Originally Posted by
Stephanie Gibson
From: ToddGarrison <tgarrison@northportpd.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 8, 2018 9:22 AM
To: Peter Lear <plear@cityofnorthport.com>
Cc: Christopher Morales <cmorales@northportpd.com>
Subject: Re: Please Say 'No, Not Now' to the Armored Rescue Vehicle
Good morning sir! Here is my response tothe below matter. Maybe this could be read or shared to the public on Tuesday?I unfortunately cannot make it due to final obligations with Lee County.
Sir,
Asthe incoming Chief of Police, I have spent the last several months followingthe process involving the armored rescue vehicle and body worn cameras, beingrequested by Interim Chief of Police, Chris Morales. I have watched theonline meetings, followed the social media threads, and participated in personat the meet and greet answering these specific questions. I feelconfident that I understand the need for this piece of equipment, andunderstand the public comments, both for and against this vehicle. However, as the future leader of this organization, I feel it isimperative that I voice my position in this matter.
Lawenforcement agencies across this country need to train and prepare for allscenarios. We prepare for the worst and pray for the best and safest outcomes;but the sad reality is, sometimes tragic things happen. We need to lookacross this country and see how many tragic events have unfolded over the pastseveral years. These tragedies have affected big and small America, so tosay “why do we need this here in North Port,” I would answer, “why wouldn’twe?” With that being said, we as a community need to do everything possible toensure the safety of the public, first responders, and law enforcement as awhole. That means the best training, the best equipment, and the bestresources.
Wecannot rely on mutual aid assets in times of need. When you rely on otheragencies’ assets, you have no control over the availability of those assets,and in an emergency situation, the last thing you want to be doing is searchingfor a rescue vehicle during a crisis. Here in North Port, we have atrained Special Response Team that is subject to and exposed to armed violentindividuals. Without the availability of an armored rescue vehicle, weare potentially going to subject our police officers’ safety in order for themto carry out their required mission. I’m not going to get into the debateof SRT versus SWAT in this email; however, I will tell you that even if we wereholding a location for a mutual aid SWAT call out, our police officers would bevery close to the threat, maintaining an inner perimeter. I can attestfrom personal firsthand experience, that NO tree is big enough, nor can you getsmall enough, when gunshots are fired in your direction. I’ve been on thefront line and in harm’s way not long ago...before law enforcement agencieseven had the availability of armored rescue vehicles. I can tell you thatour tactical safety changed tremendously once my agency purchased an armoredrescue vehicle. Although the vehicle didn’t eliminate all safetyconcerns, it most certainly provided a layer of protection second to none.
Inresponse to the public opinion of an armored vehicle being a “tank”, I have tosay I adamantly oppose that characterization. The primary purpose of atank is to provide heavy fire power to frontline combat and to destroy alongthe way. This totally contradicts the purpose of an armored rescuevehicle. These vehicles’ primary purpose is for rescue and refuge, andnot for destruction. They are designed to protect the lives of victims,officers, and even suspects. There are so many examples of “proof oflife” stories all across America involving the use of these vehicles, and ifneed be, those examples can be highlighted later.
Allthroughout the process to become the Chief of Police, I have stated, and willmaintain, that I want the NPPD to continue being a community policing agency. Our primary focus will be to deliver police service while establishingand maintaining community partnerships. The request to have an armoredrescue vehicle is not an act to militarize our police force, or to deviate fromthe 21st Century Policing Model, but simply it is a tool to protect lives. I do not believe Interim Chief Morales is prioritizing the armored rescuevehicle over body worn cameras. I watched the BWC presentation and havetalked regularly with Interim Chief Morales about the implementation of theBWC. The city is moving forward with the evaluation phase and I stronglyagree with the implementation of BWC.
Historyhas proven that police officers run toward gunfire, and will continue to do so,putting their lives on the line to “serve and protect.” We, as acommunity, need to provide these guardians with the necessary tools andequipment to maintain the community’s safety and the safety of our firstresponders.
Inclosing, I strongly support Interim Chief Morales’ request for an armoredrescue vehicle, and hope that my position is clearly stated.
Respectfully,
ToddR. Garrison
IncomingChief of Police