Chief Garisson on ARV and BWCs
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 24
 
  1. #1
    Senior Member LEO Affairs Captain
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    1,283

    Chief Garisson on ARV and BWCs

    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

  2. #2
    Unregistered
    Guest
    As a retired LE Administrator (not NPPD) from a very large agency in Florida, I can tell you Chief Garrison is spot on in his assessment. I'm sure he wishes, just like I did, that we would never need to purchase one of these types of vehicle. Unfortunately, those that wish to do harm to others, it has become necessary. We can't put a price on a life.


    Quote Originally Posted by Stephanie Gibson View Post
    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

  3. #3
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    As a retired LE Administrator (not NPPD) from a very large agency in Florida, I can tell you Chief Garrison is spot on in his assessment. I'm sure he wishes, just like I did, that we would never need to purchase one of these types of vehicle. Unfortunately, those that wish to do harm to others, it has become necessary. We can't put a price on a life.
    If's, well maybe, it could happen cant put a price on a life , and all that scare rhetoric amounts to simply this, reality is no matter how we as the public feels CM is going to get his toy, a year from now when well it will be on the new chief, if he is still around,we have seen this 300 grand vehicle sitting in the back lot, rusting. It is kind of ironic that a Captain in the LCSO who are notorious for being aggressive no nonsense deputies would use the statement we cannot rely on mutual aid, just like Ft Myers never relies on the LCSO, but they work together daily. Lets face it, nothing, nada is going to change here, Garrison was picked over many more qualified candidates for a reason, he will play ball, its just that simple. He will be the chief up until the end of VC term and she will fire him and appoint CM. 300 grand, what the he11, we will lose 600 grand a year on the pool. Life goes on

  4. #4
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Stephanie Gibson View Post
    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
    Anybody who is involved in Law Enforcement in SW Fla knows that the LCSO does not subscribe to body cameras or car dash cameras. Lee County is a very aggressive dept but one with a dinosaur mentality. There is no transparency and everything is no comment. So now that the Einstein's running this city have hired a Captain from the LCSO lets really see if he delivers or descends NPPD back to the dark ages , No cameras, no videos, no accountability , no comment.

  5. #5
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Anybody who is involved in Law Enforcement in SW Fla knows that the LCSO does not subscribe to body cameras or car dash cameras. Lee County is a very aggressive dept but one with a dinosaur mentality. There is no transparency and everything is no comment. So now that the Einstein's running this city have hired a Captain from the LCSO lets really see if he delivers or descends NPPD back to the dark ages , No cameras, no videos, no accountability , no comment.
    You might want to educate yourself on the matter. Many large agencies in Florida do NOT have body cams due to the huge cost to implement and other factors. Lee County SO is the 8th most populated county in the State of Florida. The cost is huge to implement. Even larger counties (than Lee) such as Pinellas, Hillsborough, and Palm Beach counties do not have body cams. Agencies such as Tampa PD, St Petersburg PD and others that are much larger than NPPD do not have body cams (Tampa PD has been testing them in a very small sample size). Just because an agency doesn't have body cams does not equate to a dinosaur mentality. It actually shows the posters lack of knowledge in law enforcement as well as body cam implementation. It shows something the incoming chief supports body cams when the vast majority of agencies in Florida do not use them. As of earlier this year, only 89 agencies in Florida used them. 20 of those were Sheriff's Offices. That is right only 20 of the 67 counties use them. It would be easy for Chief Garrison to say we will wait and see on the cameras but he has come out in favor of them. That speaks volumes. Learn a little on the subject before bashing this agency and other agencies for how they do things. No agency is perfect. You have no idea the dynamics agency leaders have to deal with in other cities and/or counties. Stop being reckless in your posts. Take some time and do research and make educated posts.

  6. #6
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Here we go! This sounds like the same old shit. It is a f-ing tank dude! This is North Port not Rampart. We need men and women and if you want a good swat team then work with the Sheriff and get back on the team with them. To implement a swat team and pay for equipment and training is not necessary RIGHT NOW. We can't even fill the zones. It is not the purchase of the TANK that some dispute it is the timing and priority. This town is hurting from all angles. New Chief hear me out. Let it go please and come in take of the million of other things first.

  7. #7
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    You might want to educate yourself on the matter. Many large agencies in Florida do NOT have body cams due to the huge cost to implement and other factors. Lee County SO is the 8th most populated county in the State of Florida. The cost is huge to implement. Even larger counties (than Lee) such as Pinellas, Hillsborough, and Palm Beach counties do not have body cams. Agencies such as Tampa PD, St Petersburg PD and others that are much larger than NPPD do not have body cams (Tampa PD has been testing them in a very small sample size). Just because an agency doesn't have body cams does not equate to a dinosaur mentality. It actually shows the posters lack of knowledge in law enforcement as well as body cam implementation. It shows something the incoming chief supports body cams when the vast majority of agencies in Florida do not use them. As of earlier this year, only 89 agencies in Florida used them. 20 of those were Sheriff's Offices. That is right only 20 of the 67 counties use them. It would be easy for Chief Garrison to say we will wait and see on the cameras but he has come out in favor of them. That speaks volumes. Learn a little on the subject before bashing this agency and other agencies for how they do things. No agency is perfect. You have no idea the dynamics agency leaders have to deal with in other cities and/or counties. Stop being reckless in your posts. Take some time and do research and make educated posts.
    Stop, your BS, Wait before you do that, I really don't care, this is about NP, no where else. Think this is a financial matter or hmm maybe just maybe they do not want videos floating around. Oh yes before I forget NPPD is not getting there cameras until they purchase the expensive BEARCAT, and we will see just when they get them and if. The posters knowledge, ok Einstein, this is the real world, the feds have given grants for the cameras and yet none in NP wonder why ?, Maybe because the dash cam footage for released incidents didn't make them look so 21st century. Of course this hinges on just how long the new chief lasts !!!!!!

  8. #8
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Stop, your BS, Wait before you do that, I really don't care, this is about NP, no where else. Think this is a financial matter or hmm maybe just maybe they do not want videos floating around. Oh yes before I forget NPPD is not getting there cameras until they purchase the expensive BEARCAT, and we will see just when they get them and if. The posters knowledge, ok Einstein, this is the real world, the feds have given grants for the cameras and yet none in NP wonder why ?, Maybe because the dash cam footage for released incidents didn't make them look so 21st century. Of course this hinges on just how long the new chief lasts !!!!!!
    I have spoken to the new chief several times. Body cams ARE COMING.

  9. #9
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Stop, your BS, Wait before you do that, I really don't care, this is about NP, no where else. Think this is a financial matter or hmm maybe just maybe they do not want videos floating around. Oh yes before I forget NPPD is not getting there cameras until they purchase the expensive BEARCAT, and we will see just when they get them and if. The posters knowledge, ok Einstein, this is the real world, the feds have given grants for the cameras and yet none in NP wonder why ?, Maybe because the dash cam footage for released incidents didn't make them look so 21st century. Of course this hinges on just how long the new chief lasts !!!!!!
    I guess compared to you I am Einstein. You are the one that mentioned LCSO having a dinosaur mentality. You brought another agency into the equation. I was simply enlightening you that only a very small percentage of law enforcement agencies have body cameras. I would hardly consider that dinosaur mentality. Pinellas, Palm Beach SO's wold hardly be considered dinosaur. Vehicles like a Bearcat can save lives. Cameras don't. Although I am all for Cameras. No agency the size of North Port should or need to rely on another agency for something as simple as a rescue vehicle.

    No go back and read your posts carefully. Articulate a well written article and we can have a discussion. Otherwise to now deflect and say you don't care what other agencies do and this is North Port is just a cop out. Take some time and do some reading comprehension, form a well thought out statement based on logical reasoning.

  10. #10
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    I guess compared to you I am Einstein. You are the one that mentioned LCSO having a dinosaur mentality. You brought another agency into the equation. I was simply enlightening you that only a very small percentage of law enforcement agencies have body cameras. I would hardly consider that dinosaur mentality. Pinellas, Palm Beach SO's wold hardly be considered dinosaur. Vehicles like a Bearcat can save lives. Cameras don't. Although I am all for Cameras. No agency the size of North Port should or need to rely on another agency for something as simple as a rescue vehicle.

    No go back and read your posts carefully. Articulate a well written article and we can have a discussion. Otherwise to now deflect and say you don't care what other agencies do and this is North Port is just a cop out. Take some time and do some reading comprehension, form a well thought out statement based on logical reasoning.
    Well said!

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •