# Back-up guns: Asset or liability?



## kwflatbed (Dec 29, 2004)

By Dave Grossi 
I retired from a department in upstate New York that frowned on back-up guns. Well, frowned on is too polite. _Prohibited_ is more accurate. Try as we might, my Firearms/Force Training Unit members and I were never able to convince the powers-that-be that back-up guns, properly registered with the Chief's Office and backed up with training and certification, were an essential piece of equipment for cops in our jurisdiction. 
Without coming right out and saying it, my guess was that the brass just couldn't get over the idea that back-ups guns somehow translate into drop-guns. Instead, the answer was _"you've got semiautomatic pistols with plenty of ammunition. You've got the latest in chemical agents and you've got brand new batons. You wanted more training time for weapon retention skills. We gave it to you. You don't need back-up guns."_ 
A written policy from the Ivory Tower followed shortly after one of my more vocal requests when a back-up gun saved the life of a cop in a neighboring state. That new policy stated in sum and substance: "Officers will carry only department issued weapons while on duty." My guess is that the readers of the PoliceOne.com newsletter who work for agencies that do not authorize back-up guns may recognize those thoughts and comments all too well. 
There are numerous examples out there in the force training annals that support the position that back-up guns have saved cops' lives. Anybody interested in hearing about those incidents can contact me; I'll give you details and departments. 
So enough said on that subject. The facts are undisputed. Getting bosses who haven't seen the mean streets in a decade or more to recognize that _back-up guns_ are not synonymous with _drop-guns_ may take a little more work; so that's where this article is headed. 
One of the hurdles that might have to be jumped on the way to getting back-up guns permitted is the paper trail that should be created that will eliminate the confusion between back-up guns and drop-guns. That paper trail will also serve to reassure the brass that the guns won't be misused. In theory, the documentation that should accompany back-up guns is really no different than what is now done when an agency adds a new tool to their tactical tool box of force options, whether it's TASERs, patrol rifles or bean-bag shotguns.

Full Article:http://www.policeone.com/police-pro...cles/1707496-Back-up-guns-Asset-or-liability/


----------



## Kem25 (Aug 7, 2007)

Try dealing with brass that either do not carry a firearm or refuse to carry a firearm with a round in the chamber... the idea of a back up gun just gets laughed at!


----------



## justanotherparatrooper (Aug 27, 2006)

Kem25 said:


> Try dealing with brass that either do not carry a firearm or refuse to carry a firearm with a round in the chamber... the idea of a back up gun just gets laughed at!


What kind of idiot doesnt keep his weapon hot?Damn! might as well carry a rock in their holster.


----------



## Guest (Jun 28, 2008)

justanotherparatrooper said:


> What kind of idiot doesnt keep his weapon hot?Damn! might as well carry a rock in their holster.


You'd be surprised; I used to work with someone who refused to have a live round under the hammer of their revolver. I tried to explain the whole thing about transfer bar safeties and how you could drop a Model 10 off the Empire State Building, have it land on the hammer and it still won't discharge, but he wouldn't listen to me.


----------



## CJIS (Mar 12, 2005)

justanotherparatrooper said:


> What kind of idiot doesnt keep his weapon hot?Damn! might as well carry a rock in their holster.


Some folks are just skittish about having one in the chamber. I hear stories all the time. The only argument I have ever heard that made any sense as why not too, is if a suspect managed to get their firearm. This is good for about 5 seconds till the perp racks a round.

The way I look at it is this: The gun will not go off if you do not pull the trigger. As far as a suspect getting your weapon don't let them. Lastly if an officer is worried about carrying a firearm then perhaps they are in the wrong line of work.


----------



## PearlOnyx (Jun 28, 2002)

I carry a Glock 27. If you're only carrying one weapon on your person, you have to have a lot of faith in your main service weapon working when the time comes. It also leaves an option if your weapon does get taken from you. 

Not carrying your weapon hot? Purchase extra life insurance for your family. They're far more likley to need it...


----------



## Killjoy (Jun 23, 2003)

One of the problems is that command staff is _far_ from the road, so many of the realities of policing are nothing but a distant memory to them. As far as back-up guns being used as "drop" guns, its nothing short of ludicrous. Ignoring the fact that the vast majority of police officers are not scheming villains, looking to plant evidence at the drop of a hat, why would I drop something that can be easily traced like a pistol, when I could drop a completely untraceable flea-market rambo knife? The "drop" gun theory obviously holds no water.

What it comes down to in most departments is simple dollars, cents and the phantom menace of liability. Departments worry endlessly about the "what ifs" of an officer shooting a suspect with a non-standard pistol; what if the officer misses, what if the suspect is wounded and sues, etc. etc.. Quite honestly most departments would rather roll the dice and risk their officer's lives in the low probability of a shoot-out, than give them all the equipment they need. Departments also barely want to spend enough money to train and qualify officers on their primary weapon; only a constant fear of established case-law (Young v. City of Killeen & Popow v. City of Margate) keeps them even performing the absolute minimum of firearms training necessary. Add another weapon, that adds that much more training necessary, that much more ammunition, overtime for shortages, range time, etc. This is in addition to the cost of buying the back-up weapons and their attendant accessories like holsters and magazines. Departments would rather avoid the entire issue and do nothing. A compromise solution taken up by some departments would be for police officers to register their back-up weapons and qualify them at their own expense...not perfect, but something at least.

Many officers choose to carry a back-up gun discreetly against their department's wishes, choosing their own safety over some idiotic ass-covering policy. Its clear that back-up guns can and do save officers and civilian lives, but roll that through the command-staff meat-grinder of politics, lawyers, and budgets and the message is lost.


----------



## badge14 (Sep 13, 2007)

The way I look at it is this: The gun will not go off if you do not pull the trigger. As far as a suspect getting your weapon don't let them. Lastly if an officer is worried about carrying a firearm then perhaps they are in the wrong line of work.[/quote]

Damn straight!


----------



## PapaBear (Feb 23, 2008)

I used to operate under two different philosophies when it came to officer safety:

1. It is easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission; 

2. If it saves a life, I would rather be judged by twelve than carried by six.

Do what you have to in order to survive.


----------



## mpd61 (Aug 7, 2002)

In the end it's all about P&P's. Even if the backup gun is authorized and you have to qualify/train and everything is documented, then theres the matter of whether the weapon is private or issued. The Lawyers are driving everything these days!
BTW-I'm all for it


----------



## Guest (Jul 6, 2008)

justanotherparatrooper said:


> What kind of idiot doesnt keep his weapon hot?Damn! might as well carry a rock in their holster.


I remember reading about a chief who died recently, and the obituary made a point of stating that the guy often "chose not to carry."



> Hailing from a different era, the long-serving chief often chose not to carry a gun during his time in the top post, his son said.


http://www.masscops.com/forums/showthread.php?t=55190&highlight=martins

Hearing that little tidbit about the late chief makes me lose some respect for him.

I say carry what you need to in order to stay safe.


----------

