Recycling and Good Will

Wrote two articles yesterday, and sent in three. One was for my publisher's publicist, the indomitable Barbara; the other two for Concealed Carry Magazine.

Originally, Barbara had suggested something that ties in with the Martin/Zimmerman shooting and the public uproar, since my next book coming out will be about how police make force decisions. My answer was "Hell, no!" and my reasoning was:

1) I can count the actual facts that we have on the fingers of one hand.

2) Even a trained investigator doesn't necessarily know local
policies, procedures and local law. To comment on any investigation
without this is blowing smoke out your ass and that's one thing I
don't want to do.

3) Everyone is so emotional over the issue that absolutely nothing
said will in any way help or calm things down. It will just be picked
apart for any wording that can justify not listening to any unwanted
conclusion or fact.

I answered a few more questions in the e-mail, particularly why a book on police decision making has so little relevance to this case (duty to act)...

But I did wind up writing an article on necessary steps to evaluate a force decision as a third party. And it was pretty good. And I knew CCM would like it, but I had written it for YMAA.

So I asked if they could both use it. And both said 'yes'. Not only yes, but 'Absolutely let them print/post it, but make sure it's okay if we do because you shouldn't burn bridges.'

Basically, when everyone is more worried about hurting other people's feelings than what is in it for themselves, you know you are working with great people.