When his own handgun is used to kill his partner, an unassuming detective defies the police department by refusing to carry a gun, even as he pursues the killer.
byron79Logliner
When his own handgun is used to kill his partner, an unassuming detective defies the police department by refusing to carry a gun, even as he pursues the killer.
Share
Agreed with DPG and Brennan.
Why not make it so he carries the gun but can’t use it – it never comes out of the holster.
Like Brennan wrote, he would have to either investigate the murder on the sly or take a leave of absence, but my problem is that this well and truly falls into the cliche side of things.
Is there an interesting twist you’re saving up your proverbial sleeve?
I’ve seen enough Law & Order to know that the dept wouldn’t let the detective investigate his partner’s murder, especially if his gun is the murder weapon. Perhaps he takes a leave of absence and goes after the killers on his own time. And perhaps the killing is so brutal he’s turned off of guns and opts for other weapons or swears off weapons altogether. Just my take.
Law enforcement agencies do have rules.? And they do require sworn officers (which detectives are) to carry a firearm on duty in the field.? Refusal to do so is grounds for immediate suspension; persistent refusal is grounds for firing.? Bottom line:? if he refuses to carry a gun in the field, that i s likely to be the end of his career in law enforcement.
Dramas can and have to take creative liberties, but there are limits to what one can get away with and still maintain the patina of credibility.? I just don’t find this realistic.
fwiw