Well it's good they "got it" after a young man died because of crap training.
Additionally have you heard the comments by his parents? Amazing people, tremendous empathy for the cop.
If he had followed his training, he'd still have a job.
Well it's good they "got it" after a young man died because of crap training.
Well it's good they "got it" after a young man died because of crap training.
Additionally have you heard the comments by his parents? Amazing people, tremendous empathy for the cop.
If he had followed his training, he'd still have a job.
Additionally have you heard the comments by his parents? Amazing people, tremendous empathy for the cop.
I'm glad to see that you are familiar with the training practices of the Arlington PD. How in your mind do you square calling the Arlington PD's training "crap" when they fired the officer in training for not doing what he was being taught in said training?
You guys are creating a bit of a recursive loop here. If his training was good he would have followed it or, probably more appropriately, would have been washed out. The bottom line is that he did something he shouldn't have done, yes, but it wasn't a minor accident in protocol. So somewhere there is a breakdown in training and accountability. It's good that Arlington PD is being reactive about the situation, but that doesn't change the fact that one man is dead because of a failure of proactive policy. I will totally agree that having a reactive department is better than having an inert or regressive department.