The subject of arming western Community Peace Officers

General Law Enforcement discussion which does not fit into other channels. Post your thoughts and feelings about anything you want (LE related), or just vent those fumes about whatever is on your chest.
User avatar
ShadowBrooks
Veteran Member
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 7:36 am
Location: British Columbia
Contact:

Re: The subject of arming western Community Peace Officers

Postby ShadowBrooks » Sat May 05, 2018 10:34 pm

Rareform wrote:They should be armed - the end.


I'm interested in why someone with no access to the private side is so opinionated on this subject.
Commercial Transport Enforcement Officer
There are three kinds of men: The ones that learn by reading. The few who learn by observation. Then there are the rest of us that have to pee on the electric fence to find out for ourselves.

User avatar
Code44
Veteran Member
Posts: 166
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2010 4:18 am
Location: BC
Contact:

Re: The subject of arming western Community Peace Officers

Postby Code44 » Sat May 05, 2018 11:07 pm

Zero2 wrote:Absolutely right, on all counts. That's a major difference with CPOs, CSOs and Territorial Csts from S/Csts in Ontario. THey all have the authorities needed to do their jobs (traffic, red/blues, emerg response etc) I can't for life of me figure why Ontario wouldn't give their S/Csts those authorities.....I read a post MTO Officers in Ontario, that they have red/white lights to stop vehicles, but they cannot close the gap quickly or breach any traffic laws to effect their authorities....that in itself is ridiculous! "Sure go on out there and pull over highway traffic....but don't speed and don't cut any red lights"....give me a break.....this is where western CPOs get an edge because they can do all that. They patrol major highways and county roads with posted speed limits of 110kmh.....imagine not being able to go after someone who is speeding....laughable at best, fortunately that's not the case for them.....but.....a shared pain between east and west is not being armed. Like you said, they've already been vetted, screened, security checked and psych evaled....the next step is equipping and training, and they aren't because Municipal bosses have a panic attack everytime its mentioned. Nevermind that these people come across firearms everyday.

The biggest grinding rub is that Alberta Sheriffs who have the same authorities as CPOs no more or less, and actually do less than CPOs and have a slightly lower risk category as CPOs are armed....how the **** did that happen??

Sad part is CPOs are staying quiet on the matter for fear of being disciplined or losing their authorties...IE "Well if its too dangerous we'll just remove your appointments" and THAT is ridiculous.

Not sure what its going to take to get these people the tools they need.....but I hope its not going to take yet another LODD


Sounds like you need to join the Alberta Sheriffs :pistols:
:wave:

User avatar
ShadowBrooks
Veteran Member
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 7:36 am
Location: British Columbia
Contact:

Re: The subject of arming western Community Peace Officers

Postby ShadowBrooks » Sun May 06, 2018 12:49 am

Code44 wrote:Sounds like you need to join the Alberta Sheriffs :pistols:



Right? .. Clearly doesn't understand that sheriffs were armed for other reasons before they started doing traffic enforcement, I'm still curious as to his relation to this line of work is.
Commercial Transport Enforcement Officer
There are three kinds of men: The ones that learn by reading. The few who learn by observation. Then there are the rest of us that have to pee on the electric fence to find out for ourselves.

Zero2
Rookie Member
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 6:14 am
Contact:

Re: The subject of arming western Community Peace Officers

Postby Zero2 » Sun May 06, 2018 7:15 pm

ShadowBrooks wrote:
Code44 wrote:Sounds like you need to join the Alberta Sheriffs :pistols:



Right? .. Clearly doesn't understand that sheriffs were armed for other reasons before they started doing traffic enforcement, I'm still curious as to his relation to this line of work is.


LOL :thumbsup: :offtopic: I've been involved in law enforcement for over 17 years and Fire Services for 4 years and military (Infantry) for 4 years and I currently work in law enforcement in Western Canada in a Supervisory role (no, I can't reveal my agency as we have strict social media policies). Further to this I run a busy training and consultation service that sees most of its business in Alberta with Community Peace Officers and Sheriffs alike, but also have had business in Northern Canada as well. The vast majority of my clients request basic and high risk traffic stop tactics instruction and hazard assessments.

As such I am well aware, versed, educated and "clearly understand" the Sheriffs roles and the reasons (and the political reasons) of why they are armed, but also well aware of the needs of Peace Officers and further the vastly political reasons as to why they are not.

So rest easy, I'm not some kid with a twisted desire to carry a gun....I'm just advocating the needs of Community Peace Officers and other unarmed agencies that have involvement in high / unknown risk roles.

Anyway, now we have some of my resume out of the way, any real and reaosnable thoughts on this topic? Like I said, I'm simply advocating where I see a need and just generating some conversation around the topic.

:thumbsup:

Zero2
Rookie Member
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 6:14 am
Contact:

Re: The subject of arming western Community Peace Officers

Postby Zero2 » Sun May 06, 2018 7:19 pm

ShadowBrooks wrote:
Rareform wrote:They should be armed - the end.


I'm interested in why someone with no access to the private side is so opinionated on this subject.



Not on here enough or ever applied to the "private side"....if that's how you do it anyway :ponder: :D

allbrancereal
Veteran Member
Posts: 222
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 8:43 am
Contact:

Re: The subject of arming western Community Peace Officers

Postby allbrancereal » Sun May 06, 2018 7:57 pm

Zero2 wrote:
ShadowBrooks wrote:
Code44 wrote:Sounds like you need to join the Alberta Sheriffs :pistols:



Right? .. Clearly doesn't understand that sheriffs were armed for other reasons before they started doing traffic enforcement, I'm still curious as to his relation to this line of work is.


LOL :thumbsup: :offtopic: I've been involved in law enforcement for over 17 years and Fire Services for 4 years and military (Infantry) for 4 years and I currently work in law enforcement in Western Canada in a Supervisory role (no, I can't reveal my agency as we have strict social media policies). Further to this I run a busy training and consultation service that sees most of its business in Alberta with Community Peace Officers and Sheriffs alike, but also have had business in Northern Canada as well. The vast majority of my clients request basic and high risk traffic stop tactics instruction and hazard assessments.

As such I am well aware, versed, educated and "clearly understand" the Sheriffs roles and the reasons (and the political reasons) of why they are armed, but also well aware of the needs of Peace Officers and further the vastly political reasons as to why they are not.

So rest easy, I'm not some kid with a twisted desire to carry a gun....I'm just advocating the needs of Community Peace Officers and other unarmed agencies that have involvement in high / unknown risk roles.

Anyway, now we have some of my resume out of the way, any real and reaosnable thoughts on this topic? Like I said, I'm simply advocating where I see a need and just generating some conversation around the topic.

:thumbsup:


Zero2,

As impressive as your resume is, I have to disagree with your stance. I am a strong advocate for clear distinction between police and other law enforcement agencies. I absolutely recognize why Alberta sees the need for sheriffs doing traffic stops or peace officers being out and about in public. The need is there, no doubt. But you are asking for trouble when you give them limited authority and making them pull over cars. My toughest interactions have been in traffic stops. But I also had CCC and CDSA backing me up, along with proper tools.

Either classify them as provincial police and give them proper tools or come up with new strategies that will keep them safe. Strategies such immediate backing from police, among other things.

Guns carrying Peace Officers will muddy waters for sure.

User avatar
ShadowBrooks
Veteran Member
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 7:36 am
Location: British Columbia
Contact:

Re: The subject of arming western Community Peace Officers

Postby ShadowBrooks » Sun May 06, 2018 8:56 pm

allbrancereal wrote:
Zero2 wrote:LOL :thumbsup: :offtopic: I've been involved in law enforcement for over 17 years and Fire Services for 4 years and military (Infantry) for 4 years and I currently work in law enforcement in Western Canada in a Supervisory role (no, I can't reveal my agency as we have strict social media policies). Further to this I run a busy training and consultation service that sees most of its business in Alberta with Community Peace Officers and Sheriffs alike, but also have had business in Northern Canada as well. The vast majority of my clients request basic and high risk traffic stop tactics instruction and hazard assessments.

As such I am well aware, versed, educated and "clearly understand" the Sheriffs roles and the reasons (and the political reasons) of why they are armed, but also well aware of the needs of Peace Officers and further the vastly political reasons as to why they are not.

So rest easy, I'm not some kid with a twisted desire to carry a gun....I'm just advocating the needs of Community Peace Officers and other unarmed agencies that have involvement in high / unknown risk roles.

Anyway, now we have some of my resume out of the way, any real and reaosnable thoughts on this topic? Like I said, I'm simply advocating where I see a need and just generating some conversation around the topic.

:thumbsup:


Zero2,

As impressive as your resume is, I have to disagree with your stance. I am a strong advocate for clear distinction between police and other law enforcement agencies. I absolutely recognize why Alberta sees the need for sheriffs doing traffic stops or peace officers being out and about in public. The need is there, no doubt. But you are asking for trouble when you give them limited authority and making them pull over cars. My toughest interactions have been in traffic stops. But I also had CCC and CDSA backing me up, along with proper tools.

Either classify them as provincial police and give them proper tools or come up with new strategies that will keep them safe. Strategies such immediate backing from police, among other things.

Guns carrying Peace Officers will muddy waters for sure.


Find it ironic that a good portion of my job is traffic and no one is advocating for us to be Police Officers or for cops to do my job. The police departments that do hire people specifically for commercial vehicle enforcement appoints them as Special's and sends them out to do the same job they were doing for the Province.
Commercial Transport Enforcement Officer
There are three kinds of men: The ones that learn by reading. The few who learn by observation. Then there are the rest of us that have to pee on the electric fence to find out for ourselves.

User avatar
Punisher-One
Poobah Overlord
Posts: 3772
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 12:59 am
Location: Redacted
Contact:

Re: The subject of arming western Community Peace Officers

Postby Punisher-One » Wed May 09, 2018 3:47 pm

allbrancereal wrote:Zero2,

As impressive as your resume is, I have to disagree with your stance. I am a strong advocate for clear distinction between police and other law enforcement agencies. I absolutely recognize why Alberta sees the need for sheriffs doing traffic stops or peace officers being out and about in public. The need is there, no doubt. But you are asking for trouble when you give them limited authority and making them pull over cars. My toughest interactions have been in traffic stops. But I also had CCC and CDSA backing me up, along with proper tools.

Either classify them as provincial police and give them proper tools or come up with new strategies that will keep them safe. Strategies such immediate backing from police, among other things.

Guns carrying Peace Officers will muddy waters for sure.


I've got to agree here. If they are expected to perform Police like tasks and face police like danger then give them the full authority training and use of force. If not then let the Police handle it. This tiered system of unarmed Enforcement Officers doing police tasks because of politics is going to get someone killed. That's sad.

This isn't a knock against the fine officers doing the jobs either more so about the politics.

User avatar
Hattie
Veteran Member
Posts: 168
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2016 11:23 pm
Location: Here. Sometimes over there. Or other times over by that tree...
Contact:

Re: The subject of arming western Community Peace Officers

Postby Hattie » Wed May 09, 2018 8:42 pm

Zero2 wrote:The biggest grinding rub is that Alberta Sheriffs who have the same authorities as CPOs no more or less, and actually do less than CPOs and have a slightly lower risk category as CPOs are armed....how the **** did that happen??



It is statements such as this which miscommunicate things. You are equating different jobs with each other and neglecting to clarify historical and political events which cause things to be as they are.

For the time being, at face value, the arming of peace officers in Alberta has little to do with traffic enforcement and warrants. Also has more to do with the actual employer of the peace officers. ACES, F&W, Sheriffs, are employed directly by the Government of Alberta and specifically (though ACES wanders as frequently as they change names) Justice and Solicitor General.

Any body which employs peace officers in Alberta can theoretically request for their officers to be armed but success of such application is gamble and requires a solid case. Those who are armed, and the original reasons for them being armed, depend on who was in charge at the time and the case that employer brought forward. At some points, those in charge wish(ed) none of the peace officers were armed but it is more difficult to remove those tools once established as necessary.

Many individual employers of peace officers apparently would prefer not to employ armed officers, and you would have to ask them why. They will not even apply which is favourable for the times when the Peace Officer Program is run by someone who wishes none were armed in the first place. It could be the process is too costly and time consuming to attempt. Could be there are preventative measures in place to stop multiple employers from joining forces to do a joint submission; could also be a cultural stigma against big scary guns.

In the case(s) of those agencies employed by the Government of Alberta, they saw reason to have that tool and they went through the process to gain that tool based on the individual needs of those agencies. And their proposal to their employer likely outlined the justifications/consequences and whoever was in charge at the time agreed.

To directly distinguish the issue in the quoted comment: I do not believe any CPO's/By-law/MLEO's/Etc in Alberta routinely do the same job for which the Sheriffs were armed. I am not going to speculate on whether their regular duties are safer or not as that is not the true issue.

I am afraid I will not go further into detail on the reasons some agencies are armed and others are not simply because that is way above my pay grade, gets too far into things which may only be rumor, and the more obvious of: this section is 100% viewable to the public. I know some of the quirks via anecdotal experience but what filters down from different managements and officers vary.

Where I come from, you are either a certified police officer or you are not. Does not matter if you are Fish & Wildlife, Park Ranger, Transportation, Highway Patrol, Environmental Protection, state cop, county cop, city cop, whatever; you are certified at basic, the same, and your lights are red/blue. Anybody else is not an officer and cannot conduct a traffic stop or utilize red/blue lights (most specifically blue). By-laws are administrative penalties and community aides do little more than finger print, provide traffic control, provide information, first aid, and take non-criminal reports/complaints. There is no confusion, no need for arming/defensive equipment, etc.

My view has always been if you can do traffic stops and enforce laws then you should be trained and armed to do so. Yet here I sit unarmed doing both and taking that risk because it is the way it is and it is the job I want to do. It is trying to be changed but we shall see.

I would likely try to be a police officer over being a non-GOA CPO because I think they should be armed/have proper access to do that job.
Humour and sarcasm are my default options. Except on Tuesdays.

Stark
Regular Member
Posts: 57
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2012 9:23 pm
Contact:

Re: The subject of arming western Community Peace Officers

Postby Stark » Sun May 13, 2018 2:06 pm

Punisher-One wrote:
allbrancereal wrote:Zero2,

As impressive as your resume is, I have to disagree with your stance. I am a strong advocate for clear distinction between police and other law enforcement agencies. I absolutely recognize why Alberta sees the need for sheriffs doing traffic stops or peace officers being out and about in public. The need is there, no doubt. But you are asking for trouble when you give them limited authority and making them pull over cars. My toughest interactions have been in traffic stops. But I also had CCC and CDSA backing me up, along with proper tools.

Either classify them as provincial police and give them proper tools or come up with new strategies that will keep them safe. Strategies such immediate backing from police, among other things.

Guns carrying Peace Officers will muddy waters for sure.


I've got to agree here. If they are expected to perform Police like tasks and face police like danger then give them the full authority training and use of force. If not then let the Police handle it. This tiered system of unarmed Enforcement Officers doing police tasks because of politics is going to get someone killed. That's sad.

This isn't a knock against the fine officers doing the jobs either more so about the politics.


I agree with both of the above. I personally don't think peace officers should be doing traffic stops and Alberta has been the first province I've lived in where I've seen that. Peace officers should stick to dealing with the public, assisting with events/crowd control, transit and the intox in publics and things along those lines.

If their duties are becoming such that they feel they need firearms, then the entire process needs to be revamped. I wouldn't want someone with a firearm who does 8 weeks of training. They would have to make their training more like police training and then make their application process a lot more thorough as well which makes no sense because you may as well just apply to be a real cop then. Keep the distinction between police and other law enforcement agencies.

User avatar
Hattie
Veteran Member
Posts: 168
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2016 11:23 pm
Location: Here. Sometimes over there. Or other times over by that tree...
Contact:

Re: The subject of arming western Community Peace Officers

Postby Hattie » Sun May 13, 2018 11:30 pm

Stark wrote:
Punisher-One wrote:
allbrancereal wrote:Zero2,

As impressive as your resume is, I have to disagree with your stance. I am a strong advocate for clear distinction between police and other law enforcement agencies. I absolutely recognize why Alberta sees the need for sheriffs doing traffic stops or peace officers being out and about in public. The need is there, no doubt. But you are asking for trouble when you give them limited authority and making them pull over cars. My toughest interactions have been in traffic stops. But I also had CCC and CDSA backing me up, along with proper tools.

Either classify them as provincial police and give them proper tools or come up with new strategies that will keep them safe. Strategies such immediate backing from police, among other things.

Guns carrying Peace Officers will muddy waters for sure.


I've got to agree here. If they are expected to perform Police like tasks and face police like danger then give them the full authority training and use of force. If not then let the Police handle it. This tiered system of unarmed Enforcement Officers doing police tasks because of politics is going to get someone killed. That's sad.

This isn't a knock against the fine officers doing the jobs either more so about the politics.


I agree with both of the above. I personally don't think peace officers should be doing traffic stops and Alberta has been the first province I've lived in where I've seen that. Peace officers should stick to dealing with the public, assisting with events/crowd control, transit and the intox in publics and things along those lines.

If their duties are becoming such that they feel they need firearms, then the entire process needs to be revamped. I wouldn't want someone with a firearm who does 8 weeks of training. They would have to make their training more like police training and then make their application process a lot more thorough as well which makes no sense because you may as well just apply to be a real cop then. Keep the distinction between police and other law enforcement agencies.


My training was a lot longer than 8 weeks and hiring process not too far off from any police service, but I can already see where this is headed so not even going to attempt to put forth my opinion on the matter.
Humour and sarcasm are my default options. Except on Tuesdays.

User avatar
ShadowBrooks
Veteran Member
Posts: 253
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 7:36 am
Location: British Columbia
Contact:

Re: The subject of arming western Community Peace Officers

Postby ShadowBrooks » Mon May 14, 2018 12:52 am

Hattie wrote:My training was a lot longer than 8 weeks and hiring process not too far off from any police service, but I can already see where this is headed so not even going to attempt to put forth my opinion on the matter.


I figured he was talking about Bylaw officers.
Commercial Transport Enforcement Officer
There are three kinds of men: The ones that learn by reading. The few who learn by observation. Then there are the rest of us that have to pee on the electric fence to find out for ourselves.

User avatar
Hattie
Veteran Member
Posts: 168
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2016 11:23 pm
Location: Here. Sometimes over there. Or other times over by that tree...
Contact:

Re: The subject of arming western Community Peace Officers

Postby Hattie » Tue May 15, 2018 11:47 am

ShadowBrooks wrote:
Hattie wrote:My training was a lot longer than 8 weeks and hiring process not too far off from any police service, but I can already see where this is headed so not even going to attempt to put forth my opinion on the matter.


I figured he was talking about Bylaw officers.


Basic Community Peace Officer Level 1 training in Alberta is 08 weeks in duration. There is more to it, but that is the absolute core.

By-law officers typically will not get that. Their training can be in-house. Example: Paladin Security does parking enforcement. After 6 months they let you apply for Peace Officer Status (Likely CPO2) for the sole purpose of towing vehicles. They would not get the 08 weeks just for that.

So it would be directly towards CPO's. Just not worth discussing/arguing for me.
Humour and sarcasm are my default options. Except on Tuesdays.

Zero2
Rookie Member
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 6:14 am
Contact:

Re: The subject of arming western Community Peace Officers

Postby Zero2 » Tue Jul 10, 2018 11:34 am

I'm sure everyone has seen / heard about the Saskatchewan CVE changing their mandate and name....now Saskatchewan Highway Patrol, armed and responding to rural 911 calls and expanded their traffic authority to passenger vehicles as well. Half the reason they became armed is due to passenger vehicle authority, the rest is due to their expanded criminal authority.

Great to see. Saskatchewan has always been a leader in this stuff.

User avatar
Pete Broccolo
Moderator
Posts: 627
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Weyburn SK Canada
Contact:

Re: The subject of arming western Community Peace Officers

Postby Pete Broccolo » Wed Jul 11, 2018 10:48 am

Zero2 wrote:I'm sure everyone has seen / heard about the Saskatchewan CVE changing their mandate and name....now Saskatchewan Highway Patrol, armed and responding to rural 911 calls and expanded their traffic authority to passenger vehicles as well. Half the reason they became armed is due to passenger vehicle authority, the rest is due to their expanded criminal authority.

Great to see. Saskatchewan has always been a leader in this stuff.

As much as I support the latest effort, what experience do you draw upon for your last line?! If anything, Saskatchewan has FAR lagged other Provinces regarding up-grading their non-Police Peace Officer Agency members' roles, equipment, and focus.

While SK Conservation Officers have been authorized to carry sidearms, and issued same, that has been less than 25 years. It was far more recently than that for the authorization of the Traffic Officers to wear SBA and any kind of defensive tools.

Reaching back further than that, TO were often ORDERED to NOT patrol, and to simply staff the weigh scales, as their overall budget was SO tight that the Saskatchewan Government did NOT have money for fuel for their vehicles. Further, the mobile enforcement station vans were few and far between, and were also not rolled-out until about 25 years ago.

Even with the arming initiative, new paint-and-stripe scheme for the vehicles, calling them HP, and enfolding them within the PRT, their numbers are going to HAVE TO increase DRAMATICALLY to make a difference in life-and-death, or excited-victims, situations. SK HP will NO WAY handle major criminal files from first-call through to convict-escort-to-the-pen; if they take on low-priority collisions from 911-call to write-up-the-ticket and complete the collision report, that would be excellent.

None of my rambling above should be taken as to scoff at the work of CO or HP; I NEVER had an interest in checking fishers, or hunters, or following up on wasted game, nor was I a fan of checking brakes, log books, dangerous goods, nor vehicle weights, even though it was within my authorities.
#32936 - Cst - RCMP - 1975-10-27 / 2010-12-29
"F" Div - 1976-05-04 / end (GD & HP / RTS)
Proud Dad of #54266 - RCMP - 2007-02-12 / date
RCMP Vets Assoc - Regina Div member
Husband (8*+), Dad (*), Father-In-Law (*), & Grampa (*+2)


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest