• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Active Shooter In NS. April 19 2020

Yeah a soldier in a car driving by would have made all the difference.

edit because I was derailing even myself
 
Yeah a soldier in a car driving by would have made all the difference.

That's not my point at all. If you don't understand, ask questions.

I was expressing the difference between a civilian police officer and soldier. As they (we) are the only ones with unlimited liability.
 
It’s not. I know.

The unlimited liability concept doesn’t work in any other context but military. There are four people not 400. And your objectives aren’t the same.

There are plenty of Mounties charging into danger. I’m working the honours forms for several.

I also have worked with enough guys with bad limbs from taking rounds that I remain convinced that we don’t need a concept of unlimited liability while we still have people showing up and doing their duty,

You will, and I’m not saying anything about this situation, have cowards in every type of uniform. Even where they have unlimited liability.
 
Remember a few years back when the Québec Hell's Angels were deliberately targeting members of the law enforcement community? That's pretty damned close to unlimited liability in application but not name.

Up to but not including.
 
I find that the term "unlimited liability" gets used too much as an excuse crutch. It comes with terms and conditions also.....

You don't follow the order to jump off the building just because we only brought 5 ropes and the parade commander wanted 6 rappellers.
 
I find that the term "unlimited liability" gets used too much as an excuse crutch. It comes with terms and conditions also.....

You don't follow the order to jump off the building just because we only brought 5 ropes and the parade commander wanted 6 rappellers.

Its the legal term use another if you'd like.

Accepting Unlimited Liability
Unlimited liability is a concept derived strictly from a professional understanding of the military function. As such, all members accept and understand that they are subject to being lawfully ordered into harm’s way under conditions that could lead to the loss of their lives.

CAF members are compelled to follow the lawful commands of their superiors. Your example is not only hyperbolic but would be unlawful.
 
Its the legal term use another if you'd like.



CAF members are compelled to follow the lawful commands of their superiors. Your example is not only hyperbolic but would be unlawful.
Just saying it gets used like a billy club in debates it has no reason to be in.....
 
When military folk debate with LEO's...."oh yea, well we have unlimited liability and have to follow orders."
As you yourself pointed out above, no you don't...
 
When military folk debate with LEO's...."oh yea, well we have unlimited liability and have to follow orders."
As you yourself pointed out above, no you don't...

I think the difference is when I/C section base orders a team to enter a space and stop the ingress of water, that is a lawful command; and the expectation is that injury or death is acceptable in completion of that task, and refusal of that task for fear of injury or death or any other reason is punishable.

But to be honest its two very different professions and its not a fair comparison. One is meant to preserve peace and order and the other is meant to establish it through violence.
 
Small anecdote. Years ago when they started active shooter training at OPS it was passed on to me via a few people I know that there that a lot of members did not want that training as they didn’t want to have to go in and engage. Apparently anyone with military experience was keen on it though.

We should note when we had an active shooter on parliament hill a few short years ago we saw video evidence of a lot of RCMP members heading towards where the gunfire and shooting was happening.

I think military types bring up Unlimited liability because it’s a known concept to us and it’s hard to conceive that certain jobs like firefighting, LEOs or what not don’t have that same concept. To be honest I think civilians think the same way, that police should charge in headstrong regardless of danger.

We can point to UL as something unique to the military but I think we need to recognize that it is that. Unique. And not try to project that onto other professions. Not saying anyone is but just something to keep in mind.
 
Small anecdote. Years ago when they started active shooter training at OPS it was passed on to me via a few people I know that there that a lot of members did not want that training as they didn’t want to have to go in and engage. Apparently anyone with military experience was keen on it though.

We should note when we had an active shooter on parliament hill a few short years ago we saw video evidence of a lot of RCMP members heading towards where the gunfire and shooting was happening.

I think military types bring up Unlimited liability because it’s a known concept to us and it’s hard to conceive that certain jobs like firefighting, LEOs or what not don’t have that same concept. To be honest I think civilians think the same way, that police should charge in headstrong regardless of danger.

We can point to UL as something unique to the military but I think we need to recognize that it is that. Unique. And not try to project that onto other professions. Not saying anyone is but just something to keep in mind.

Very fair. Well said.
 
I think the difference is when I/C section base orders a team to enter a space and stop the ingress of water, that is a lawful command; and the expectation is that injury or death is acceptable in completion of that task, and refusal of that task for fear of injury or death is punishable.

But to be honest its two very different professions and its not a fair comparison. One is meant to preserve peace and order and the other is meant to establish it through violence.
Mm hm. And even at that, police do go, time and time again, into really dangerous situations alone or with minimal backup. Moncton involved several members killed in individual interactions while trying to stop an active shooter. Fredericton, similarly. And lots more where police simply win the fight without taking casualties, so the public doesn’t notice it.

So it’s not that police aren’t frequently and selflessly standing into danger. It’s just that that last step to ‘unlimited liability’, being ordered into a tactically necessary death, isn’t a thing.
 
Mm hm. And even at that, police do go, time and time again, into really dangerous situations alone or with minimal backup. Moncton involved several members killed in individual interactions while trying to stop an active shooter. Fredericton, similarly. And lots more where police simply win the fight without taking casualties, so the public doesn’t notice it.

So it’s not that police aren’t frequently and selflessly standing into danger. It’s just that that last step to ‘unlimited liability’, being ordered into a tactically necessary death, isn’t a thing.

Absolutely and that's why police make huge salaries. Their job is often more in harms way than CAF members. No debate. And that's also why the expectation of the public is that they will stride toward danger and lay down their lives. Perhaps we need more education on the role of police, or we need to renegotiate their responsibilities and liabilities.

My dad spent decades with CSC starting as a CX and working his way up to Warden. You couldn't pay me enough to do that job. That job nearly killed him.
 
And I pretty much loved my 32 years(except for obvious certain moments) of the job.

Different strokes....
 
Absolutely and that's why police make huge salaries.
While I disagree about the word "huge", there's a whole other thread on this topic.
Their job is often more in harms way than CAF members. No debate. And that's also why the expectation of the public is that they will stride toward danger and lay down their lives.
The public only thinks about the physical harm. Emotional harm and moral harm are the real long term hazards that go unseen on the nightly news.
Perhaps we need more education on the role of police....
Blame Hollywood for that. The hero cop. The glorious death in the line of duty. Saving the mom and child from a predator who looks like Jack Nicholson with one shot, one kill.

Sometimes the job is like looking into a garbage can full of snakes.
 
While I disagree about the word "huge", there's a whole other thread on this topic.

Of the 1065 people listed in the sunshine list for the HRM 454 of them are listed as police.


Seem like good pay to me. Feel free to split this.


The public only thinks about the physical harm. Emotional harm and moral harm are the real long term hazards that go unseen on the nightly news.

Absolutely, and our injured officers should be looked after.

Blame Hollywood for that. The hero cop. The glorious death in the line of duty. Saving the mom and child from a predator who looks like Jack Nicholson with one shot, one kill.

Sometimes the job is like looking into a garbage can full of snakes.

There are points in our careers (Police, Military, Fire ect) when you suck back and realize this is what we singed up to do and this is why the crown or tax payer has paid us. When in those situations we need to make peace, find internal courage and carry on with the task. Sometimes we carry those situations with us for life. Either way its what we're paid to do. All services like these should have robust aftercare packages that accompany the wounded for life.
 
Last edited:
Of the 1065 people listed in the sunshine list for the HRM 454 of them are listed as police.
With OT because of staffing shortages, unforeseen events etc. I see this as normal. Happens all the time in my agency.
Absolutely, and our injured officers should be looked after.
and
There are points in our careers (Police, Military, Fire ect) when you suck back and realize this is what we singed up to do and this is why the crown or tax payer has paid us. When in those situations we need to make peace, find internal courage and carry on with the task. Sometimes we carry those situations with us for life. Either way its what we're paid to do.

While I agree with both your points, my reply was about how we (police, fire, EMS, CBSA etc.), as a profession, have public opinion of us shaped by the entertainment industry to our detriment. Thankfully, the Canadian entertainment industry hasn't made another attempt to glamorize the CAF in the same way since Bunker and Hyena Road.

All services like these should have robust aftercare packages that accompany the wounded for life.
YMMV
 
Back
Top