Off duty, but never off guard

As police officers, our commitment to protect doesn’t end with our shift. Whether we’re at the grocery store, at a gas station or out with family, the instinct to intervene remains strong. However, off-duty scenarios differ significantly from on-duty ones: no uniform, no radio, no immediate backup. This shift necessitates a change in how we approach potential threats.

The right to be armed

Carrying a firearm off duty is standard practice for most officers, and agencies often encourage or require it. It’s a right we have earned, but it’s also a responsibility that comes with serious considerations. The public may not always understand why we carry off duty, and some individuals — whether out of ignorance or malice — may try to challenge our right to do so.

I have seen officers get into unnecessary conflicts because they felt the need to prove their legal right to carry. While standing up for our rights is important, arguing in public over it can lead to damaging optics. Imagine going to a concert, being denied entry by an uninformed security guard and deciding to educate them. The situation escalates, it gets recorded and suddenly you’re a viral headline — not for defending the public, but for arguing about your gun. Even if you are in the right, your agency may view this as a violation of its code of conduct.

A smarter approach? If someone refuses to acknowledge your right to carry, don’t argue. Walk away, take your business elsewhere or document the situation properly. In Texas, for example, officers who have been wrongly denied their right to carry have successfully taken the matter to the attorney general. The key is handling it professionally and strategically rather than emotionally.

The need to intervene — or not?

One of the biggest challenges we face is knowing when to act. We are trained for on-duty intervention, where we have clear authority, resources and backup. But what about off duty? That’s where things get complicated.

We work an average of 40 hours per week, leaving us 128 hours off duty. That’s the majority of our time. Yet almost all of our training is geared toward our on-duty role. We receive little, if any, dedicated training for off-duty scenarios, despite being held accountable for our actions (or inactions) at all times.

This gap in training forces us to be creative, often making split-second decisions without the clarity or structure we rely on when in uniform. The key question we should ask ourselves before intervening off duty is: Do I need to act?

Some incidents require immediate intervention, but many do not. Being a good witness is often the best move. Gather information, note suspect descriptions, observe carefully — these actions are just as valuable as stepping in directly. Many officers have placed themselves in danger by intervening in minor situations that could have been handled more effectively by on-duty units.

Before jumping into action, consider:

• Is intervention necessary, or am I inserting myself into an avoidable conflict?
• Do I have the tools and resources to handle the situation safely?
• How will my agency and the public view my actions after the fact? (It’s 2025 — optics do matter!)
• What are the potential consequences if things escalate beyond my control?

The risk of misidentification

Even when intervention is necessary, misidentification is a serious and deadly risk. Uniformed officers responding to a high-stress call have milliseconds to assess a situation. If they see an armed individual in plain clothes, they react to the threat — not to the badge.

This problem is further compounded by tunnel vision, a physiological response to high-stress situations where focus narrows to the most immediate danger — typically the firearm. This is known as the “halo effect,” where the presence of a gun overshadows everything else. The tragic consequences of this reality include:

• North Carolina, 2010: Officer William Wilkins was shot by another officer while responding to an armed suspect call. Despite holding his badge, he was misidentified.
• Texas, 2013: Officers mistakenly responded to the wrong home and encountered Jerry Waller, an armed homeowner in his garage. Their tunnel vision focused on his gun rather than the context of the situation, leading to a tragic outcome.
• Chicago, 2019: An off-duty officer was shot by responding units who mistook him for the suspect he was attempting to stop.

Identification solutions

To reduce the risk, off-duty officers must take extra steps to ensure they are recognized as law enforcement. I developed and patented the Plainclothes Identifying Gauntlet (PIG Zleeve) more than 10 years ago after observing a consistent and concerning fact during off-duty survival training: Role-players participating in off-duty-themed force-on-force scenarios repeatedly ended up in blue-on-blue fire incidents. Designed based on case study research showing that officers instinctively focus on the hands and arms when assessing threats, the PIG Zleeve is worn on the arm, making recognition immediate.

In the spirit of transparency, I want to acknowledge that my product is not the only one available. Other identification solutions exist, each offering unique approaches to reducing the risk of misidentification:

• DSM Safety Banners: Reflective, high-visibility banners that display “POLICE” to ensure instant recognition
• ID Sash by Shat-Tech: High-visibility material with reflective lettering, designed for quick deployment
• VisiBlue Identification Gear: Specially designed for off-duty and plainclothes officers, emphasizing rapid identification

Off duty, never off guard

As police officers, we are held to a higher standard. The public expects more from us, whether we are on duty or not. That means making smart decisions, knowing when to engage and understanding the risks involved.

• Know your rights, but don’t let ego dictate your actions.
• When off duty, think practical before tactical.
• Understand that misidentification is a real and deadly risk.
• Always ensure you are easily recognizable if you must intervene.

As law enforcement officers, our instincts don’t clock out just because our shift ends. We’re wired to observe, assess and act — but off duty, the rules change. Being smart means knowing when to engage and when to step back. Stay aware, stay professional and, above all — off duty doesn’t mean off guard.