FREE e-Newsletter
Important News - Hot Topics
Get them Now!
Doug  Wyllie

Doug Wyllie

Doug Wyllie has authored more than 1,000 articles and tactical tips aimed at ensuring that police officers are safer and more successful on the streets. Doug is a Western Publishing Association “Maggie Award” winner for Best Regularly Featured Digital Edition Column. He is a member of International Law Enforcement Educators and Trainers Association (ILEETA), an Associate Member of the California Peace Officers’ Association (CPOA), and a member of the Public Safety Writers Association (PSWA).
December 2018 (2)
November 2018 (5)
October 2018 (4)
September 2018 (3)
August 2018 (6)
July 2018 (4)
June 2018 (3)
April 2018 (1)
March 2018 (2)
January 2018 (1)
September 2017 (1)
August 2017 (1)
May 2017 (1)
April 2017 (1)
January 2017 (1)
November 2016 (1)
September 2016 (1)
June 2016 (2)
May 2016 (3)
April 2016 (2)
March 2016 (1)
February 2016 (3)
January 2016 (1)
December 2015 (1)
November 2015 (5)
October 2015 (1)
September 2015 (3)
August 2015 (3)
July 2015 (6)
June 2015 (3)
May 2015 (2)
April 2015 (3)
March 2015 (5)
February 2015 (1)
January 2015 (1)
December 2014 (9)
October 2014 (2)
September 2014 (2)
August 2014 (2)
July 2014 (1)
June 2014 (2)
May 2014 (2)
April 2014 (4)
March 2014 (2)
February 2014 (3)
January 2014 (3)
December 2013 (2)
November 2013 (2)
October 2013 (3)
September 2013 (5)
August 2013 (3)
July 2013 (3)
June 2013 (3)
May 2013 (4)
April 2013 (3)
March 2013 (5)
February 2013 (3)
January 2013 (3)
December 2012 (5)
November 2012 (2)
October 2012 (4)
September 2012 (2)
August 2012 (5)
July 2012 (4)
June 2012 (3)
May 2012 (5)
April 2012 (6)
March 2012 (5)
February 2012 (3)
January 2012 (5)
December 2011 (5)
November 2011 (3)
October 2011 (3)
September 2011 (3)
August 2011 (2)
July 2011 (2)
June 2011 (3)
May 2011 (4)
April 2011 (3)
March 2011 (5)
February 2011 (3)
January 2011 (3)
December 2010 (2)
November 2010 (4)
October 2010 (4)
September 2010 (5)
August 2010 (4)
July 2010 (4)
June 2010 (4)
May 2010 (4)
April 2010 (3)
March 2010 (3)
February 2010 (1)
January 2010 (3)
December 2009 (4)
November 2009 (4)
October 2009 (2)
September 2009 (3)
August 2009 (4)
July 2009 (5)
June 2009 (3)
May 2009 (5)
April 2009 (4)
March 2009 (4)
February 2009 (3)
January 2009 (2)
December 2008 (4)
November 2008 (3)
October 2008 (3)
September 2008 (3)
August 2008 (2)
July 2008 (3)
June 2008 (4)
May 2008 (5)
April 2008 (5)
March 2008 (4)
February 2008 (5)
January 2008 (3)
December 2007 (2)
November 2007 (5)
October 2007 (4)
September 2007 (4)
August 2007 (5)
July 2007 (4)
June 2007 (4)
May 2007 (5)

Fort Hood: Can It Happen to Us?

Is anything being done to prevent one of our fellow officers from opening fire on us.

November 10, 2009  |  by - Also by this author

Looking at the Fort Hood tragedy, I have to ask: Can it happen within law enforcement's ranks? Can one of our own lay siege to his or her fellow workers and department?

Murders of law enforcement personnel by their brethren are not without precedent. Lovers' triangles have resulted in murder-suicides; subordinates have shot superiors; ex-cops-cum-felons have killed lawmen.

Given the disparate personalities one encounters on the job, it isn't difficult to envision a large-scale assault being committed by an officer. At one time I planned to end a novel I'd been writing with a disgruntled deputy appropriating an AK-47 from an evidence locker and opening up on his peers. At the time, I thought the idea novel, too. Two intervening decades of workplace shootings and school massacres have since disabused me of the notion. These days, such an ending would be dismissed as hackneyed and clichéd.

One doesn't know what will set a person off. They may be emotionally disturbed or predisposed to violent outbursts. One thing that can certainly push them over the edge is the thought of getting terminated, or prosecuted. To that end, law enforcement has done a fairly good job in relieving officers of their firearms incident to some red flag indicator. Indeed, it's one of the most disconcerting things a supervisor can do, particularly if he knows and likes the involved officer.

Unfortunately, much that could have been done to protect our soldiers at Fort Hood wasn't done. The political soft sell - replete with that idiot Rep. Nancy Pelosi's (D-CA) euphemistically aborted "passed away" in describing the fate of the victims, and President Obama's "shout-out" prior to speaking about the tragedy - only add insult to injury. It's amazing how the government can warm of one-man terrorist cells, then shy away from acknowledging them as such when they manifest themselves.

But while Obama can't fake sympathy like Bill Clinton and Nancy Pelosi is a parasitical cretin, it's a sadder reality that the military must have at some point considered the prospect of such an incident, if for no other reason than for precedents:

In 1998, a 19-year-old Russian sailor went on a rampage, murdering eight fellow sailors and threatening to blow up the submarine on which he was serving.

In our own military, the concept of fratricide by militant Muslim was seen in the deserts of Kuwait when Sgt. Hasan Akbar killed two fellow soldiers and wounded 14 more with a grenade in 2003.

And while we're discussing Muslim threats, Michelle Malkin offers other examples in this column.

Perhaps understanding the conundrum facing non-Muslims in America as we face the question of who is and isn't militant, some high-profile Muslims have even invited more intense scrutiny.

Zuhdi Jasser of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, even said of the prospect: "I don't take offense...It's better to find out...and discover (a possible Muslim threat) before he becomes a major and kills 13 brave soldiers"

Unfortunately, any practical approach to such dilemmas would entail acknowledging that some things are readily divorceable from politically correct dogma-namely, reality. So it's not likely to happen.

Without a doubt, the military could have done a better job protecting its own. Hopefully, they will now take action to resolve this problem.

And so should we.

We in law enforcement shouldn't have to wait for such an incident to improve our threat prevention methods.

Yes, we do psychological screening during the hiring process. But people change, evolve, and some who straddle the fence today will take a side tomorrow. Do they need to be constantly evaluated? No.

But something can be done to identify those who would hurt our own.

One way is through state-of-the-art lie detection technology. It's out there, and getting better all the time. Surely, the military-and we-are in a position to ask the tough questions:

"Are you inclined to undermine your fellow soldier/officer?"

"Are you predisposed to undermine the federal government/your department?"


If it all smacks of an Orwellian nightmare, I suppose it is. But I'm betting that the 40 some-odd families forever impacted by this tragedy wish such steps had been taken.

Instead, I suppose we'll stick with what we've been doing. Adhere to the politically correct script that inclusivity is good for all. Put a blind eye to the red flags that scream out for intervention. Spend our money making our officers piss into sample cups (despite the remarkably low percentage of numbers testing positive) I remember a time when one simply recognized a fellow officer was dirty or under the influence and chased him down.

To identify our internal threats, we need to take a very simple action, one that can be summed up in a variant of another military posture.

Do ask. Do tell.

I'm indebted to G. Alan Ferguson for forwarding Ralph Peters' excellent editorial on the matter. I hope you read it.

Comments (4)

Displaying 1 - 4 of 4

walkin' trails @ 11/11/2009 7:13 AM

"Are you predisposed to undermine the federal government/your department?"

Better question would be, "Are you predisposed to undermine the Constitution of the United States, including the Bill of Rights/the rights and the trust of the people you will be sworn to protect?"

oldhag @ 11/12/2009 6:11 AM

Don't forget Tim McVeigh, John Allen Muhammad, and all the other weapons-and-war types who wanted to go out with a bang. It wasn't just the Muslims.

dscoville @ 11/12/2009 11:08 AM

Walkin' trails: I see your point. But given the synaptic limitations of those who'd embrace such horseshit anarchist practices, I figured I'd make the Q and A thing easy for them. Kind of like dealing with those who protest that they know their rights when they don't :)

David Moore S-55 @ 11/13/2009 12:17 AM

There should be no victims PERIOD and thankfully !! - Frustrated like author, YOU BET!! I read in media Washington Post, he held a security clearance of Secret so he gets a PR every 10 years-what happened between?! - "Pre-meditated murder (13) counts says allot" What about the following? This is from open source briefings "General Requirements" which you sign upon granting of such: All holders of a "security clearance" must keep their security office informed about anything that might have a bearing on their continued eligibility for access to classified information or that might signal an "increased vulnerability to foreign intelligence targeting." Your cooperation in doing so is an important part of the "continuing evaluation" process.

• "Allegiance to U.S."

• "Foreign Influence"

• "Foreign Preference"

• Sexual Behavior

• "Personal Conduct"

• Financial Considerations

• Alcohol Consumption

Am I missing something? I worked in this area over 25 years Ret Military- let's get out of denial and do the right thing leave Politics out people get killed or hurt then - what we took OATHS for! Red Flags blowing in the wind...BIG-TIME - let's learn from this so it does not happen again and FIX!! "The victims of this senseless murder have already given far too much to our country as it is, prior to giving their lives!! One Pvt had a baby on board!

Join the Discussion

POLICE Magazine does not tolerate comments that include profanity, personal attacks or antisocial behavior (such as "spamming" or "trolling"). This and other inappropriate content or material will be removed. We reserve the right to block any user who violates this, including removing all content posted by that user.

Other Recent Blog Posts

Politics Trumping Tactics: [Don't] Sit Down… You're Rocking the Boat
Elected officials have one underlying goal that informs and influences all their other...
Foot and Hoof Patrol: Meaningfully Connecting Cops and Citizens
Foot patrol is the essence of community policing—officers on foot create opportunities for...

Police Magazine