• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Officer Safety

marinepilot81

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
108
Location
Florida Panhandle
During gun debates/discussions I'm frequently asked about "officer safety" or something similar. Instead of my typical response of "the state exists to protect the rights of people, not the power of the state", I'm just going to bring up the facts/figures.

Here are the Top 10 Most Dangerous Jobs of 2011:
10. Truck Drivers - 21.8/100,000
9. Garbage Men - 29.8/100,000
8. Roofers - 32.4/100,000
7. Mining Machine Operators - 38.7/100,000
6. Coal Miners - 38.9/100,000
5. Ranchers - 41.4/100,000
4. Misc Extraction Workers - 64.2/100,000
3. Pilots - 70.6/100,000
2. Loggers - 91.9/100,000
1. Fisherman - 116/100,000

My job is #3...and Police Officers didn't make the list.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/44344096/Most_Dangerous_Jobs_2011?slide=2
 

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
15MostDangerousJobs.png


And in the last few years the MOST deadly part of an officer's job is .... driving.

Statistics vary from year to year and depending on who's doing the researching, but the plain facts are that policing just isn't That deadly of a job.
 
Last edited:

Kivuli

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2008
Messages
208
Location
North Carolina
That's a very misleading statistic. There are plenty of jobs out there that are more inherently dangerous than long distance truck driving. The difference is in the precautions, safety measures, and training geared to avoid mishaps that is involved. A high-voltage linesman is at FAR greater risk than a garbage collector. The reason the fatality rate isn't as high is because of the safety measures involved and the overall fewer number of people doing the job. Same applies to policing.
 

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
1) If a job were to be 100% fatal to anyone who tried to perform it, but safety measures were so successful that no one performing that job had died in the last 200 years, ... then is it still a dangerous job since it's so safe?

2) The number are standardized at x/100,000 (a common method used in statistics to prevent inaccurate projections.) One has only to look at column "B" in the supplied illustration to see the x/N numbers used.

I'm not sure what you're using in place of logical thought, but I suspect it's not working out quite as well as you'd hope.
 
Last edited:

Kivuli

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2008
Messages
208
Location
North Carolina
1) If a job were to be 100% fatal to anyone who tried to perform it, but safety measures were so successful that no one performing that job had died in the last 200 years, ... then is it still a dangerous job since it's so safe?

2) The number are standardized at x/100,000 (a common method used in statistics to prevent inaccurate projections.) One has only to look at column "B" in the supplied illustration to see the x/N numbers used.

I'm not sure what you're using in place of logical thought, but I suspect it's not working out quite as well as you'd hope.

I have not at any time made a statement towards you that is insulting; even slyly so. Let's keep that mutual please.

Danger is a subjective concept, not an objective one that can be nailed down by statistics. To me, danger inherent in something is not solely determined by fatality rate. Ergo, the potential of being killed nearly instantly by a high-tension transfer line is inherently more dangerous than the potential for being struck by a car and possibly suffering severe injuries as a result.

okiebryan said:
More tow truck drivers get killed in the line of duty than police officers. We keep getting run over by people who ignore our lights on the side of the road.

The same danger exists for police officers. If your assertation is true, however, my sympathies. The death rate in this country would be much smaller if people would simply use their heads when driving a car.
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
I have not at any time made a statement towards you that is insulting; even slyly so. Let's keep that mutual please.

Danger is a subjective concept, not an objective one that can be nailed down by statistics. To me, danger inherent in something is not solely determined by fatality rate. Ergo, the potential of being killed nearly instantly by a high-tension transfer line is inherently more dangerous than the potential for being struck by a car and possibly suffering severe injuries as a result.



The same danger exists for police officers. If your assertation is true, however, my sympathies. The death rate in this country would be much smaller if people would simply use their heads when driving a car.

I see your point, but to make it real simple it's just a ratio...amount of people doing that job/by amount of deaths every job has training and people are naturally inclined for self preservation.

Policing just isn't that dangerous when you look at it that way. I spend more time in life/death situations as a contractor/construction worker than the amount of danger people most (qualifier) officers spend in "dangerous" situations.

If we were to look at how many officers, construction workers, fishermen died by their poor decisions I think we'd see a dramatic drop in all the professions.
 

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
Danger is a subjective concept, not an objective one that can be nailed down by statistics. To me, danger inherent in something is not solely determined by fatality rate. Ergo, the potential of being killed nearly instantly by a high-tension transfer line is inherently more dangerous than the potential for being struck by a car and possibly suffering severe injuries as a result.


The same danger exists for police officers. If your assertation is true, however, my sympathies. The death rate in this country would be much smaller if people would simply use their heads when driving a car.

"Danger" may be a subjective concept but "Fatality" is not a concrete concept and can easily be measured. The statistics presented measure fatalities and unless you believe in zombies there are only two states to consider, "Alive" and "Dead". Since it's one of those binary things, it's quite easy to measure, put down a 1 for dead and a 0 for not dead. Add them up and compare to the total number of persons in the industry. Divide the number of fatalities per Number of population and you come up with a figure. It's very simple, very concrete and not subject to interpretation.
 

Kivuli

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2008
Messages
208
Location
North Carolina
"Danger" may be a subjective concept but "Fatality" is not a concrete concept and can easily be measured. The statistics presented measure fatalities and unless you believe in zombies there are only two states to consider, "Alive" and "Dead". Since it's one of those binary things, it's quite easy to measure, put down a 1 for dead and a 0 for not dead. Add them up and compare to the total number of persons in the industry. Divide the number of fatalities per Number of population and you come up with a figure. It's very simple, very concrete and not subject to interpretation.

Fatality ratio, however, is not the sole measure of overall hazard. To claim otherwise is logical fallacy.

suddenvalleygunner said:
I see your point, but to make it real simple it's just a ratio...amount of people doing that job/by amount of deaths every job has training and people are naturally inclined for self preservation.

Policing just isn't that dangerous when you look at it that way. I spend more time in life/death situations as a contractor/construction worker than the amount of danger people most (qualifier) officers spend in "dangerous" situations.

Every job has training, but if the number of roofers I saw not wearing a harness while I was an electrician is any indication, the parallel cannot be drawn without also taking into account the rate at which people FOLLOW that training. I'd wager the percentage of folks in the above listed professions follow all the safety precautions given at a much lower rate than officers follow theirs.

suddenvalleygunner said:
If we were to look at how many officers, construction workers, fishermen died by their poor decisions I think we'd see a dramatic drop in all the professions.

Truer words never spoken, my friend.
 

Dreamer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
5,360
Location
Grennsboro NC
Aside from the indisputable fact that LE is nowhere near the most dangerous job in the USA, there is the additional fact that the way most LE fatalities occur has NOTHING to do with encountering violent criminals. The VAST majority of LE fatalities (or major injuries) are TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS--usually cops getting hit by unattentive drivers while they stand on the shoulder of the road during a routine traffic stop. A fair number of cops are killed in high-speed chases due to their own bad judgement, or other drivers failing to yield in time.

The number of LEOs killed in the line of duty by criminals is actually quite low, and this almost NEVER occurs during things like traffic stops, serving warrants, or routine "stop and talks". Most LE deaths that occur during interaction with criminals happen when the police have entered into a volatile situation with guns drawn and they initiate fire.

And truth be told, more cops are injured by FRIENDLY FIRE or ND incidents during training on average than by guns fired by criminals, in the US... (granted, however, that there are VERY few ND-related deaths of LEOs--but there seem to be a disturbingly growing number of ND-related deaths of LAC's, caused by LEOs...)

So if you look at the totality of deaths and major injuries in context, the simple fact emerges that most cops who get injured or killed are the victims of the negligence of non-involved people, their own negligence, or the negligence of fellow officers.

Being a cop IS dangerous--because you are constantly doing stupid, dangerous things (like waltzing about on the shoulders of major highways at night), and because you are surrounded by trigger-happy, black-suited special forces wannabees who are looking for the next excuse to justify their multi-million dollar equipment budgets...
 

ComradeV

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
428
Location
Maple Hill, North Carolina, USA
I would postulate that danger(or risk) must be looked upon objectively and via the use of statistics.

Fatality ratio is however only one statistic involved in measuring this.

One must take into account not only the probability of hazards but the inherent severity of possible risks.

Death isn't the only hazard, severe injuries that lead to permanent damage are also a factor.

The whole concept of risk mitigation in the jobs that LE perform clearly need more evaluation though.
 

Gil223

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
1,392
Location
Weber County Utah
The Data Source CAN Be Important

J'ever notice that different sources frequently report significant differences in statistical analysis of the same condition(s)? This thread provides us a good example: Marinepilot's top 10 list doesn't include LEO's anywhere... yet Fallsch's list has the LEO at 9 of 15. This is not all that unusual when we start searching for, and relying upon, statistics. About 30 percent of statisticians work for Federal, State, and local governments; private-industry employers include scientific research and development services, insurance carriers, and pharmaceutical and medicine manufacturing. A master's degree in statistics or mathematics is the minimum educational requirement for most jobs. The median annual wage-and-salary wages of statisticians is approximately $75,610.

We are most familiar with the 'pollster' as statistician... when we even have the slightest idea of who collected, analyzed and reviewed a statistical sample prior to it's publication. The pollster is essentially a 'hired gun', retained to collect data that supports the position of their employer. That may sound somewhat devious, but the practice is no different than hiring a janitor to sweep, mop, dust and empty. They both do the job they are paid to do! There are no jobs that are purely altruistic in nature any more. Altruism doesn't feed the kitty. There are 'callings' and 'hobbies' that may provide one with basic sustenance and a great sense of personal satisfaction. But, the way that we keep score in our dollars and cents world, they don't pay much.

Almost one-third of our practicing statisticians work in government and specific areas of private industry (according to one statistic, anyway). I'm guessing the other two-thirds work in professional sports, the poll taking industry, and in the "Would you like fries with that?" section of the fast food industry (alongside many law school grads and philosophy majors). How does one keep their job in almost any field of endeavor? They "go along, to get along". They recite the party line, and sing the company song. There are statistics to support any agenda - if not right this minute, then shortly after someone is hired to generate them. Math skills are required - ethics are not. Pax...
 

Kivuli

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2008
Messages
208
Location
North Carolina
Aside from the indisputable fact that LE is nowhere near the most dangerous job in the USA, there is the additional fact that the way most LE fatalities occur has NOTHING to do with encountering violent criminals. The VAST majority of LE fatalities (or major injuries) are TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS--usually cops getting hit by unattentive drivers while they stand on the shoulder of the road during a routine traffic stop. A fair number of cops are killed in high-speed chases due to their own bad judgement, or other drivers failing to yield in time.

The number of LEOs killed in the line of duty by criminals is actually quite low, and this almost NEVER occurs during things like traffic stops, serving warrants, or routine "stop and talks". Most LE deaths that occur during interaction with criminals happen when the police have entered into a volatile situation with guns drawn and they initiate fire.

And truth be told, more cops are injured by FRIENDLY FIRE or ND incidents during training on average than by guns fired by criminals, in the US... (granted, however, that there are VERY few ND-related deaths of LEOs--but there seem to be a disturbingly growing number of ND-related deaths of LAC's, caused by LEOs...)

So if you look at the totality of deaths and major injuries in context, the simple fact emerges that most cops who get injured or killed are the victims of the negligence of non-involved people, their own negligence, or the negligence of fellow officers.

Being a cop IS dangerous--because you are constantly doing stupid, dangerous things (like waltzing about on the shoulders of major highways at night), and because you are surrounded by trigger-happy, black-suited special forces wannabees who are looking for the next excuse to justify their multi-million dollar equipment budgets...

I would like to see the numbers backing these assertations up, if you have them available.

Let us for the moment go with them being true. Most LEOs killed in the line of duty are from traffic crashes. It doesn't take much suspension of disbelief to go with that one, and I'm pretty sure it's true even without seeing numbers. There's a reason for that the simple statistics don't tell. When driving a car, you can only take so many precautions to ensure your own safety. Even if you do everything humanly possible, you STILL might be the victim of someone else's poor decision. Now, do many of those officers make a poor decision themselves that leads to an accident? I'll believe many of them do (though not all). I mention that to mention this: the reason those deaths are so much higher than deaths by criminals is because you can train, equip, and prepare to mitigate armed criminal encounters FAR more effectively than you can vehicle crashes.

A lot of people intellectually understand the danger of driving a vehicle in an unsafe manner, but the vast majority of them get inside a rolling two-ton block of steel and get the warm, cozy feeling of being invincible. "Meh, that won't happen to me; I'm a good driver!", they think to themselves. So they don't take every precaution they might. Some even take outright stupid risks, be it born of impatience, inattention, or even just enjoying the "thrill". Our current crash statistics are the result.

When confronting an armed criminal, there are multitudes of precautions and tactics you can take to minimize your risk, just the same as driving. The difference is that people not only intellectually understand the inherent danger in confronting an armed criminal, they also understand it primaly. "I might get shot!", they think to themselves, so they adhere to every possible precaution they can because we all know what happens when you get shot. Thus, much more of the risk is mitigated.

However, none of that lowers the intrinsic danger of confronting an armed criminal. Truth is, people crash all the time and usually aren't injured, or if they are it isn't serious. Getting shot is FAR more likely to be a bad day than getting in a fender-bender.
 
Last edited:

Gunslinger

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
3,853
Location
Free, Colorado, USA
During gun debates/discussions I'm frequently asked about "officer safety" or something similar. Instead of my typical response of "the state exists to protect the rights of people, not the power of the state", I'm just going to bring up the facts/figures.

Here are the Top 10 Most Dangerous Jobs of 2011:
10. Truck Drivers - 21.8/100,000
9. Garbage Men - 29.8/100,000
8. Roofers - 32.4/100,000
7. Mining Machine Operators - 38.7/100,000
6. Coal Miners - 38.9/100,000
5. Ranchers - 41.4/100,000
4. Misc Extraction Workers - 64.2/100,000
3. Pilots - 70.6/100,000
2. Loggers - 91.9/100,000
1. Fisherman - 116/100,000

My job is #3...and Police Officers didn't make the list.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/44344096/Most_Dangerous_Jobs_2011?slide=2

#3 quickly becomes #1 if combat is included. The most dangerous "job" in the world was flying over Hanoi during the war--still the most heavily defended air space in history.
 

OldCurlyWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2010
Messages
907
Location
Oklahoma
No "suspension of disbelief" required, just less than a minute with a web-search engine.

gr-officer-deaths-300.gif

Source: National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund
Credit: Robert Benincasa and Alyson Hurt/NPR


But how many of those Firearms fatalities are self inflicted? LE has a quite high suicide rate.

33 years ago when I was entering LE and was buying Life Insurance, my agent asked what I had done before LE. When I answered what I had been doing, he replied that if I were still doing some of my previous occupations, he could not write an insurance policy for me. Compared to LE they were considered very dangerous.
 

Xulld

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2010
Messages
159
Location
Florida
A danger is a risk. The greatest risk one can take is with ones life, you simply having nothing more you can loose once you loose your life.

That is why fatalities as a measure of danger is perfectly cogent, and logical.

There are plenty of other dangers, but none more severe.
 
Last edited:

ManInBlack

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2006
Messages
1,551
Location
SW Idaho
The "officer safety" excuse is a total canard and fallacy. Not only do police officers not have an especially dangerous job, even if they did, one would presume that police are paid precisely to assume risks the rest of the population is not required to (and paid quite handsomely, when one factors in benefits). There is no draft for police officers in this country; they may come and go as they please. If a particular police officer finds himself too scared to treat each person encountered as a citizen with rights to be protected, rather than as a civilian to be ordered into compliance, he should seek other employment, preferably in the productive sector.
 
Top