Replies

in fact during that training they teach cops how to act in regards to crime when they’re off duty.....Show me factual examples of this ‘Training’.

You could look it up but you seem to want to rely on me to do it for you, even though it seems you're questioning the veracity of my comments. Cops are allowed to carrying their firearms off duty and told/taught how and when to use them off duty. For example, without, protective vest, uniform and radio to call for immediate backup, say they're in a strange jurisdiction etc, they're taught to hold back, be a good witness, call the cops, and wait for backup unless their life or the life of an innocent is at immediately risk.

They're told not to be a hero such as going into a greedy mart and witnessing a holdup, but not knowing if the holdup man has accomplices in the venue....Or going alone to investigate a burglary. No uniform, no bullet resistant vest, no radio...Very risky.

I could go on and on with examples of what cops are taught, but you're likly getting the point.

In addition, I'll include this which I lifted from some other site as I don't have time to fully educate you about what cops should do or not do while off duty.

________________________________________________

""Cops generally retain their police powers on and off duty. They can carry their firearms, badges, and whatever other equipment they choose to take with them. What they don't usually have is the immediate recognition that the uniform brings or direct radio communication with other cops.

The cop who decides to intervene in an off-duty situation runs the risk of not being recognized as a cop, or at least having someone say they didn't recognize the officer's police status. If that happens, many of the protections that on-duty police enjoy go away. A simple assault against a private citizen might be a felony if perpetrated against a police officer. If the defendant can make a plausible argument that he didn't know his victim was a police officer, he not only skates on the felony, but may even be able to raise an argument for self-defense.

On-duty cops responding to the scene are going to see a guy pointing gun or trying to overcome a private citizen. In a small-to-medium size department, everyone might know everyone else and the off-duty guy will be recognized. But if the department is a large one or the off-duty cop is outside his jurisdiction where the locals don't know who he is, he's just a guy with a gun. And we know what often happens to people with guns when the cops show up. On-duty cops may be on scene and the off-duty guy doesn't know about them. If he was on duty and had a radio, he would know when and where everyone was arriving and could coordinate tactics with them. But most cops aren't issued personal radios (they check them out of the station when they begin their work day), and even if they did, they're often too bulky to carry around comfortably. The advent of cell phones has helped with this situation, but there is still at least one intermediary (the dispatcher/call-taker) between the off-duty and the on-duty cop. This often translates to a lag of a minute or more to have a message get to its intended destination.

Officers who are "of color" are at special risk. The typical cop who rolls up on a situation and sees a member of a racial or ethnic minority pointing a gun at someone is going to assume the guy with a gun is a crook. Yes, this sounds racist, and probably is, but I think most other people (minorities included) would make the same assumption.""

in fact during that training they teach cops how to act in regards to crime when they’re off duty.....

Show me factual examples of this ‘Training’.

You asked... And even when shown in #17 and 19 ya still don't believe it and or just chose to ignore it. Get lost.