I was watching the news last week and story came on about a Des Moines Police officer who while apprehending several armed suspects, broke his ankle . What made this story so newsworthy was the fact he did all this while his unarmed civilian wife sat in the front seat of the patrol car. At first I thought, this can’t be department policy, that officer is going to get in trouble, why is he giving an interview?

Encouraging your spouse to ride along with you in a squad car makes about as much sense as handing out steak knives in a prison.

Apparently I wasn’t the only one asking that question, because the very next day this story appeared explaining department policy and why the officer would not get in trouble.

The Des Moines Police Department justifies this ride-along policy stating it helps the public to understand what they do. Really? We need to ride in a squad car to understand what you do? I fail to see how one person riding along in a squad car advances the public policy of maintaining law and order. Frankly, if we want to know how dangerous your job is we need only watch the nightly news reports. Encouraging your spouse to ride along with you in a squad car makes about as much sense as handing out steak knives in a prison.

Des Moines Policy on Ride Along's

Is this educational, or just a way to show off while killing time? And is it really in the taxpayer's interest? If his wife is put at risk of injury or death by one of the suspects, how would the officer have responded? What if the officer just thought the suspect might be moving towards his unarmed wife? Would he be justified in shooting him? Wouldn’t having present an unarmed civilian, encourage or at the very least suggest the possibility, that for the criminal suspect it’s a game changer? Doesn't the ride-along place civilians at greater risk of being shot? I would think so. And what about the officer's attention and being distracted with a ride-along. I fail to see how a ride-along helps the public maintain law and order.

Why are the taxpayers being asked to shoulder this additional risk?

Looking further at this issue I see it’s quite common for the state patrol, the military and other instances. See link, link, and what could happen if the officer were disabled like in this instance?