Judges (Lawyers), Guns & Money. Is carrying a gun the best strategy to avoid physical harm?
Back in the 1970s, one of my dad's closest friends was a judge in the South Bronx, who was nicknamed 2-Gun, and he was nicknamed 2-Gun because he carried 2 guns because he felt it was his only way to keep safe in his role as a judge.
Now, why do I bring that up?
Because the New York Times just did a massive piece on judges and the threats to their safety, and the fact that law enforcement is pretty much powerless to do keep judges because law enforcement works after the fact.
And because most places don’t have the money to provide round the clock security to the judges in their courthouses, and at their homes.
The upshot of the article was that more and more judges are carrying guns for their own safety because they feel like they have nothing else they can do in the face of the increases in threats to their safety.
But is that really the most effective strategy to avoid physical harm when you're judge, lawyers, or other legal professionals?
I think there's more that you can do.
And I know because I've actually trained judges. court administrators, court staff, law firms, and the staff of the U.S. Senator whose staff members face constant threats because of their role in political.
What you really have to think about when you think about safety is what will actually work for your specific safety situations.
And in this piece, we're going to look at why a gun isn't necessarily your best option. If you're a legal professional, and that includes lawyers, since approximately 40% of all lawyers surveyed have faced threats to their safety or actual physical violence.
If you're a California organization, who has put together a workplace violence prevention program, and you want to see if you're in compliance with California law, I'd love to do a 15 minute free consultation with you.
We'll discuss where you're at, and we'll talk about whether you've actually achieved that goal of creating a compliant plan that will also keep your employees safe.
If not, I'll give you some ideas on what you can do.
Just click on the link and schedule your free call.
Here's the problem with relying on a gun as your primary basis for your strategies to avoid physical harm from workplace violence.
Now, judges face workplace violence, because of the work they do, because of the political culture that is targeting judges, but a lot of the safety threats they face are actually at their home.
And you may remember a few years back when a federal judge's husband was shot at their home in New Jersey, and recently in Indiana, a judge and his wife got into a gunfight at their home with an attacker.
So it's not just in the workplace.
Here's a couple of things that you should consider if you are thinking about using a firearm as your primary strategy to avoid physical harm.
Now, by the way, California mandates, you must train your employees in strategies to avoid physical harm from violence, and those strategies must be specific to the safety hazards your employees face.
Number one, with a gun, and you have to think about this for any weapon, any weapon you carry can be taken from you and used against you.
And I know this because I've taught many people how to do exactly that.
So if you have a firearm, you can't just brandish it at someone and hope that you intimidate them, because they can very easily take that gun from you.
The 2nd thing to remember is that bullets can go through drywall and other surfaces, and an innocent person may be injured or worse, killed, and that can fall on you.
Is that something you want to have to live with for the rest of your life.
And 3rd, if you carry a firearm, and as I mentioned, you can't just brandish it, you've got to actually pull it out and pull the trigger immediately in order for it to be effective.
And that's a judgment call you have to make in a split second.
You don't have minutes to make that decision.
You literally have to pull that firearm out, and pull the trigger because if you don't, it will be taken from you.
Here's what I do when I work with judges, attorneys, and others in the legal field, in terms of strategies to help them avoid physical harm from violence.
The 1st and most important thing is situational awareness, because that's where your safety starts.
The sooner you're aware of a potential threat, the more decisively you can implement different approaches to address that threat, and in fact, avoid that threat in its entirety.
One of the issues going on with judges is they're receiving a ton of online threats.
Now, in all fairness, and for the judges and for law enforcement who often does not take any action because of this, there's a First Amendment right to be able to talk about a public figure, to be angry at a public figure, to disagree with the public figure.
So it's really a fine line of when that transitions into a threat where law enforcement can take action. If they have the manpower and financial resources to take action.
To make situational awareness effective, you’ve got to implement that into your daily life, and not just at your workplace. Situational awareness is about recognizing the potential for a safety threat before it can harm you.
And that is what gives you options.
Now, some of your safety actions in response to a recognized threat might be simple, like changing your route to work, parking at a different location, communicating with other people to notify them that you have some concerns for your safety. Will touch on that in a bit.
But the single most important thing is to implement it right away. According to the Times article, most he judges, receive little in the way of security training. That’s because of the illusion that law enforcement is there to protect and serve.
I butted heads with the local sheriff's department, back when trying to put together trainings for judges and court administrators, in Bernalillo County, in New Mexico. The sheriff tried to prevent that training telling the judges and court administrators we've got your safety taken care of so you don't have to do anything.
That's not how the judges saw it. The judges believed they needed more safety consulting and training and that's what we provided.
The next strategy is de-escalation, but you have to understand the way violence works for that to be effective.
Violence does not follow a set progression. It can happen at any point, so you may not have time to de-escalate.
But there are some things you can do to know if de-escalation can work like reading body language, listening, redirecting the person's thought process away from attacking you that can help you.
And if you do de-escalate, then you've got to be able to continue with that until you’re fully safe.
But understand that there are times you may not be able to de-escalate because quite simply attacks often happen before you have a chance to de-escalate.
Changing the dynamics of an attack occurs when an attack initiates, and you take away the attacker's initial advantage.
There are a couple of different approaches to do that. Primarily they involve distraction techniques, and forcing the attacker to recalibrate his attack.
There's a couple different ways that you do that.
One of the ways is by creating physical barriers. For example, getting on the other side of a vehicle, going behind a door.
Those are physical barriers, and it forces the attacker to have to move around and work around an obstacle and for him to have to come up with a new plan.
The other thing that you can do is partly de-escalation where you redirect their thoughts away from harming you, and that allows you to use some self-defense. Self-defense is also a separate strategy to avoid physical harm.
If you can stop an attack before it harms you, for example by taking away an attacker's gun, or if you can prevent yourself from being put on the ground right away, that does forces the attacker to recalibrate.
And while the attacker is recalibrating, you create opportunities for yourself to either take control of the situation, or to exit the situation quickly and safely.
A couple other strategies to avoid physical harm that are really critical include communication and the buddy system.
You've got to be able to communicate when you have safety concerns before they become a real threat to your safety. You've also got to be able to communicate when you need someone to come in and help you.
The buddy system.
For example, if judges are working at a courthouse or lawyers are working at their law firm.
And your concerned about your safety you should have someone who can go to your car with you.
Your parked car makes you an easy target for an attack. Somebody knows where you work and they know where you park, and they have a pretty good idea of your schedule, they can actually lay in wait for you.
So having that buddy system in place is a really important strategy to avoid physical harm.
When you are dealing with determining the best strategies to avoid physical harm, you really need to assess what your safety risks are.
That's a pretty critical step, and it should, also include your staff.
Understanding where your threats are coming from, and how they can manifest themselves, will guide you to the most important and most useful strategies to avoid physical harm.
Remember that safety comes from training and repetition.
So, for example, when I work with some folks, I also provide access to some video content for them so that they can continue to work on this and practice because a one and done, might not necessarily get you there.
It's a good start. But you will need some additional work and that's one of the things that I provide.
If you would like some help determining if your workplace violence prevention program complies with California's new law, I'd love to do a 15 minute free conversation with you.
We'll discuss where your program is at. You might be all set. But if not, we'll look at some possibilities that you can add to your program if they need to be strengthened. And it’s not just about complying with the law, it's also about keeping your people safe.
