News Wire

Historically, American Policing, and more specifically police officers, have been slow to change and adapt. However, due to recent high profile incidents that have received massive amounts of media exposure and public discussion, we have been given a great opportunity to improve our profession and ultimately our communities. Below are four fresh ideas to help us rise and meet the challenge.

1. Police Need to Change How They TALK With People
What do humans do when someone doesn’t speak their language and communication is difficult to get a point across? Typically, people begin to raise their voice and this escalates to yelling. Does it work? No! Police are taught early in the academy to speak loudly or even yell to “gain control” to “let people know who is in charge.” Instead of taking this type of stance, officers should be able to let people know who is in charge by mere presence alone. After all, case law exists with this absolute fact: by mere presence, an officer is demonstrating an act of force. It is my opinion that the most effective officers are those that “walk softly, but carry a big stick.”

My years of police work have shown that true control and power is all about how you carry yourself. I have seen petite, female officers control NFL linebackers with “soft power,” and conversely I have watched NFL linebacker-type officers struggle to control a small child. Does raising your voice ever change the dynamic of a situation? I have been in a lot of fluid and rapidly evolving situations, and yelling simply escalates the already deteriorating situation. This training needs to start in the academy and it needs to begin with the way we train our police recruits. At times it’s imperative to take charge, often these times are teetering on life and death decisions and actions (cause and effect), but yelling and screaming rarely works. Watch most videos of police shootings and you will hear the officer yelling because gaining emotional control is one of the hardest attributes a police officer can develop. By reverting back to training, easy calculations with easy solutions become complex problems. Things then can escalate beyond the officer’s control. Yelling simply gets the heart rate up and begins the auditory exclusions and loss of motor functions causing bad decisions not by choice, but by laws of human physiology.

Build trust and gain respect by introducing yourself by first name. “Officer Doe” is formal and rarely calms a situation or puts someone at ease. It is amazing how disarming a first name can be to someone hyped up on his or her own power. The officer is already entering with force on their side; there is little reason to introduce a second layer of excitement. In many instances, officers are walking into a deteriorating situation. Next time, try to deescalate the situation instead of creating an environment with competing power vacuums. Who cares if a suspect, witness or victim knows your first name?

2. Police Need to Change How They THINK: What is Important Vs. What is Important Now
Far too often, officers forget what is important versus what is important now. There are instances where an officer will show up to a scene and be required to take action. This action may be the use of deadly force. It is the unfortunate nature of police work. But these situations are rare. Officer safety, and going home at the end of your shift is the number one police priority. The next time someone refuses to comply, think long term and not short term. Think strategic goals, think verbal judo and if he or she will not comply, try another tactic if the threat of danger is not present. We have all seen the videos of an officer body slamming an 85-year-old grandmother because she wouldn’t roll down her window, or pepper spraying an 8-year-old because they wouldn’t get off of a chair. We all ask ourselves, “What was the officer thinking?” The answer is that the officers in these situations got wrapped up in the moment and did not find a balance between what is important versus what is important now. This new mode of thinking should also be taught early on during initial academy recruit training.

3. Police Need to Change How They Use TECHNOLOGY
The evolution of technology calls for investment and training for officers aside from their duty belts and physical training. There are ways to administer force and subdue unruly individuals without harming them. During the rollout of the Taser, police use of force increased dramatically because each incident required a use of force report. But once investigated, injury reports were down 88%, and officer-involved injuries were down nearly 92% (Law Enforcement Study, 2009). The Taser is a great piece of technology that has greatly aided police work. However, we seem to have stopped advancing technology in law enforcement.

There are departments with officers who do not have working radios. And departments that have other faulty equipment, including vehicles, firearms and buildings/infrastructure. Every piece of information ever developed in the history of the world is available on smartphones. Surely police can partner with Silicon Valley specialists to develop new technologies capable of serving as force multipliers for officers. There are several technologies available that can stop a riot in its tracks from the military that cause zero harm. (Not zero discomfort, zero harm.) The ability to disable an active resister so that an officer does not have to resort to physical and even deadly force should excite police administrators and the public. This technology is available. We, the police and the public just need to ask for it, or rather, demand it!

4. Police Need TIME to Speak With Someone Other Than Another Cop
A former detective and now a supervisor, we will call him “Paul” for purposes of this abstract, is an incredible cop; one of the best. He spent several years on an International Crimes Against Children Task Force. Due to the horrific nature of the crimes involving children that he was required to investigate, “Paul” was required to meet with a police psychologist once a month. The purpose of this short 30 minute discussion was to ensure that officers assigned to this task force had a positive outlet for the awful crimes that they were seeing every day. Some of the crimes investigated could simply not be discussed with family members or at cocktail parties with friends. These crimes were the worst of the worst. “Paul” said he was initially reluctant to speak with a psychologist. He said he was a tough cop who had seen a lot during his career. Talking with a civilian (a non-cop) was just a check the box sort of activity. He would do it because the department was making him do it.

However, Paul said as time went on, he actually enjoyed the meetings with the psychologist. Speaking with someone who wasn’t a cop was beneficial in other aspects of his life. He said that it helped him cope with the horrific nature of the crimes he was investigating. Cops see and experience things on a daily basis that most in society will never have to deal with. Seeing these things over and over again can have a detrimental affect on the human psyche. Additionally, cops are often in life and death situations where their own safety and life hang in the balance. Soon, all cops view everyone with disdain and suspicion.

There is an epidemic of alcoholism and suicide in law enforcement, and there has been for sometime. There is also a high divorce rate. I believe that cops should be required to meet with a police psychologist or a departmental chaplain once a month or at least quarterly. This time can alleviate the stress and pressures that are inherent in the job, which can lead to burnout and stress. Speaking with someone other than a cop can also help alleviate some of the feelings of disdain about society. It would be interesting to see a funded National Institute of Justice study after a year pilot program at a police department using the above program. I think it would produce positive results for the both the public and police.

Summary
It is important to say that police work is often dangerous, difficult and sometimes downright dirty. During some police calls for service, no amount of talking, technology or new ways of thinking will have any impact on the situation. Officers often have to respond and ultimately use deadly force to protect the lives of citizens and themselves. Sometimes officers just have to do their job. They have to show up, get the handcuffs (or firearms) out and go to work. The four ideas above recognize that and they are meant for the vast majority of police work which often involves positive citizen-police interaction.

The above ideas do not require any additional manpower or funding; just an imagination and a desire to improve our profession and communities. We typically use all of the excuses and clichés to keep things the way they have always been but law enforcement is being scrutinized today like no other time in history and while much of that scrutiny is unfounded, we owe it to our profession and the communities that we serve to do all we can to constantly evolve and improve.

Washington Post released a story about Freddie Gray throwing himself up against the walls of the transport metal rails to inflict self damage. Yes, Police made serious mistakes and are accountable for such, but the failure is systemic.

1: the police committed a policy violation for chasing an evading suspect (Freddie Gray) without reasonable suspicion

2: knife is not available now that was allegedly taken from Mr Gray

3: police leadership did not communicate with public well (or at all) for 10 days and now holding back report due Friday and now turned indefinitely

4: did not strap him in van (seat belted) because they wanted to give him “the railroad ride” to central book-in (this is a derogatory punishment NEW officers partake in for self satisfaction f prisoners who cause them harm in a retaliatory standpoint) (I have never used these vans so I truly have zero inside knowledge on the practice but know it occurs wrongly)

5: when asking for help, Freddie complained he could not breathe, officers responded; “well your talking so your breathing.” transport police did not notify EMS (SOP anywhere) could have been beginning of excited delirium

6: stopped after hearing thrashing to double restrain causing positional affixation and possibly "Sudden In Custody Death Syndrome" (he was dead on arrival at Central Book In and they resuscitated him where he went into comma at hospital

7: Police DID give voluntary statements without Garrity or Miranda warnings voluntarily (five of the six officers that is) the sixth was mis-directed when it looked like this was going south

8: Police just now deferred on the internal and autopsy report BECAUSE of UNKNOWN interests internally calling for indictments even if Mr Gray caused or was a contributor to his injuries - BUT it looks like excited delirium

9: No one is talking to the community once the rioting stopped. If you come at this like a Counter Insurgency and tactics: take back and control area, secure and hold area, grab leaders of area and insert transitional ideas with leadership philosophies effective for all that WILL stand the test and time, insert appropriate messaging and get the dialogue YOU want in the community based of mutual understanding and dialogue and then find out what the community wants - and then talk it through at nauseum - they did of securing the area and forgot the rest… Messaging being the most important.

Going in there with a five point plan and tell the community here is what happened, we want NOTHING from you but want to give you help from the programs available as there are 51% more programs in Maryland from 16 years of Democratic policies in Baltimore. Educate them how to use the policies and assistance to get themselves forward. Fund churches (real churches) for schools and Charter centers - get seventh graders and up involved in correct environments, reassure the community, educate about gun laws and enforce them with ATF policy partnership program help, relax DEA standards for federal indictments in that area and make some examples (thresholds there are ridiculous it take an excessive amount to get a federal indictment so lower that threshold for a timely portion) make them partners in the policing policy process and turn precincts into community run stations with police as partners.

Remove the democratic zero tolerance of 50 plus years - make the community understand the police are the ones that by default show up for the city fist by default by running the calls for help and assistance (typically to fix issues that took tears to boil over and they have five minute increments to fix the problems and then you end up with poor decisions. Train community programs to assist in political views and leadership to guide the city. Police will take this recommendation as a “slap down” but if we as police are afraid of evolving and even reaching back to our original practices where the community was the police, back to the original “Watch and Ward” standards, the system will fail, not the hiccup we’re experiencing, but a total failure. A police state will be necessary imminent which would give so many powers to a federalized police force under the guise of “protection of the greater need for the greater good.” Start corner by corner, block by block, district by district and eventually lead it to the city with LARGE open meetings for an extended period so everyone sees the agenda and meeting details that get lost. Bring investor groups back like the Inner Harbor "re-beautification re-vitalization" program that was so successful and discuss the community ramifications of not buying in, new development from private resources will provide jobs and jobs will help offset the programs in place. Why live in poverty when a fully supported household can earn over $41k in assistance programs and then offer buy in positions and help. It will take work, it will take leadership and will take a messenger that has experience both on streets growing up, police experience and possibly military experience. I HAVE DECLINED because of unreasonable perimeters put on me that it would be a “political” staple that was set up to fail. I would love to help implement this if asked but everyone is commentating on whats wrong.

As for a excessive racism, look at the microcosm of society that are police and yes, there are bad actors, but its less than 80% of society “bad actors” per capita” which does not make it right.

Here are what I see are the solutions:

Failing to take action will result in police simply running calls and not self initiating anything therefore crime statistics will sky rocket and forget numbers, you will have body issues… The South Carolina incident must be extracted because that was a “killer wearing a badge” and he will get what he deserves, the other incidents are either mitigated, re-directed to courts, or federal investigation inquiries… THIS IS A starting point and opportunity and I seem to be on the community side here as are many of my former colleagues (I am retired now from losing use of my left arm in a fight at work, police is dangerous work but I do not complain, I knew the risk and accepted them).

For your information: My source (there are three) are solid on the first five points above (the sixth is 50% stop on with theater 50% speculation) above the only speculation that was in my previous assessment (submitted to another agency at their request) is the priority one (high value prisoner in need of immediate transport) pick up they had on serious charges with Freddie in back and ANOTHER prisoner. I thought he possibly was in collusion into creating a brutality case and possible killed him but now I think it was PARTIALLY self inflicted, then add excited delirium and positional affixatia if drug content come back positive from his autopsy or ER intake blood tests.

The impact of an active shooter incident on any business operation is profound. For example, the entire theatre complex in Aurora, Colorado, that was the site of an active shooter incident in 2012 was closed for six months and required extensive remodeling.

Besides loss of revenue and reputation, additional costs from emotional, physical and psychological impacts can lead to general liability, workers compensation and other casualty insurance claims. These disruptive effects on property and people can be minimized with proper training.

Research shows there is a substantial difference in the reactions of people who have been trained and those who have not when confronted with workplace violence.

We take a holistic approach to active shooter survival. Many things impact the outcome, but one thing is for sure, employees need to know what to do as they are the front line of recovery for every business.

Is this risk rare? Can you risk not taking action? Begin with ReACT – companywide online training, documented reporting and certification accountability.

According to a 2013 study titled "Active Shooter Events from 2000 to 2012" published by Texas State University, businesses are the most frequently attacked locations in the United States, representing approximately 40 percent of active shooter incidents.

In 2014 alone, six (6) active shootings in the United States took place in the workplace:

• Darby, Pennsylvania – a patient entered a hospital and shot two hospital employees, killing one;
• Columbia, Maryland - at the Columbia Mall an individual shot two employees of a snowboard and skateboard store and wounded a shopper;
• Kennesaw, Georgia – a shipping company employee shot six fellow employees in the company’s warehouse;
• Kingston, New York – a New York City employee shot a fellow worker inside the employees’ office building;
• Vancouver, Washington – two separate active shooter incidents occurred within 48 hours, with one at a paint store and a second at a U.S. government complex; and,
• Rancho Cordova, California – a landscaping company employee shot a fellow employee at the company’s facility.

Preparing for an active shooter can be extremely challenging. Businesses are recommended to put in place the following measures:

1. An action plan
2. Active shooter educational programs
3. Preparation and training exercises to help employees react appropriately in the event of an active shooter

The ReACT Active Countermeasure Training Program does all three. Engage with America’s leading SME’s the nation’s “fore-fathers” for workplace violence survival skills. Formulate survival options and stand confident what when Seconds Count, You HAVE a Plan.

Is this risk rare? Can you risk not taking action? Begin with ReACT – companywide online training, documented reporting and certification accountability.

The Occupational Safety & Health Administration Section (OSHA) of the United States Department of Labor sets workplace regulations to ensure safe working environments for employees. One of the regulations under the General Duty Clause, Section 5 (a)(1) states, “Each employer shall furnish to each of his employees,  employment and a place of employment which are free from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to his employees”. 

In a workplace where the risk of violence and serious personal injury are significant enough to be "recognized hazards," the general duty clause would require the employer to take feasible steps to minimize those risks. Failure of an employer to implement feasible means of abatement of these hazards could result in the finding of an OSH Act violation. Violations of the OSHA regulations can result in employers receiving fines and will likely involve a civil lawsuit. 

Recent court rulings relative to liability lawsuits have shown that active shooter scenarios have become more prevalent and are now considered a “recognizable hazard” to employees. This ruling by the court system puts the burden on employers to provide training to their employees on how to recognize indicators of potential active shooters as well as how to respond when an active shooter situation occurs.  If the training is not provided, it opens the door for a civil liability against the business.

Is this risk rare? Can you risk not taking action? Begin with ReACT – companywide online training, documented reporting and certification accountability.

Rarely do we have any advanced warning of an active shooter. However, most often the warning signs are pieced together after the fact during the investigation. Active shooter incidents have reportedly averaged 13 minutes. The lack of predictability generates inherent anxiety and fear. That will never change.

Courts are finding fault with employers as noted in the 2013 court decision from Hennepin County, Minneapolis, MN, where the court found fault with the employer for negligence and failing to train their employees. “Liability is on the employer to train their employees to recognize the indicators of the potential active shooter and how to respond when they are faced with an actual active shooter incident.”

The charges basically aligned with the OSHA guidelines set forth under the General Duty Clause, *Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) of 1970, requires employers to provide their employees with a place of employment that “is free from recognizable hazards that are causing or likely to cause death or serious harm to employees.” The courts have interpreted OSHA’s general duty clause to mean that an employer has a legal obligation to provide a workplace free of conditions or activities that either the employer or industry recognizes as hazardous and that cause, or are likely to cause, death or serious physical harm to employees when there is a feasible method to abate that hazard.

The growing training requirement is the result of data collected by The Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries (CFOI) conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS):

• From 2006 to 2010, an average of 551 workers per year were killed as a result of work-related homicides
• In 2010 (the last year for which final data are available), CFOI reported a total of 518 workplace homicides, or 11 percent of all fatal work injuries that occurred that year
• Shootings accounted for 78 percent of all workplace homicides in 2010 (405 fatal injuries)
• More than four-fifths (83 percent) of these workplace homicides from shootings occurred in the private sector

Is this risk rare? Can you risk not taking action? Begin with ReACT – companywide online training, documented reporting and certification accountability.

It’s a warm spring day right before the big Mother’s Day rush at the mall. A young man with a large backpack shot and killed three store employees while opening their doors for business. It was uncovered that the shooter didn’t know the victims.

Business owners and managers can’t fully eliminate this growing threat of workplace violence. That’s why its imperative companies train employees on how to survive reducing risk and mitigating potential damage. Why must business owners and managers be proactive? The aftermath is costly. That’s why when seconds count businesses must have a plan.

• Active Assailants seek to do as much damage as possible – shooting anyone and everyone in sight,
• Active Shooting events trigger customers to take their business elsewhere regardless if there is a connection or not between the shooter and the business; causing massive, irreversible reputational harm,
• Business continuity is disrupted across the entire enterprise network, impacting customers, employees, investors, operations, revenue and brand stability regardless of incident location,
• Employee productivity and confidence undermined,
• Property damage can shut down operations and revenue during repair,
• Additional counseling services may be needed for employees and families,
• Death and injury lead to general liability, worker’s compensation and other casualty insurance claims in addition to litigation.

Although the threat cannot be eliminated, effective crisis management planning starts with documented training and testing of employees on proactive survival options, mental preparation as well as integrated planning, communications and role playing to minimize potential harm physically and emotionally.

Last year alone there were 19 identified active assailant events. Over 40% occurred in the workplace. These 19 events resulted in 208 injured and 68 fatalities, averaging 11 injuries and 3.5 deaths per event.

Is this risk rare? Can you risk not taking action? Begin with ReACT – companywide online training, documented reporting and certification accountability.

FRIDAY, APRIL 24, 2015 BALTIMORE CALLED CHRIS GROLLNEK. Just when we thought there were enough “experts” to go around, Chris Grollnek of ReACT seems to be the one everyone is turning to in times of crisis. With an inside track on a developing story, Chris not only studies the phenomena of this scrooge but also speaks to groups young and old on how to prevent the incidents.

Prevention is one thing, understanding and predicting is another. Two years ago Chris Grollnek warned of eminent mall attacks form his understanding of the progression of the active shooter and their motives. Firearms aside, these mass incidents that stretch the resources of the normal event of any location, family, city, county, state or nation, the events have themes that directly correlate with bad news on the horizon.

Nothing has shown us more than Ferguson Missouri and the incredible acts of a national agenda to debunk police or advocate for mass gatherings availing limitless powers to create chaos. Enter Baltimore, when the prevention strategies began, the national and local resources there turned to Chris Grollnek and his unique wisdom to provide encompassing insight.

Fearing the worse, Baltimore Maryland is preparing for an event that may make Ferguson look like a “lead in” or “opening at” before the primetime review… Leaning on Chris Grollnek and the two separate active shooter incidents he has actually been involved in makes perfect sense - if we can stop police from being attacked from a targeted standpoint and protect citizens mutually, there is no more qualified person in the nation, possibly the world for that matter...