Police Officer Preparation & Law Enforcement Resource - Archive

I have been struggling to land a law enforcement job since graduating the police academy in December. I have since considered becoming a reserve officer(fully sworn, non-compensated position. Do you feel that being a reserve officer would help my chances of landing a full-time job? Or will it not help much and therefore not be worth the time?

I also have a backround question. Over a year ago, my 19 year old brother was going to bootcamp. Before he went to bootcamp, he was at my house. I had a few friends over, and ended up having a beer with my brother before he left for bootcamp(he was shipping out a couple days after this). I'm not sure if it was something I bought or one of my friends brought over, but I do understand he was inder 21 and consumed an alcoholic beverage in my house. Do you feel this will be a disqualifier? I will be upfront about it of course.

Thank you all for your time.

Yes it will help. It will give you experience and solid references.

I can't imagine that causing problems.

Good luck.

In today's competitive hiring environment, being a Reserve Officer would give you significant advantage over most of those you're competing with for jobs.

It might also lead to a paying position with the department you volunteer for. A lot of the Officers and Sergeants I work with started as Reserves with our department.

What the others said are right.

Getting into LE took me YEARS! Become a reserve officer. Look at jobs that "investigate" in the civilian world. Insurance company claims investigators.....loss prevention....etc... Anything where you have to talk to people, take statements, research things, etc.... All will help.

What the others said are right.

Getting into LE took me YEARS! Become a reserve officer. Look at jobs that "investigate" in the civilian world. Insurance company claims investigators.....loss prevention....etc... Anything where you have to talk to people, take statements, research things, etc.... All will help.

I sure like our system better. You take a written aptitude test to determine if you have the innate skills for the job, an oral board to check out your personality and possibly your core beliefs and then everything else is pass fail. I haven't found that people who were explorers, reserves, insurance investigators or whatever turned into better cops than people off the street that took the test.

I also think departments are more forgiving of reserves than paid officers. I had a trainee when I was a FTO that had been a reserve with a S.O. for two years. He was terrible, knew all the rules, laws, regulations and had no common sense. I wrote an unsatisfactory evaluation on him and thankfully, he was canned. But the S.O. apparently thought he was good enough for free labor, I dunno.

But then again, I believe good cops are born, not made. I've seen people with all sorts of training who couldn't investigate their way out of a paper bag and rookies with an incredible natural ability to do the job. Prior experience doesn't mean anything after a while anyway.

I sure like our system better. You take a written aptitude test to determine if you have the innate skills for the job, an oral board to check out your personality and possibly your core beliefs and then everything else is pass fail. I haven't found that people who were explorers, reserves, insurance investigators or whatever turned into better cops than people off the street that took the test.

I also think departments are more forgiving of reserves than paid officers. I had a trainee when I was a FTO that had been a reserve with a S.O. for two years. He was terrible, knew all the rules, laws, regulations and had no common sense. I wrote an unsatisfactory evaluation on him and thankfully, he was canned. But the S.O. apparently thought he was good enough for free labor, I dunno.

But then again, I believe good cops are born, not made. I've seen people with all sorts of training who couldn't investigate their way out of a paper bag and rookies with an incredible natural ability to do the job. Prior experience doesn't mean anything after a while anyway.

Could not agree with you more.

Unfortunately there is no way for anyone to know if someone "had what it takes" for the job until AFTER they are hire and trained ec. Then some get cut loose due to performance etc. and others "quit" after realizing being a "Cop" is not what they percieved it to be.

One guy sticks in my mind. About 10 years ago I was tasked with the last phase of FTO, "observing" the soon to be released on his own Officer. All of his FTO's gave him excellent scores. I watched him during a use of force incident. It was minor but I could sense hesitation on his part to use the neccesary force. I pulled him aside and asked him the simple question about how he feels about possibly taking someones life to defend himself or other Officers. He responded, "I dunno, never thought about it, honestly I would trust GOD to keep us safe without me committing the sin of MURDER"..,

I was shocked, met with the Commander about his views and my JUSTIFIED concern for EVERYONES safety. Appearently he told the commander the same thing and was let go for "inability to conform to Police standards.

Moral to my story, he seemed like a great guy and a good Cop BUT being a Cop was not "for him".

"God" only knows what would have happened if I would not have asked a simple question.

I pulled him aside and asked him the simple question about how he feels about possibly taking someones life to defend himself or other Officers. He responded, "I dunno, never thought about it, honestly I would trust GOD to keep us safe without me committing the sin of MURDER"..,


It's pretty odd though that someone would take the job w/o considering that. But he could have been a reserve for 10 and never been asked that question, in fact it would have probably more apt to have been taken for granted that he would.

On the flip side, ever read "On Killing" by Dave Grossman? Eye opening book about research he's done. During war, less than 25% of the combatants actually aim their firearms at the enemy with intent to kill. (This includes both sides, not just Americans) I forgot the percentages, but one group fires randomly in the general direction of the enemy and the third group finds other things to do like giving out ammo, etc and never fire their weapons at all.

I've read lots of rationalizations on this board and other places about how training and changed all this, etc. etc., but it's BS, IMO. I saw the same thing in Vietnam, I knew the soldiers that I could count on to shoot to kill, the ones who just fired their weapons to be firing and so on. I saw that on a number of police shootings. With the exception of one where all three officers fired and hit the suspect, every officer involved shooting I investigated (including two I was a part of) where multiple officers were present, all cops saw the same situation unfold and most never fired their weapons. And there were generally some who never even unholstered their weapons if the situation developed rapidly and they weren't mimicking others.

The morale of this story is, never believe that just because someone is a cop, qualifies at the range and even says they would have no trouble shooting someone, that they will when push comes to shove. My best friend and I were standing shoulder to shoulder in an incident where I drew my gun, aimed and hit the suspect in middle of the chest. My friend, a former Army infantryman pulled his gun and fired two rounds from the hip in the general direction. Both shots went wild. He was a member of group 2. At the time I couldn't believe he did that and it really bothered me, but years later after reading that book, it made sense.

And as I've ranted about before, I despise the practice of using free labor to do the job I made a career out of. It cheapens the profession, but that's another subject.....

It's pretty odd though that someone would take the job w/o considering that. But he could have been a reserve for 10 and never been asked that question, in fact it would have probably more apt to have been taken for granted that he would.

On the flip side, ever read "On Killing" by Dave Grossman? Eye opening book about research he's done. During war, less than 25% of the combatants actually aim their firearms at the enemy with intent to kill. (This includes both sides, not just Americans) I forgot the percentages, but one group fires randomly in the general direction of the enemy and the third group finds other things to do like giving out ammo, etc and never fire their weapons at all.

I've read lots of rationalizations on this board and other places about how training and changed all this, etc. etc., but it's BS, IMO. I saw the same thing in Vietnam, I knew the soldiers that I could count on to shoot to kill, the ones who just fired their weapons to be firing and so on. I saw that on a number of police shootings. With the exception of one where all three officers fired and hit the suspect, every officer involved shooting I investigated (including two I was a part of) where multiple officers were present, all cops saw the same situation unfold and most never fired their weapons. And there were generally some who never even unholstered their weapons if the situation developed rapidly and they weren't mimicking others.

The morale of this story is, never believe that just because someone is a cop, qualifies at the range and even says they would have no trouble shooting someone, that they will when push comes to shove. My best friend and I were standing shoulder to shoulder in an incident where I drew my gun, aimed and hit the suspect in middle of the chest. My friend, a former Army infantryman pulled his gun and fired two rounds from the hip in the general direction. Both shots went wild. He was a member of group 2. At the time I couldn't believe he did that and it really bothered me, but years later after reading that book, it made sense.

And as I've ranted about before, I despise the practice of using free labor to do the job I made a career out of. It cheapens the profession, but that's another subject.....

So in your opinion, how could somebody like me know if I could really use deadly force? I have pondered that question to a great extent. I have tried to mind lab scenarios where I needed to shoot somebody, but the only realistic answer I could give myself is that I don't know how I will react when I get into a deadly force situation. I feel like anybody on earth can say, "I would be able to use deadly force if needed".

However, I have never been in a deadly force situation. I have never been shot at, and don't know how I am going to react when bullets are flying past my head and death could be seconds away. I would love ro say, "I would use my sights and aim for the attackers midsection and fire".

I have been in plenty of job-related and personal situations where I have had to harm another person to protect myself or protect another person, and I was able to react really well. But having never been in a situation where I was going to have to take somebody's life, I don't feel I can realistically say for 100%the fact thar I would react appropriately.

Do you feel my way of thinking is a problem, and if so, then how do you feel I could better prepare myself for that situation?

I do actually agree on the free labor. I see alot of fire departments now that have so many volunteers thar they staff very few paid positions. I hope law enforcement doesn't move in the same direction.

I pulled him aside and asked him the simple question about how he feels about possibly taking someones life to defend himself or other Officers. He responded, "I dunno, never thought about it, honestly I would trust GOD to keep us safe without me committing the sin of MURDER"..,





That's one of our oral board questions, It's hard to believe that any department wouldn't ask that question during the hiring phase. I do know that we have had some applicants say that they couldn't kill someone and they're given the handshake, thank you, and shown the door.

Thank you all very much for the answers. I am definitely going to try and become a reserve at a department. I'm a very young guy and am doing my best to become a more desirable applicant. This website has helped me alot especially when I start to become a little discourage. I really appreciate it.

It's pretty odd though that someone would take the job w/o considering that. But he could have been a reserve for 10 and never been asked that question, in fact it would have probably more apt to have been taken for granted that he would.

On the flip side, ever read "On Killing" by Dave Grossman? Eye opening book about research he's done. During war, less than 25% of the combatants actually aim their firearms at the enemy with intent to kill. (This includes both sides, not just Americans) I forgot the percentages, but one group fires randomly in the general direction of the enemy and the third group finds other things to do like giving out ammo, etc and never fire their weapons at all.

I've read lots of rationalizations on this board and other places about how training and changed all this, etc. etc., but it's BS, IMO. I saw the same thing in Vietnam, I knew the soldiers that I could count on to shoot to kill, the ones who just fired their weapons to be firing and so on. I saw that on a number of police shootings. With the exception of one where all three officers fired and hit the suspect, every officer involved shooting I investigated (including two I was a part of) where multiple officers were present, all cops saw the same situation unfold and most never fired their weapons. And there were generally some who never even unholstered their weapons if the situation developed rapidly and they weren't mimicking others.

The morale of this story is, never believe that just because someone is a cop, qualifies at the range and even says they would have no trouble shooting someone, that they will when push comes to shove. My best friend and I were standing shoulder to shoulder in an incident where I drew my gun, aimed and hit the suspect in middle of the chest. My friend, a former Army infantryman pulled his gun and fired two rounds from the hip in the general direction. Both shots went wild. He was a member of group 2. At the time I couldn't believe he did that and it really bothered me, but years later after reading that book, it made sense.

And as I've ranted about before, I despise the practice of using free labor to do the job I made a career out of. It cheapens the profession, but that's another subject.....

Its funny you mention DR. Grossman (at least thats how he introduced himself, I think he has a Phd in physcology), I actually had the PLEASURE and HONOR of attending TWO seminars he held over the years (I work near the largest AF base in the US). I still have a signed copy of his book but after all these years I never got around to reading it (I will now though).

He is an EXCELLENT speaker and VERY educated in the subject IMO so I am sure his book is well written and informative. Its been about six years since the last seminar I attended but EVERYTHING he said and explained made sense and "hit home" expecially the "physcological effects" of deadly force encounters.

In reference to the OP unsure of "what he would do" in a deadly force situation I can only say, no logical, compassionate person WANTS to take someones life. But if you do not have the "mindset" or "don't know" what you would do in a situation that would require deadly force then IMO this is not the job for you.

Its natural not to want to take a life, but in LE there may come a time when you will have to make the desicion to pull the trigger. In this day and age the chance of a deadly force encounter is becoming more likely regardless of where your a LEO. And I can tell you from
experience (I have been involved in only 2 fortunately) when it "goes down" you only have "milliseconds" to react and if you have doubts now, then I dont have to tell you what "I think" will happen if YOU have to make that choice if you already feel the way you do.

If your unsure then PLEASE, for your sake, fellow Officers and citizens PLEASE reconsider your choice to become a LEO.

I hate to sound harsh or cold but to be truthfully blunt I do not want to read the news of Officers killed when it "could have" been prevented. Even 1 LEO line of duty death is 1 too many and there are already hudreds killed every year!

In truth you are completely right when you say "you dont know how you will react until it happens", but you have to have the mindset that you WILL "do what it takes" regardless and be willing to live with the actions you had no choice but to take.

I don't buy everything Grossman sells, I disagree with some of his personal opinions. He's a psychologist and never been under fire himself. I'm kind of a hardhead on those kinds of things, if you haven't actually had someone seriously trying to kill you and/or you have to return fire, your opinion is a guess. But his professional research involving people who have been there validates my experience. I believe "On Killing" should be required reading in every academy.

I agree totally that it's something people need to contemplate and if they don't think they can, get another job. The cold truth is, there are a lot of cops out there who can't/won't. I've interviewed them and although none admitted it, there was no good explanation as to why they stood there with their thumbs up their @sses while others were taking action. And some were people who I had previously listened to talk a big game. But when push came to shove, they folded.

In my first shooting, as I said my best friend cowboyed two shots that went wild. One deputy sheriff there never pulled the trigger and two other deputies never drew their guns. The incident, btw was a man with butcher knives in each hand about to stab another deputy who had fallen and not unholstered his weapon. (This was pre body armor) I was the only one there that shot to take the guy down out of 6 cops. I never ever again trusted another cop to shoot unless I'd known they'd done it before. I would advise everyone here to also not have blind faith in your untested cohorts. That's why a lot of cops die with their guns drawn, facing the suspect that killed them and/or get shot with their own guns.

I don't want to sound harsh either, but I've listened to too many crow about what bad @sses they were, criticize others and/or talk about what they would have done and then see them stand there like a moron when the sh!t hit the fan. I saw it in Vietnam, I saw it on the streets over here. It's a mindset that I had to get into many, many years ago and some people simply can't/won't do it. And you never know who they are until it's too late. It's something every cop out there really needs to be introspective about.

The act of carrying a gun does not make you someone you're not.

Rather than do another edit, I'll add another post.

What bothers me the most is, this is something cops don't want to talk about. After the first couple of officer involved shooting I investigated, I tried to start a conversation with others about why some cops didn't shoot when faced with the same circumstances. Especially those that never even unholstered their weapons. People didn't want to get into that, I guess they felt like they would be criticizing other cops. I saw it differently and something that needed to be discussed and addressed. The department focused on the cops that did the shooting, but the ones who took no action just went about their business.

I even went to our training division and asked them about what could be done in terms of education and training, but again I got a bunch of psycho-babble and it was obvious that they were afraid of the issue too.

And we have to be careful with that too or we might get some trigger happy cops out there trying to prove they have what it takes, there's a fine line there. But the more it's out in the open, the better chance there is of everyone making it home at night.

I'll shut up now.....

Pure respect.

Its funny you mention DR. Grossman (at least thats how he introduced himself, I think he has a Phd in physcology), I actually had the PLEASURE and HONOR of attending TWO seminars he held over the years (I work near the largest AF base in the US). I still have a signed copy of his book but after all these years I never got around to reading it (I will now though).

He is an EXCELLENT speaker and VERY educated in the subject IMO so I am sure his book is well written and informative. Its been about six years since the last seminar I attended but EVERYTHING he said and explained made sense and "hit home" expecially the "physcological effects" of deadly force encounters.

In reference to the OP unsure of "what he would do" in a deadly force situation I can only say, no logical, compassionate person WANTS to take someones life. But if you do not have the "mindset" or "don't know" what you would do in a situation that would require deadly force then IMO this is not the job for you.

Its natural not to want to take a life, but in LE there may come a time when you will have to make the desicion to pull the trigger. In this day and age the chance of a deadly force encounter is becoming more likely regardless of where your a LEO. And I can tell you from
experience (I have been involved in only 2 fortunately) when it "goes down" you only have "milliseconds" to react and if you have doubts now, then I dont have to tell you what "I think" will happen if YOU have to make that choice if you already feel the way you do.

If your unsure then PLEASE, for your sake, fellow Officers and citizens PLEASE reconsider your choice to become a LEO.

I hate to sound harsh or cold but to be truthfully blunt I do not want to read the news of Officers killed when it "could have" been prevented. Even 1 LEO line of duty death is 1 too many and there are already hudreds killed every year!

In truth you are completely right when you say "you dont know how you will react until it happens", but you have to have the mindset that you WILL "do what it takes" regardless and be willing to live with the actions you had no choice but to take.

Maybe I worded my response incorrectly. What I was trying to say is that although I feel that I would react appropriately when faced with a deadly force situation, nobody can say for 100% fact that they would unless they have been in the situation themselves. While in the police academy I had alot of classmates who had never been in a physical confrontation before. I became sick of hearing them watch videos from their seat of cops in fights, and my fellow recruits would tear apart the officers actions in the video. They all made statements like, "I would have done this.....". I tried to tell them that in my experience things happen much faster in real life, and occasionally you may get caught off guard and not have time to react.

All I was trying to say is I have never been in a deadly force situation. I am aware that in adrenaline pumped situations people do weird things they never thought they would do. I have made a conscious effort to not let adrenaline take over when I get into physical confrontations.

My main question is for all of the LEO's on this board, particularly the ones that have used deadly force, do you feel there is ANYTHING somebody like me could do to be better prepared for situations like that?

I have made a conscious effort to not let adrenaline take over when I get into physical confrontations.

Adrenaline's my drug of choice. Adrenaline will save your life.



My main question is for all of the LEO's on this board, particularly the ones that have used deadly force, do you feel there is ANYTHING somebody like me could do to be better prepared for situations like that?

I wish I knew, but I'm not a psychologist nor even that much of a tactician. I did a lot of hunting as a kid and remember getting "buck fever" the first time I shot a rabbit. After that, I was okay. But I don't think hunting animals is the key here. Although I knew nothing about what others were capable of, before I went on my first patrol, I started working on the mindset that I would kill anyone I thought that might kill me.

But the fact you are aware of it and thinking about it helps loads, IMO.