Hello from NIGHT RANGER

[NIGHT RANGER]

I have heard nothing on the handcuffing issue lately?

I handcuffed two today, because they are criminals who if let loose would hurt civilains citizens I was sworn to protect. I case noted it and expect no further issues.

Actually never been big on it, but here in Miami we just are status que nothing has changed.

The idea of the handcuffing and all other issues are left to the supervisor. The sups fail to see that they are the scapegoats and will be fired if something goes wrong. PC arrest is the same way. Policy says one thing but verbal guidance is the rule.

I am a sup in Miami. I follow policy because it is what will protect me at any grievance hearing from disiplinary action. Verbal guidance? Please, there is no such thing. If it is not in black-n-white, it does not happen. If the circuit office tells me to do something contrary to written PPD, I ask for them to put it in writing. You know what, they never do. This handcuffing thing has been blown way out of proportion in other parts of the State. Just follow the PPD and try not to be too gung-ho about it.

[VOPman]

Try not to be "gung ho?" I guess that's the same advice you would have given to Victorino's P.O.?

This playing around with offenders is unprofessional, inconsistent, and dangerous. By not handcuffing all offenders under arrest, I can forsee a possibility where an offender could successfully sue FDC for discrimination. Arresting someone is a very serious affair. By doing so, you are taking away the liberty of a known criminal. Sure, 99% of all the handcuffing that we do is under compliance, so I can see where an amateur might ask, why should we handcuff at all, but keep in mind, 99% of all handcuffing that cops do is also under compliance. What do you guys think result if cops were required to make a "judgement call" about which arrestees to cuff?

Judges are paid to make educated guesses and take risks on the possibility of future victimization. They are also protected from liability if more victims are created because they released someone. We are neither paid as well nor do we have the constitutional protection.

And don't spew that crap about being protected by policy. 4 people were fired in Deltona over a policy that did not exist until afterwards.

[NIGHT RANGER]

You know, it is not professional the way we have to deal with offenders when making an arrest. We have to do a song and dance and act like we are not going to make an arrest when in fact they are getting arrested. Also, the practice is so unsafe. Ironically, I have found it to be safer to make an arrest out in the field. DOC really needs to figure out who it is!

Taking someones freedom is something to take very seriously.

What I meant by try not be gung-ho is cuffing the 50 year old first time offender on for staeling money from her former employer while she was running his books who hasn't paid restitution nin 3 months :twisted: What circuit do you work in anyways? The firings in Deltona were wrong, period. The administration that did it is gone. The bottom line is, if you follow a verbal order that is contrary to policy and something goes wron, do you really think the one who gave you that order is going to admit it? No, they're going to lie, say they never told you, and ask you what the policy is. So far, the policy on cuffing has not changed, been updated or re-written. If Scala is telling you guys up there something different verbally, and one of your idiots does something stupid because you didn't cuff them, good luck!

[VOPman]

Firstly, I disagree. The firings in Deltona were the most correct thing FDC has done in a while, but not for the reasons that they stated. They were fired, so it has been published, for not complying with policy regarding a timely report. They should have been fired for merely failing to make even the slightest attempt to protect the public by, at least, attempting to arrest Victorino upon contact.

Next: 50 year old first time offender. Who cares what they are on for, what the vOP is, or what their prior record is. An arrest is an arrest. Not handcuffing everybody is discrimination, plain and simple.

Once we decide to arrest, then everyone should get the same treatment. Remember, every murderer was once an adorable, innocent child and they all have to start with their first victim. Let's pray they do not choose the unsuspecting P.O. who is going to take away their freedom without restraining them immediately.

It's almost hilarious reading these posts from people who oppose cuffing or talk the anti-cuffing rhetoric. The rules are simple. Just like driving. If you get behind the wheel and crank up the engine you are required to put your seat belt on before you drive away. There's no judgement call.....hmmm...maybe I shouldn't buckle up today because my car is a little old and it's small. Now doesn't that sound silly? Car, keys, buckle up drive. Same for felons.....criminal, probable cause for violation, cuff and stuff. This is not a hard concept folks. The only judgement call I see is whether or not there's probable cause he's in violation....once there's probable cause the rest should be automatic....cuff, stuff, send VR to Court. This is a no-brainer.....It's a shame we have people that try to muddy the waters.....this is why I think DOC needs to drug test the staff.

Funny, when I was a "real cop" many years back we handcuffed EVERYONE we were arresting no matter what they did, from stealing a six-pack of beer to murdering their spouse. It didn't matter who they were, what their age was, what their background was. An arrest is an arrest, and to handcuff, as we were taught, "is for your protection and mine". We also did it during a search, just to separate folks while we tried to figure out what was going on, etc. (Sort of like how we handcuff them when we search their residence.)

Each handcuffed offender now receives that casenote along with my BS explanation (to please the masses) of why I felt threatened. Funny, but I can feel threatened in a variety of ways, none of which can be disputed by a supervisor. I don't ask to handcuff, never have, never will. I tell the sup I'm going to do it and why. I casenote EVERYTHING to protect me, my supervisor and the offender. If I get fired for doing so, but I can go home alive and in one peice, then so be it. I'll find another job, because I'll be living to do so.

AMEN!

Amen I Say to you , Amen :roll:

In our office we just duct tape the offender to the chair until law enforcement arrives to transport- we got tired of jumping through hoops to get our cuffs back :lol:

We just send them green postcards like the sheriff does and tell them to turn themselves in. Solves all problems :oops:

well i feel we should never hand cuff and most of us dont in c12.

the current policy will make. I pray no officer dies over the uncuffed offender pulling out a weapon and shooting you.

If an offender is going to shoot you at the office, it would most likely happen when you open up the lobby door and say "Hey Joe Blow let me get that WMR"- captive audience= you and easy exit= office door 2 feet away. I don't know about you, but in my circuit, it is against policy to have your weapon on your person while in the office. I'm not saying that an offender is never going to bring a weapon into the office or that a shooting will never go down- I know anything can happen and I also know that my firearm is in a locked gun box in my supervisor's office. I've been doing this a long time and I do handcuff when I feel there is a need. Since we started handcuffing, some officers at every turn, word has spread with our offenders and the rate at which we have had runners and confrontations has increased. There is more than one way to look at this situation is my point and no absolute answer.

[Darth Duck]

The emperor needs to issue a clear cut one sentence policy: either all offender's are handcuffed while being arrested without exception or clearly say let em go don't get in their way. The way they have it you could run in to the wrong administrator and end up on the PDC hit parade. Personally cuff them all, but don't tell Parrot head I said that, he thinks I am a social worker.

That's Parrothead (one word) Dark Lord. And no, I don't think you're a social worker, just mistook you for one. By the way, my wife is one and makes $60.00 an hour (F.Y.I.). I'm with you, CUFF EM ALL! :twisted:

It warms my heart to see Darth Duck and Parrothead join flocks! :lol: