Never take self defense advice from “a cop buddy”

In the last seven days I have encountered several instances of some truly terrible self defense “advice”, all of it attributable to one of the most common bad idea boogie men of the gun world: “a cop buddy.”

“A cop buddy of mine told me that if you have to shoot someone, make sure you empty a whole clip into ’em so they’re good and dead because you don’t want them to be able to sue you!”

“A cop buddy of mine told me that anyone who is more than ten feet away from you isn’t a threat and it’s illegal to do anything to them.”

“A cop buddy of mine said that if you use hollowpoint bullets when you shoot somebody the law will automatically award a civil suit to the person you shot.”

…and I could go on, but those statements (used verbatim) represent the choicest examples of mind-bending nonsense attributable to the mysterious “cop buddy.”

Head in Hands
Gott in himmel

Many members of the public labor under the misapprehension that police officers, by virtue of simply being a police officer, are experts in a number of subjects including first aid, law, combatives, and firearms. Since most members of the public have next to no knowledge about those topics it can certainly seem like the police, who receive at least some training in most of those areas, are experts.

The unfortunate reality is police training is often minimal (sometimes nonexistent) in those topics, and rarely will anything an officer encounters in police academy training be sufficient to make him/her a genuine expert on the subject. I’ve heard some spectacularly bad advice given out by sworn law enforcement officers. My favorite direct experience was hearing a deputy (in uniform) advise someone at a gun store that if they ever had to shoot someone on their property in self defense, drag the deceased into the house before calling the police. I’m sure the deputy meant well, but that deputy had never once worked a homicide investigation in his (to that point) relatively short career. He wasn’t a trained investigator. To that point the bulk of his career had been writing traffic citations and occasionally providing perimeter security at a crime scene. He’d certainly never done an investigation of a legitimate lethal force self defense claim before. I’m certainly not an expert in homicide investigation, but I am pretty certain that a self defense claim is not bolstered by moving the corpse of your claimed assailant to a different location. Because it’s not like police departments have detectives and forensic experts working for them right? They’ll never know!

In my experience that particular deputy is more the exception than the rule. Often the bad information is, at best, third hand and the attribution is to “a cop buddy” that I’m reasonably sure does not actually exist. I’m fairly certain that “a cop buddy” is usually invented to add credibility to an idea that is, on the face of it, pretty damn goofy but that fits with prejudices and fears many have about the complexity and incomprehensibility of the law. We’re all familiar with the idea of a legal “loophole” and we’re conditioned to think that the foibles and flaws of the written laws make for some pretty strange outcomes:

The law is complex and it does do strange things at times, but it is not so badly structured and incomprehensible that executing an assailant who is no longer threatening is rewarded. (At least not unless you can convince Judge Micheal Gary that you’re a child at 22 and society somehow failed you and that’s why you tried to murder four people) The whole “make sure they’re dead!” thing has been tried before. It turns out that making sure the criminal is dead turned a perfectly legit self defense shooting into a first degree murder conviction complete with life sentence.

Legitimate self defense, you see, is based on an exigency. You are resorting to the use of significant violence (including lethal force) because your life and physical well being is endangered by a criminal assault. When the danger passes, so does the justification for the use of that force. Using the convicted pharmacist cited in the last paragraph as an example, when he fired his initial shots at two mobile robbers he was legally in the clear. The hit he delivered that rendered one of the robbers unconscious was a perfectly legitimate use of force. When he decided to stand over the top of the unconscious criminal and shoot him in the head, though, there was no longer an imminent threat to his life. Note that this change did not take hours. The exigency that justifies pulling the trigger usually lasts only a few seconds. Use lethal force beyond those few critical seconds and you can utterly ruin your life. Generally speaking, ruining your life isn’t really compatible with the goals of self defense.

Self defense is a serious subject and it’s worth investing your time and effort into learning more about the legal requirements surrounding it. Your life and your future are too precious to trust to the gossipy nonsense attributed to¬†“a cop buddy” (be he real or invented) or gunstore lawyers.



  1. I would argue that although a cop does not automatically understand more about the law then your average citizen they’re supposed to. UOF is part of basic leo curriculum, so is securing a crime scene, so is basic firearm mechanics, all of which would have covered the shenanigans mentioned above.

  2. I have a few “cop buddies”/”former/retired cop buddies” who actually exist, and who actually give me sound, reliable advice on shooting, self-defense and deadly force law – their names are Massad Ayoob, Marty Hayes, Craig “SouthNarc” Douglas and Tom Givens.

    The key difference is that these men are nationally recognized subject matter experts with decades of experience, to whom I’ve paid my hard-earned money in exchange for their knowledge and expertise, and who are all ready, willing and able to testify on my behalf regarding the training they’ve given me, provided that I followed their training in good faith and did not act in a culpable manner while doing so.

    Any “cop buddy” who won’t do the same, whether because they’re not confident in recounting the same “advice” they gave you in front of a jury, or because they’re a figment of your imagination that was fabricated as part of a fraudulent “appeal to authority” argument, should be judged accordingly, along with said “advice”…

    1. I’ve never worked with Craig Douglas, so no personal experience there (no offense, Craig, we’ve just never met), but as for Mas, Marty, and Tom, I can speak from personal experience in saying that anyone with the opportunity to take advantage of their instruction would simply be a fool not to do so. Period.

      –Andrew, @LawSelfDefense

  3. I am a retired Homicide Investigator from a medium size city Police Dept. The caliber, bullet type etc does not make or break a legal self defense shooting. The main problems are circumstances and whether the political situation in the incident area is run by crazy prosecutors e.g. NJ, CA, NY etc. You can be completely legal in your actions but because some idiot prosecutor wants to make a name for themselves they can and will turn your life into h-ll. Remember the politician has the power and money of the jurisdiction to ruin you and your family. I have witnessed prosecutions on very flaky evidence because the defendant became a political target that could be used as a stepping stone for personal gain. Be aware and consider the alternatives BEFORE you act. It may be better and safer to be a witness instead of a participant and maybe a defendant. Stay Safe.

  4. Don’t ask your lawyer to chase down and capture an armed robber, and don’t ask your local cop for legal advice.

  5. Is the cop buddy the distaff counterpart to “my family full of hunters” or “my husband who taught marksmanship inna army” who serve only to add credibility to the claim that nobody ever needs an “assault rifle” that holds more than five rounds?

Comments are closed.