Law Enforcement Organizations in T2K

[Raellus]

Something Web posted in another thread got me thinking again about what civilian law enforcement would look like in the Twilight World, especially here in the States.

I wonder what the average quality of civilian law enforcement organizations would be like in the later years of the war (after the TDM, in particular). In the U.S., I wonder what proportion of law enforcement officers are reservists or National Guard. In the event of WWIII, most of those men and women who are would be called up to active duty. In addition to recalled reservists and activated guardsmen, a lot of younger, patriotic officers, deputies, patrolmen, etc. would likely voluntarily enlist (I don't know if/how the draft would apply to folks in law enforcement). In other words, the creme-de-la-creme would be skimmed off by the armed forces. Who would be left behind?

Furthermore, attrition in large cities, especially ones hit by nukes, would be high for law enforcement and other first responders. As MilGov and CivGov snipe at each other, and organized militia groups like New America step up their violent activities, this attrition would only increase. Just dealing with looters and street gangs would take its toll. Add all of these factors up, and what are you left with? Worst case scenario is that law enforcement in the U.S. c.2000 would be the dregs of its pre-war self. In some spots, orgnanized local government law enforcement might be altogether absent. In others, what serves as law enforcement might be just as bad as the local criminal elements (if not worse).

Currently, here in S. Arizona, a couple of county sheriffs are only a few steps removed from fledgling marauder bosses. Sherriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County (made famous by making county inmates wear pink undies and jumpsuits) is being investigated by the Justice Department for various Civil Rights Law infringements/violations. In some ways, he's only a few short steps removed from a feudal lord. I can only imagine what he'd do if the Feds were distracted by a world war. Just recently, conservative Republlican Sherriff Paul Babeau of Pinal County gave up his run for senate when a illegal immigrant male lover reported that Babeau threatened to have him deported if he left him or told anyone about the affair.

This is a pretty pesimistic projection, I know, but it doesn't seem too far fetched to imagine some parts of the country starting to look like one of the sets from Mad Max.

What do you think?

[weswood]

I seem to remember from my reservists days that certain proffessions, law enforcement & firemen specifically, can turn down or maybe not be called up at all.

[Targan]

I think that during the Twilight War and particularly after the TDM, many retired police officers would return to the force (too old to enlist in the military or be drafted but still well able to perform law enforcement duties).

[TrailerParkJawa]

I think pre-war police forces would be rare. Perhaps little towns in Jericho might stay intact. But for a big city like San Jose not very likely any pre-war organziation and structure would survive.

Justice will be local and probably brutal. Even if its dealt out my the equivelant of the town Sheriff or local neigborhood watch

[Webstral]

There are a lot of variables. We have the example of Manhattan, where municipal government has collapsed completely. But we know that the actual Mayor of New York continues to hold office in the Bronx (I think). The surviving cops probably are much rougher and readier than they ever used to be in every part of the country. However, in communities where order remains there needs to be a means of enforcing the law that is more sophisticated than having Joe Militiaman butt stroke folks to the ground.

[Tombot]

Originally Posted by Targan

I think that during the Twilight War and particularly after the TDM, many retired police officers would return to the force (too old to enlist in the military or be drafted but still well able to perform law enforcement duties).

Yep, i guess thats right. The return of the older cops as a cadre for building up the militias. Which do both; policework and defense of the local grainstore from marauders.
And public hangings, since the TV-entertainment must be substituted somehow.

[Medic]

I believe, the law enforcement would pretty much turn back to the Wild West style. It might be, there are no pros left, so the communities elect the best/most popular candidate or someone just takes up the job without consulting his fellow residents. And since there is not going to be judges around too much either, the result is most probably going to be the "sheriff" acting as judge, jury and executioner. If he has no actual training as a peace officer, innocent casualties are more than expected.

Quoting an old Beetle Bailey strip where Chaplain Staneglass tells Brigadier General Amos T. Halftrack "If power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely." Having seen this happen even outside huge (inter)national emergencies, I tend to think, those people who most covet the positions of power are those who should be the last to have them...

[Webstral]

Almost every variation imaginable is likely to be found in post-Exchange America and across the globe.

[Medic]

Most certainly, globally there is some variation due to e differences of local histories. For an example, in Finland you would probably not find just a single "sheriff", but the community as a whole might work in unison to capture perpetrators. Or then, you might find a local magistrate, nimismies. Or there might be a regional unit that used to guard the important buildings and resources in the area and assumed the local police authority, possibly integrating the local police in to their ranks.

[kalos72]

A standard police office is really not much to worry about and would just be another "thug" in most respects.

Now SWAT members are another story...utilize those guys in a storyline and you have some real challenges for the PC's.

[oldschoolgm]

I agree that there are a whole lot of factors that play into how and what police forces would like. A few of points come to my mind.

1. Does the police force exist in a town or city where the populace are organized into a militia or sorts?
2. Are the police the only form of security for a community?
3. What kind environmental factors exist in and around the communities?

I tend to agree that a lot of the younger military age officers won't be around, but for more rural communities I would think the local authorities (cops and sheriffs) will be a bit more militarized as well as extremely prejudiced with regards to the communities and people they are protecting. It wouldn't be surprising to see some municipalities going back to old west style justice, but I can also see small rural towns having paramilitary police forces.

Now the proximity of military units, marauders, large nomadic gangs and such would probably have a big effect on what this would look like.

I also think it would be a bad assumption to think that a lone cop would not be dangerous. If a cop or sheriff has survived to 2001 with only a handgun and shotgun to protect people from marauders and gangs and such, he is probably a lot more resourceful than a soldier that has come to rely on his unit members and fully automatic weapons.

My 2 cents.

[Canadian Army]

Here are couple of things to keep in mind:

1.) The average sheriff's department in the United States employs 24.5 sworn officers.

and

2.) Currently their are roughly 58,000 federal law enforcement officers operating throughout the United States and in San Juan, Puerto Rico; who would be available in aftermath of the nuclear attack.

3.) Historically, the sheriff was also commander of the militia in that county. In Twilight you could see the local sheriff or the local State Trooper Commander holding a commission in the State Guard; after all how would the State Guard recruit and screen new members without help of local law enforcement.

[Legbreaker]

Here in Australia I think in regional centres not a lot would change, although fuel is likely to be limited and horse patrols probably become more common than vehicle borne. Fuel would be reserved for emergencies.
The cities are on the other hand likely to suffer badly from nukes, particularly Sydney, Melbourne, Newcastle, Wollongong, and perhaps Adelaide, Darwin, Brisbane, and Perth.
Army reserve units as well as 1st Armoured Regiment would be tasked with assisting the Police and other emergency services in and around the cities. Again, with fuel having to be rationed (nukes having taken out the refineries to deny NATO, particularly those western forces in Korea), much of the day to day work would be done on foot.
Civilian ownership and use of oil based fuels and lubricates would be strictly rationed to those who can prove a genuine need (farmers, food transportation, medical staff, and the like). Martial law may need to be implemented in some areas (particularly those with military units assisting the police, or around vital installations and facilities).

After a few months, perhaps a year, civilians may be "drafted" into the police, and receive a brief training course. These draftees would probably be used for administrative tasks, guarding of prisoners, and other relatively simple jobs, freeing up the fully trained police for the streets. Likewise, there's likely to be a influx of volunteers to the military, perhaps just so they can guarantee being fed each day, or in the hopes of being sent to Korea (the only conflict zone outside Australia and New Guinea) to give the Ruskies a little payback.

It's unlikely we'd see any deputisations here - it's a completely different culture when it comes to law enforcement to the US. Only those who have received training would be allowed to act as police and carry a weapon, although everyone would be encouraged to assist where possible with information on criminal activities.

[James Langham]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Here in Australia I think in regional centres not a lot would change, although fuel is likely to be limited and horse patrols probably become more common than vehicle borne. Fuel would be reserved for emergencies.
The cities are on the other hand likely to suffer badly from nukes, particularly Sydney, Melbourne, Newcastle, Wollongong, and perhaps Adelaide, Darwin, Brisbane, and Perth.
Army reserve units as well as 1st Armoured Regiment would be tasked with assisting the Police and other emergency services in and around the cities. Again, with fuel having to be rationed (nukes having taken out the refineries to deny NATO, particularly those western forces in Korea), much of the day to day work would be done on foot.
Civilian ownership and use of oil based fuels and lubricates would be strictly rationed to those who can prove a genuine need (farmers, food transportation, medical staff, and the like). Martial law may need to be implemented in some areas (particularly those with military units assisting the police, or around vital installations and facilities).

After a few months, perhaps a year, civilians may be "drafted" into the police, and receive a brief training course. These draftees would probably be used for administrative tasks, guarding of prisoners, and other relatively simple jobs, freeing up the fully trained police for the streets. Likewise, there's likely to be a influx of volunteers to the military, perhaps just so they can guarantee being fed each day, or in the hopes of being sent to Korea (the only conflict zone outside Australia and New Guinea) to give the Ruskies a little payback.

It's unlikely we'd see any deputisations here - it's a completely different culture when it comes to law enforcement to the US. Only those who have received training would be allowed to act as police and carry a weapon, although everyone would be encouraged to assist where possible with information on criminal activities.

I can see a draft being unnescessary, after all it is a job that is likely to feed a person and their family and probably increase their survival chances.

Would they always be armed? Maybe unarmed auxilliaries?

[Legbreaker]

The main problem I see with arming "auxiliaries" in Australia is the lack of pistols. They're a rather controlled item here with (besides law enforcement and some military units) the main allowable use being on the range (usually the specialist target varieties).
Some security guards can carry pistols, but they are usually .38 revolvers or something equally as inadequate.
Tasers and Capsicum spray are only a recent introduction here. In the T2K period they were virtually unheard off and I don't believe anyone was authorised to carry them, let alone use. Mace and other stronger "self defence" items are unavailable even for police. Batons require the wielder to pass a course before being allowed to carry (I carried a 5 D cell maglite instead when I was doing security work - same broken leg as a baton, but no need for the piece of paper).

The majority of "volunteers" would probably go to the military though given the deployment of troops to Korea (I'm working on a Brigade strength including some New Zealanders) plus the conflict with Indonesia in Papua New Guinea.

I know there was no shortage of L1A1 SLRs and even old SMLE Mark IIIs in storage in the 90's, which are a bit much for law enforcement purposes.

[Trooper]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

The main problem I see with arming "auxiliaries" in Australia is the lack of pistols. They're a rather controlled item here with (besides law enforcement and some military units) the main allowable use being on the range (usually the specialist target varieties).
Some security guards can carry pistols, but they are usually .38 revolvers or something equally as inadequate.
Tasers and Capsicum spray are only a recent introduction here. In the T2K period they were virtually unheard off and I don't believe anyone was authorised to carry them, let alone use. Mace and other stronger "self defence" items are unavailable even for police. Batons require the wielder to pass a course before being allowed to carry (I carried a 5 D cell maglite instead when I was doing security work - same broken leg as a baton, but no need for the piece of paper).

The majority of "volunteers" would probably go to the military though given the deployment of troops to Korea (I'm working on a Brigade strength including some New Zealanders) plus the conflict with Indonesia in Papua New Guinea.

I know there was no shortage of L1A1 SLRs and even old SMLE Mark IIIs in storage in the 90's, which are a bit much for law enforcement purposes.

Very odd policy.

In Finland police use pistols only for self defence. If you are expecting armed resistance - number one choice is submachine gun, shotgun or assault rifle. Its not unusual to find one or two H&K MP-5s in normal squad car + pair of heavy IV-class vests.

MP-5 is quite popular weapon in police use. First there was some leftist whining about "machinegunners & stormtroopers". In real police line of work MP-5 saves lives- its nowdays much easier to shoot gun toting criminal in the leg. In "bad old days" you had to aim to "ten" (heart or head) with 38 snub nose or with 7,65 FN pistol.

[Medic]

Originally Posted by Trooper

Very odd policy.

In Finland police use pistols only for self defence. If you are expecting armed resistance - number one choice is submachine gun, shotgun or assault rifle. Its not unusual to find one or two H&K MP-5s in normal squad car + pair of heavy IV-class vests.

MP-5 is quite popular weapon in police use. First there was some leftist whining about "machinegunners & stormtroopers". In real police line of work MP-5 saves lives- its nowdays much easier to shoot gun toting criminal in the leg. In "bad old days" you had to aim to "ten" (heart or head) with 38 snub nose or with 7,65 FN pistol.

Let's add, the Finnish Police MP-5s are semi-auto only. If the police needs automatic weapons, they can request them from the military and the Commander of the Ground Forces will review the request either granting it or not. The same thing goes for armored personnel carriers that are crewed by the professional military, armed for self-defense only. The law says, military can not be used in crowd control and in case of military vehicles, even a water cannon is considered a weapon - if needed, the Border Guards can be called to assist the police in crowd control.

The military assistance to the police, including more advanced weapon systems like missiles and such, can be given with the consent of the Ministry of Defense, along with the crews to use them. Technically the police will then be responsible of their use while they are operated by the military (who will probably provide advice to the police on how to implement the said weapon systems).

The only difference to this is the Police Special Team "Karhu" (=Bear). They are police officers who receive a SWAT-style special training.

[simonmark6]

For auxilliary troops who are going to guard vital installations and police urban areas, the L1A1 and SMLE are not ideal weapons. The troops are going to miss a lot and the rounds are going to travel a long way before stopping. In Northern Ireland, there were cases of rounds penetrating the walls of people's houses.

I think that's why Leg was suggesting the use of pistols. Sub machine guns on semi-auto would be even better but I'm guessing they'd be in even shorter supply than pistols.

I'm not au fait with Austrailian gun laws, Leg but what about shotguns? They might be an alternative: common, big intimidation value and easier to use in less trained hands. Plus is they do miss there's less likelihood of hitting an innocent civilian, if such a think exists in Oz, which I am sure there are. Some, well, maybe at least one...maybe...

[Trooper]

Originally Posted by Medic

Let's add, the Finnish Police MP-5s are semi-auto only. If the police needs automatic weapons, they can request them from the military and the Commander of the Ground Forces will review the request either granting it or not..

Well lets say thats what police says. Some MP-5s are semiauto only, but police also have automatic weapons like MP-5s, silenced MP-5s, sterlings, Swedish-K:s, Suomis and H&K and Sig assault rifles.

Politically correct term for semi-auto MP-5 is "support weapon". Most police officers use "support weapon". I have trained with our local PD and in that training we used full auto version of MP-5.

[Medic]

Originally Posted by Trooper

Well lets say thats what police says. Some MP-5s are semiauto only, but police also have automatic weapons like MP-5s, silenced MP-5s, sterlings, Swedish-K:s, Suomis and H&K and Sig assault rifles.

Politically correct term for semi-auto MP-5 is "support weapon". Most police officers use "support weapon". I have trained with our local PD and in that training we used full auto version of MP-5.

They must have been ERTI-task force (probably Karhu), then. The military grade hardware for them is off limits by the law otherwise. If I may ask, what kind of a circumstance was it when you trained with them - I'm just curious, since I have some history of co-operating with various PDs in Finland and I've never seen them carry a fully automatic weapon.

(ERTI: erityistilanne = special circumstances, usually siege or heavily armed criminals etc.)

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by simonmark6

I think that's why Leg was suggesting the use of pistols. Sub machine guns on semi-auto would be even better but I'm guessing they'd be in even shorter supply than pistols.

Only specialist police such as the Special Operations Group (SOG) or Police Tactical Group (exact name differs between states) possess, or are even trained with anything more than their service pistol.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Police

Originally Posted by simonmark6

I'm not au fait with Australian gun laws, Leg but what about shotguns?

Well, true, but given the actual police aren't authorised more than pistols except in special situations....

Also, in 1996 there was a major change to Australian firearms laws due to Martin Bryants slaughter of 35 people in April of that year.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_bryant
Basically, the laws restricted the ownership of firearms to bolt action only for the most part, although some permits are issued for special use such as farmers. Pump shotguns were made illegal overnight and any decent semi auto weapons also.
You can forget about any automatics or heavy weapons!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_pol...rms_categories
This change in law occurred before the outbreak of hostilities. It's therefore quite probable (although by no means certain) "useful" weapons would be severely restricted. However, with the possibility of Indonesia already making threatening noises, who knows?