Law enforcement has "hazard list" of addresses consider as "dangerous"

[Jamisjockey]

so then anonymous tips don't exist?  heck lots of places keep lists cab companies did and we exchanged info with each other. contractors keep track of problem clients. in this case a lot depends on what this lady did to make someone list her.   if we make the lists public record the dope dealers will be the first to use the list.  to know when its time to move to a new place.

And, so? 

[BryanP]

so then anonymous tips don't exist?  heck lots of places keep lists cab companies did and we exchanged info with each other. contractors keep track of problem clients. in this case a lot depends on what this lady did to make someone list her.   if we make the lists public record the dope dealers will be the first to use the list.  to know when its time to move to a new place.

Cabbies and contractors are private individuals who have no power over me and can't influence my life unless I invite them to do so by hiring them. Police are public servants who have easily abused powers over much of the public.  Huge difference there.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

has this woman been abused?

[Jamisjockey]

has this woman been abused?

The jews weren't abused, right until they were herded onto boxcars.

Again.  Let me speak my point more slowly.
Having a list of PUBLIC RECORD EVENTS that happen at your home makes perfect sense.  Callouts, arrests, events and police/fire/ambulance notes?  Sure.  This is all stuff that should be public record.  What is to stop someone from making a secret list of reasons not to respond to emergencies at your home?  Maybe the police chief sneaks in there "Dangerous subject, crackhouse, SWAT callout required before police/fire/ambulance response."   Or, simply, they put "gun owner" on there. 

[Perd Hapley]

All kidding aside, I hope this means the ban on Nazi comparisons is lifted.  It was a dumb rule. 

[Jamisjockey]

All kidding aside, I hope this means the ban on Nazi comparisons is lifted.  It was a dumb rule. 

As long as the comparison makes sense, IMHO.  Other mods may have something else to say and stick a boot in my rear end... 

[Perd Hapley]

What, are they on Christmas break?  I didn't know Nazis celebrated Christmas!!!!Eleventtty1111   

[RevDisk]

In the military, they call this intel.  If you are the point man on a stick of troops that is about to bust a door in outer Moniraqstan, I suspect you want to know that this address is a known bomb factory.

Is this markedly different from the needs of first responders in civilian life?  That the resident has a history of seizures, is suffering from dementia, is an escaped felon?

PS: I would certainly agree that if such lists are maintained for political reasons, that is an invalid purpose.  I would want to see evidence of such political use only, however.  Like CSD said, does this mean that police/fire/EMS would not respond to the person mentioned in the OP?  I doubt it, without seeing evidence to the contrary.

There is a marked difference between invading then occupying a foreign country and doing routine policework.  This apparently is a novel concept to way too many folks.  First being, it is not the job of the police control their jurisdiction.  Their job is to deter crime in general, and show up after a crime is noticed or reported.  They have some secondary roles.  Controlling traffic at accident sites, et al.  That's it.  If a crime is committed, they hopefully detain the suspect and gather evidence. 

If they wish to make logistical notes about homes, that's fine.  "Aggressive dog protecting house", "owner has medical issues", etc.  Adding in anything remotely political crosses a line.  Misusing one's authority and resources to work against criticism is a violation of the trust given.  Most likely, this lady is a borderline nut.  That's fine, if she's not a danger to anyone or whatnot.  Still, we must use these types of folks as canaries. 

Folks that have traveled have seen the "benefits" of using one's police to enforce political power.  There are famous examples like the Stasi, KGB, Gestapo, et al.  We've had our own brushes.  Police collusion with extremist groups, COINTELPRO, Family Jewels, the on-going Stellar Wind, etc.  We must firmly stomp on any branch of law enforcement turning on its citizenry and violating its entrusted authority.  Otherwise, it will continue and escalate.  No doubt others will call that "slippery slope".  To those that have traveled a bit more, it's more so an example of "inevitability". 

[MillCreek]

The jews weren't abused, right until they were herded onto boxcars.

You need to brush up on your 20th century European history, unless you have a very narrow definition of 'abused'.

[MillCreek]

There is a marked difference between invading then occupying a foreign country and doing routine policework.  This apparently is a novel concept to way too many folks.

Maybe I missed it in this thread or real life, but I have not seen a lot of first responder callouts using the same tactics often used by invading and occupying infantry forces in urban terrain.  I cannot recall the last time our local PD softened up a dynamic entry by using frag grenades through the windows, antiarmor missiles or hosing down the place with 25 mm rounds.  There is a difference between using information and tactics.  We can probably all agree that for domestic law enforcement, aggressive infantry tactics against the citizenry is a Bad Thing.  Information is just information.  It can be used for good or bad and collected and distributed for good or malign purposes.   Although it is not a popular opinion on this board, I think we are a long way from the KGB, Stasi or People's Security Bureau, regardless of whom holds the office of the President at any given time.  Many of the scenarios cited by RevDisk above have occurred through many Administrations and Congresses that have been controlled by one or the other political party. 
 

[Balog]

Information is just information. Secret "information" based on who knows what is something else. All legitimate reasons to "list" someone should be public record. The fact that they're hiding it says all we need to know.

Also, your information on infantry tactics is utterly wrong. I raided a lot of houses, and we never used those tactics unless we were receiving fire.

If you think cops aren't using .mil tactics and gear, you obviously haven't been paying attention to either SWAT teams or the infantry.

[MillCreek]

^^^ I was not referring exclusively to American forces.  These tactics are certainly used in certain areas of the world, and as you pointed out, the specific tactics used can depend on such things as the degree of resistance offered. 

And of course domestic police forces use some military tactics and gear.  Just like civilian medicine uses some military procedures and technologies.  But domestic police forces don't use all available military tactics and gear, now do they? They use tactics and equipment necessary to the situation, just as I am sure the military does.  If they did not, Baghdad should have been a large patch of radioactive glass for a while now. 

[RevDisk]

Maybe I missed it in this thread or real life, but I have not seen a lot of first responder callouts using the same tactics often used by invading and occupying infantry forces in urban terrain.  I cannot recall the last time our local PD softened up a dynamic entry by using frag grenades through the windows, antiarmor missiles or hosing down the place with 25 mm rounds.  There is a difference between using information and tactics.  We can probably all agree that for domestic law enforcement, aggressive infantry tactics against the citizenry is a Bad Thing.  Information is just information.  It can be used for good or bad and collected and distributed for good or malign purposes.   

Ah...  Not to sound insulting, but I'm gathering you are not up on current infantry or police entry tactics.  You might want to talk to Balog to discuss current infantry tactics.  Information, tactics and equipment are flowing from the military to domestic law enforcement.  It is not a considerably horrific problem at the moment.  But the problem is, we do not know if it will be in time.  Hence why we put the boot in when folks start to slide in the wrong direction.  So we stop the Bad Thing before it gets problematic.

I think you undervalue the importance of "just information".  One of the problems with information is that it tends to stick around.  If you don't believe me, why don't you turn over a complete inventory of your firearms, where they are specifically located, the combination of your safe (if applicable), a picture of your house key and your work schedule?   Surely it's information as you say. 

Although it is not a popular opinion on this board, I think we are a long way from the KGB, Stasi or People's Security Bureau, regardless of whom holds the office of the President at any given time.  Many of the scenarios cited by RevDisk above have occurred through many Administrations and Congresses that have been controlled by one or the other political party. 

I agree we are not yet at the point were we have a home-grown variant of the Committee for State Security.  I'd also argue that we are a bit closer than most folks, including the popular opinion on this board, would normally think.  As an example, how many people here are even remotely familiar with Stellar Wind or its current capacities?  Care to guess how many other SCI projects are around?

The fact that both parties are equally involved doesn't mean it's not a valid concern.  All governments naturally slide towards authoritarianism.  It is only by putting the boot in when they even minimally cross the line that we check this natural proclivity. 

[Hawkmoon]

We can probably all agree that for domestic law enforcement, aggressive infantry tactics against the citizenry is a Bad Thing.

I'll agree to that ... if you'll agree that using "dynamic entry" to serve a no-knock warrant for a non-violent (alleged) crime at 3:00 a.m. falls within the general description of "aggressive infantry tactics against the citizenry."

[MillCreek]

Ah...  Not to sound insulting, but I'm gathering you are not up on current infantry or police entry tactics.  You might want to talk to Balog to discuss current infantry tactics.  Information, tactics and equipment are flowing from the military to domestic law enforcement.  It is not a considerably horrific problem at the moment.  But the problem is, we do not know if it will be in time.  Hence why we put the boot in when folks start to slide in the wrong direction.  So we stop the Bad Thing before it gets problematic.

I am not sure why you are assuming I am referring to domestic military personnel.  I have recently finished reading a few books on the Soviet/Russian wars in Georgia and the surrounding areas.  I can assure you that many military and police forces around the world do not show the same concern for collateral damage and harm to innocents that is generally shown by American military and police forces.  And are you opposed to military tactics and gear flowing to domestic law enforcement if it benefits officer safety?

[MillCreek]

I'll agree to that ... if you'll agree that using "dynamic entry" to serve a no-knock warrant for a non-violent (alleged) crime at 3:00 a.m. falls within the general description of "aggressive infantry tactics against the citizenry."

In the scenario you describe, I would.

[RevDisk]

I am not sure why you are assuming I am referring to domestic military personnel.  I have recently finished reading a few books on the Soviet/Russian wars in Georgia and the surrounding areas.  I can assure you that many military and police forces around the world do not show the same concern for collateral damage and harm to innocents that is generally shown by American military and police forces.  And are you opposed to military tactics and gear flowing to domestic law enforcement if it benefits officer safety?

Re foreign military personnel, true.  But I don't care as much about what they do as what we do.  I had the "pleasure" of working "along side" (COUGHCOUGH) the Russian Federation Army.  I neither like nor particularly respect the Russian Federation Army, nor did I particularly like them orientating their weapons at us when we were not allowed to do the same. 


And to answer your question, obviously it depends.  If the military develops some new type of body armor or medical equipment, I don't have any problems with LE using it.  Why should I?  My sole criteria is very simple.  Anything that is forbidden to the general public should be forbidden to law enforcement, as they are also civilians.  If you or I are not allowed to have a brand new auto, neither should law enforcement.  If a vest or medical equipment is restricted from general purchase, so should it be restricted from law enforcement.  If it benefits officer safety, it should be allowed to benefit the general population as well. 

If it is forbidden from the general population, it obviously is too dangerous to be trusted to law enforcement. 

Tactic wise is a bit more blurry, I will concede.  My argument would be "least tactical necessary to realistically get the job done".  If you know your suspect gets up at 6:45 every day to go to work, perhaps you should send two guys to arrest him when he's about to get in his car.  As opposed to a no knock dynamic entry with flashbangs and a full SWAT team at 0300. 

Police work is an extremely safe line of work.  It's not nearly as dangerous as roofing, driving a truck, or farming.  It's NOWHERE near as dangerous as fishing, logging or flying. 

[Balog]

I'm struggling to understand your point MillCreek. Are you really saying that because US cops don't use the same tactics as genocidal, war crime committing foreign militaries there is no problem? They don't generally line people up by a ditch and shoot them in the back of the head, so I guess we don't need to worry about cops planting evidence or faking warrants or kicking in doors at 3am because of anonymous tips, right? We shouldn't be worried or do anything until it gets as bad it is in 3rd world Communist countries? Really?

[MillCreek]

I believe that domestic American police forces should follow the law and be held accountable if they do not.  An informed citizenry and free press are excellent means to monitor this.

[Balog]

I believe that domestic American police forces should follow the law and be held accountable if they do not.  An informed citizenry and free press are excellent means to monitor this.

Hard to monitor people who claim the need to cloak their actions in secrecy, lest people get upset...

[Hawkmoon]

And are you opposed to military tactics and gear flowing to domestic law enforcement if it benefits officer safety?

I am. Officer safety has to be secondary to citizen safety. There are entirely too many no-knock, dynamic entry raids conducted on WRONG ADDRESSES and for non-violent offenses for them to have any justification whatsoever. Unless and until the police as a group entity (meaning all police, everywhere, not just your town) can absolutely guarantee that there will never ever be a no-knock and/or dynamic entry warrent "served" on an incorrect address (or on a correct address at which the subject has not resided for at least the past six months) -- they should not be allowed.

The CATO institute has some rather sobering statistics on such warrants gone bad. Have you looked at them?

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6476

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=1361

Especially the first link. Be sure to expand it to get the full report.

[AmbulanceDriver]

Aight.  I'm gonna weigh in on this.  We do have flags for addresses in our system.  We have police, fire, and EMS flags.  Any of the emergency services can view all of the flags for an address.  There's a reason for this.  We've had our medics shot at, and a couple actually hit (thankfully, non-fatal injuries).  We've not had this happen since the flag system has been put in place.  Most of the flags are fire history flags.  Hazmat info, lockbox info, stuff like that.  EMS flags range the gamut from "this person is on oxygen at all times" to "this person weighs 500+ lbs".  The police flags cover things like known criminals living at an address, etc. 

That all being said...

It appears that in this case the flagging system may have been abused.

[BridgeRunner]

The police flags cover things like known criminals living at an address, etc. 

Yay!  My husband's crackhead, multiply-convicted uncle use to live here.  Awesome!

[BryanP]

has this woman been abused?

Hard to tell.  The police won't tell us. 

[Jamisjockey]

You need to brush up on your 20th century European history, unless you have a very narrow definition of 'abused'.

Nah.  That was just me making an exasperated goodwin point.

Secret lists have been used to round up political disidents and undesirables for years.  History is a harsh mistress, always repeating itself and all...

has this woman been abused?

Hard to tell.  The police won't tell us. 

Ha!  FTW!!