I heard some yahoo on the radio say these days you don’t go out and see birds on the telephone wire, you go out and you see SWAT teams. He said it in this rueful tone, like it was some sort of abomination. Used it to springboard into this whole rigmarole about tyranny, of all things. The bastard just sits up there in his booth all day, belting out bullshit in his megaphone voice: “Every form of degradation will be visited upon the trembling shell of this Republic. This is only the beginning.”
I honestly can’t believe they let him ride the airwaves. You asked me the man’s a dangerous fellow. They’d do well to bundle him off to that prison in the Caribbean. And I don’t mean Guantánamo; they’ve got this classified underwater facility for the super-dangerous convicts. I guess so they can just pull the plug and flood the cellblocks if things get out of hand.
Guys like that give me and my business a bad name. Since when did we let fulminating mental cases question a man’s right to make a living in this country? My outfit has taken a lot of crap from people of his ilk in what it pleases them to call the liberty movement. Which is pretty rich – I mean I actually produce something tangible, when all they do is sputter words that don’t add up and for that matter flat out don’t add value. If anything that kind of talk distracts people and foments dissension. Heck, it probably has a discernibly negative effect on this great nation’s GDP.
My business caters to the needs of law enforcement personnel. We serve as a regional clearinghouse for the tactical L.E.P. needs of departments in the tri-state area and beyond. I’m not going to sit here and bullshit you – business is good. Does that make us part of some conspiracy to Sovietize a great nation? No. It makes me a rational market actor serving a critical public safety need in a time of great challenge. We’re under attack here. Disorder and asymmetric threat profiles are on the rise wherever you look. The truth is that I’m more than proud to supply hardened equipment to the thin blue line that stands between us and the chasm of anarchy and perdition. The soi disant liberty movement types aren’t looking at things right. They just love taking things out of context and distorting them beyond recognition. Facts are their playthings. For the longest time I couldn’t decide whether it was because they’re hotheads and profiteers or if they’re plain malignant, but I’ve been seasoned to lean toward the latter.
Never once in all these years did they complain as we sourced rounds at the lowest possible price to protect officers in the line of duty without sacrificing the health of municipal balance sheets. Never did they come out and call that a malinvestment of public funds or the proof of a sinister nexus between enforcement organizations and their private-sector vendors. Oh no, they never thought to tar my enterprise with the brush of treachery when we were supplying Kevlar by the yard or sourcing robust, low-cost servers to coordinate information sharing when kids go missing. Only now that our NO HESITATION posters have become a soundbite in the news cycle have they crawled out of their burrows en masse to denounce us as collaborators.
I don’t even know what that’s supposed to mean. Suddenly collaborating with police departments to address tactical lacunae is evidence of some sinister plot? It gives me pride to turn that charge on its head: Yes, we collaborate with our customers, because if we didn’t we’d be out of business in a fortnight. My opinion is that our track record and the emergent asymmetric threats faced by our men and women in uniform should be enough to invalidate any arguments that we’re engaged in anything unsavory. And yet I feel compelled, both as a person of good will and as an entrepreneur keen on throwing up a firewall around his company’s goodwill, to address their specific qualm on the merits. The substance of the conspiracists’ allegation is that we’re somehow engaged in training police to shoot women and children indiscriminately. This notion is absurd on its face. If the TLE objective were to mow down women and children indiscriminately, that would duly be laid down in the rules of engagement and in the force continuum. Personally I would also have a problem with that.
But that is expressly not the case. This printed matériel is part of a training initiative to condition police to respond to threats wherever and in whatever form they manifest. I think any hard-nosed patriot would be a fool who blinded himself to the new reality that women and children have been and increasingly will be flipped and dragooned to serve in the forces of disorder that at this very moment are threatening to tear this nation apart law by law, code by code. For make no mistake – this is the new reality, one in which the consequences of failure are unfathomable. These are the types of threats our crimefighters are already facing in the TLE environment of the future, and I think it no better than negligent homicide to send our finest into combat with a huge blind spot programmed into their genetics and reinforced by relentless cultural conditioning.
The NO HESITATION product line isn’t about being indiscriminate; it’s about reprogramming psyches to adapt, with full discretion, to a highly volatile threatscape. We’re not just in the business of vending posters of pregnant women and grannies brandishing guns. We do so much more – this lineup of posters represents so much more – and detractors should familiarize themselves with the entire spectrum of our offering before they single out random data points for prejudicial critique. What the product line really comes down to is a fairly sophisticated reality scripting proposition that relies on simple visual prompts to penetrate the critical gap between stimulus and response.
Each deck of civilian subject posters comes with a situational script on the basis of which the force runs through a set of tactical rehearsals. Our archetypal profile posters really run the gamut. The officers whose command structures we fusion with are expected to develop sensitivity to subject presentations that laypeople simply can’t detect – think facial micro-expressions – and then couple that articulated intuition with their discernment so as to engage without fail in the tactically correct response. For instance, the decks will depict the same subjects as friendlies in one pose and with a hostile micro-expression in another. That little sneer isn’t enough in most scripting scenarios to justify the application of lethal force, but what it does do is put the officer on alert for possible hostility from that subject or its associates. Under some rules-of-engagement scenarios a sneer actually will suffice for climaxing on the force continuum in the sense of a preemptive reprisal warranted by the officer’s trained discretion, and would in turn prompt positive reinforcement under the officer conduct matrix. But that really only applies to the state of siege, terror plot or shelter-in-place scenarios, which are the exception. Plus, for disciplinary purposes, continuum climax always needs to be coupled with non-lethal or less-lethal kinetics, so that the incident report reflects a balance well struck. For instance, under the shelter-in-place narrative, one correct response to the sneering subject would be to deploy less-lethal force; a shot to the knee, par exemple, followed by the officer advancing into the gallery under covering fire and then either subduing the subject or finishing it off, depending on the response elicited by the narration.
In the vast majority of cases of course, things are much simpler: it’s either open or hold fire, depending on what the officer sees. I cannot emphasize enough that a gun can be wielded by almost any malignly minded subject to deadly effect irrespective of gender, size or relative debility. I don’t think you’ll be inclined to debate me on the point that malignity toward our brave sheepdogs is in a secular uptrend, so why would you quibble with an officer gaining the tools and conditioning needed to defend himself? Indeed.
Another scripting scenario where letting loose is the appropriate response to a facial marker in the absence of a drawn weapon is what we call CCD/CC, or cross-country deployment into a legacy concealed carry jurisdiction, which is something we have been called on to emphasize with some vigor. This scenario would come to pass in a circumstance where forces from a sector like the Massachusetts Commonwealth were deployed to the Lone Star region, where subjects are still permitted to carry firepower surreptitiously on their persons. The conceit of the script of course is that concealed carry has been freshly outlawed, hence legacy and hence also why preemptive reprisal is the only acceptable response given variable matrix CCD/CC; shelter in place; subject sneers, leers or otherwise engages in hostile ocular contact.
Of course, in the new TLE threatscape, threats don’t just crop up in the future – they also come back from the past. The ultimate ambition is to train police to respond to the micro-expressions and armed/unarmed state of motley past and present threats such as Arab/near-Arab, subversive/quasi-subversive, hoarder, anti-government extremist, self-policing zealot, anarchist, disgruntled veteran, unemployed/unemployable, miscreant, addict, suspicious medical history, etc. The response to each, always calibrated to the background of the situational narrative, is unique, and I’m proud that Panoply Logistics is at the bleeding edge of total police/total policing preparedness. That being said, as is the case with any avant-garde force, toes are going to get stepped on. We can’t write that out of the script. All we can do is prepare for any contingency the hounds of disorder may wish to visit on us. Come to think of it, we might want to lace the deck with subjects showcasing tokens of affiliation with said radio host, then just sit back and wait for the script to play out. At the end of which continuum the words on every officer’s lips will be the ones we put there: No Hesitation.