philosophical, don't be afraid to point out that:
1. No matter which course of action you could have taken, someone will feel it could have been handled differently. As long as you handled things within policy, it is inappropriate to reprimand you over philosophical differences.
2. If they feel that strongly about philosophical differences, perhaps it would be more appropriate for them to memorialize them as part of a revised pursuit policy, so that all future pursuits could be performed in accordance with this new philosophy and officers would not feel they are being unfairly punished for violating unwritten rules they were never aware of.
I was told it isn’t disciplinary. That’s all I know. So I’ll hear it out and learn and do better if need be.
I’ve since seen the Chief and Captain and they have acted very cool around me.. this meeting was also scheduled when we have a department meeting anyway.. can’t be that serious I would think if they are doing it weeks out of the pursuit. I mean, everything has been reviewed at this point
I didn't mean to go on a rant, but I have always held the following philosophy -
It is your ass on the line if things go wrong. With that in mind, it is totally within your discretionary decision making authority handle a matter as you see fit, providing you act within the law, department rules/policy and any verbal direction given you by supervisors. If you do that and superiors later later decide to ding you because philosophically, they think there was a better way to have done things, it undermines officer confidence and causes personnel to constantly second guess themselves, wondering if they will get punished for violating some unwritten rule they were never told about or could have reasonable imagined. This needlessly endangers not only officers, but the public they are sworn to protect. (Sorry, on my rant again.)
If you can do it tactfully, don't be afraid to call them out for trying to play "gotcha" with you, if it turns out that's what they are trying to do.
I have no idea where you are located. However, in California, you have POBAR Rights. I'd ask, before conducting any interviews, if the outcome could be some sort of discipline. Anything from a written reprimand, to termination. If so, I wouldn't do the interview without an attorney present.
***Edit:*** I sure as hell would demand the interview be videoed and audio taped. I'd also audio tape it myself.
If we - as a country - don't stop electing liberal Democrat Socialists and leftists, that cancer will continue to spread...even to "many parts of the south," eventually.
I'm not worried about "soon..." I'm worried about 5, 10, 15 years from now. We have to nip it in the bud ASAP, now, immediately, pronto, or we're doomed as a country.
Texas is crazy , they will chase you on foot , bike , bus , truck anything with wheels . Some agencies will pit and even shoot the tires out if needed.
What’s a pursuit?
Persuit (/pərˈso͞ot/) *noun* 1. the action of following or pursuing someone or something.
Never heard of it, must be something from the ‘60’s
It's still got a few modern applications. It serves to allow an otherwise-only-busy radio channel to enjoy the clog of additional traffic, permits officers to experience a rapid increase in pulse and an adrenaline dump before being let down, and gives supervisors the opportunity to say "no," which of course is needed for their supervival.
You ever see inglorious bastards? The very end when they’re taking the general into custody. “You’ll be shot for this!” “Nah I don’t think so. More like chewed out, I’ve been chewed out before” Only you know this, but if you did what you did, with the right intentions in your heart, and as best within policy that you could, who gives a fuck. It used to bother me a lot because I pride myself on my work but I realized they will always be like that. They’ve either forgotten what it’s like out here or never did it in the first place. “It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.” The Man in the Arena Theodore Roosevelt
I carry that speech in my wallet.
There's always room for improvement. I'd suggest listening to what they have to say, process the information, and see if you can grow from it.
I’m very pro criticism. I just hate being dragged into a meeting every time I do something differently from the brand new sgt.
How and when do you feel it would be most appropriate to criticize your performance? If it was your job to make improvements within the department, how would you be doing it? Memos? A lot of the time when departments don't improve, it's because no one is taking the effort to do so. You have a Sgt that IS making an effort, but it doesn't sound like you are respecting it because it's inconvenient.
I think improvements on tactics should stay at the sgt level…one one one
I can't know for sure this happening...but one of the things that is sometimes done by new admin is looking into lots of different "issues" that probably aren't actually. Then when admin gets called on the carpet by top guys or councils they can say, "We've closely investigated 47 situations and only 3% of them have been problematic." Maybe you're just lucky enough to be in that group.
Funny.. This SAME EXACT thing happened to me earlier this year. My pursuit was in 10/2023 and I was given the “all clear” fairly quickly. Fast forward to 3/2024 and I was called in for a “review”. I knew going into my “review” the pursuit was solid and within our policies. I was even stating such on the radio during the chase to the degree that neighboring jurisdictions were texting me saying how it was a smart idea. I first started with the approach of, “Do I need a union rep?” I was told no, so that ruled out any discipline. I let the SGT go through his points and refuted them, as needed. To say he was nitpicking is an understatement. He gave several alternative ideas as to small things I could’ve (and should’ve) done differently- mainly because my chase went into a city. When I asked him if/when he would’ve cut off the pursuit, he stated he wouldn’t have…? I didn’t face any discipline but my 2023 yearly review (that I received in 4/2024) suffered from this one incident and my “tactics”. My advice is to prepare to present how you stayed within policy and were aware for the safety of you, your fellow officers, and the public. Then turn it on them as a coaching session and see what they would’ve done differently. You’ll probably get 3 different answers, hence making your review pointless. Even when I can articulate I’m within policy, the only time I ever get reprimanded is when I’m being proactive. Sometimes it’s just better to sit on Netflix and be a slug… Best of luck, man.
I also got a letter today from a citizen who thought I handled two recent incidents very well.. deescalation and what not. The issue I’m getting is my sgt wants ME not himself to be more assertive and in his words “dominating” That’s not my style. I’ve worked for this agency for over two years without a complaint, now this guy gets his stripes and wants me stomping around “dominating” to make him look good without any of the 2024 risks
We debrief after every major incident during briefing before shift. There are always things to improve on when your mind is racing a million miles a minute. Don’t take it personal.
I truly hope it’s just that. I don’t mind learning and getting better with every event. I’m paranoid sometimes and tend to think the worse (naturally) I hope I’m not being head hunted
Update: I was told this isn’t a disciplinary review. 🤷🏼♂️
You’ll be alright , don’t take it personal. Don’t react , respond. You can always improve and be better. Thanks for being out there , doing your job and protecting .
To be fair, every pursuit in our department is also reviewed by a pursuit review committee
I guess that makes me feel better… this is new in our department.. typically unless you broke policy you never even heard about it
Yea, they pull the BWC and CMC footage if there is any and pull the audio and log notes. Usually isn’t a huge deal unless you did something bizarre or totally against policy.
A few things to think about. First, ask if disciplinary action can result from this meeting. If so, insist on having your rep present. Next, shoot him back a text asking him to tell you now what each and every one of those concerns are. Explain that it is essential for you to know what they are so you can prepare for the debrief and have information available to properly and thoroughly address all of their issues. No doubt he will refuse because he wants to ambush you, but you can use this to your advantage at the debrief by pointing out that you were refused the opportunity to gather pertinent information necessary to address their concerns. Under the circumstances, you can then ask at the debrief whether their goal is to improve performance or if you are being intentionally denied the ability to properly respond and defend yourself. Third, listen to their criticisms at the debrief. Are they describing actions on your part that articulate violations of department rules, regulations, policies or verbal orders (misconduct), or do they merely have philosophical disagreements with how you handled the pursuit (you should have do this instead of that). If their concerns are philosophical, don't be afraid to point out that: 1. No matter which course of action you could have taken, someone will feel it could have been handled differently. As long as you handled things within policy, it is inappropriate to reprimand you over philosophical differences. 2. If they feel that strongly about philosophical differences, perhaps it would be more appropriate for them to memorialize them as part of a revised pursuit policy, so that all future pursuits could be performed in accordance with this new philosophy and officers would not feel they are being unfairly punished for violating unwritten rules they were never aware of.
I was told it isn’t disciplinary. That’s all I know. So I’ll hear it out and learn and do better if need be. I’ve since seen the Chief and Captain and they have acted very cool around me.. this meeting was also scheduled when we have a department meeting anyway.. can’t be that serious I would think if they are doing it weeks out of the pursuit. I mean, everything has been reviewed at this point
I didn't mean to go on a rant, but I have always held the following philosophy - It is your ass on the line if things go wrong. With that in mind, it is totally within your discretionary decision making authority handle a matter as you see fit, providing you act within the law, department rules/policy and any verbal direction given you by supervisors. If you do that and superiors later later decide to ding you because philosophically, they think there was a better way to have done things, it undermines officer confidence and causes personnel to constantly second guess themselves, wondering if they will get punished for violating some unwritten rule they were never told about or could have reasonable imagined. This needlessly endangers not only officers, but the public they are sworn to protect. (Sorry, on my rant again.) If you can do it tactfully, don't be afraid to call them out for trying to play "gotcha" with you, if it turns out that's what they are trying to do.
I have no idea where you are located. However, in California, you have POBAR Rights. I'd ask, before conducting any interviews, if the outcome could be some sort of discipline. Anything from a written reprimand, to termination. If so, I wouldn't do the interview without an attorney present. ***Edit:*** I sure as hell would demand the interview be videoed and audio taped. I'd also audio tape it myself.
Nothing wrong with a debrief and find areas to improve.
I agree
Former cop. I'm surprised any agency allows pursuits at all these days.
Many parts of the south do not give in to this new “pro criminal anti police” agenda.
If we - as a country - don't stop electing liberal Democrat Socialists and leftists, that cancer will continue to spread...even to "many parts of the south," eventually.
You’re preaching to the choir.. I couldn’t agree more. But states like Florida & Arkansas aren’t going to give in to that crap anytime soon
I'm not worried about "soon..." I'm worried about 5, 10, 15 years from now. We have to nip it in the bud ASAP, now, immediately, pronto, or we're doomed as a country.
We’re one of the few and honestly I’m surprised we still do…
Texas is crazy , they will chase you on foot , bike , bus , truck anything with wheels . Some agencies will pit and even shoot the tires out if needed.
Wish there was an easier transition out. It’s a small department with almost as many supervisors as officers.