Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Balog on June 02, 2014, 05:49:54 PM
-
We've talked about these clowns before when they murdered an unarmed pastor. Be sure to read the comments on Preacherman's blog. Use of pyrotechnics is contraindicated in cases where children are present. Either the cops didn't bother to recon to find out if the kid was there, or they just didn't care. Second link is a good example of the widespread rot in LEO circles. I've seen less callous indifference to the death and suffering of innocents from my fellow infantry Marines raiding suspected terrorist's houses in Iraq. Amazing how cops are racking up more collateral damage in the War on
the public Some Drugs than we did fighting insurgents. As always, feeding the troll will only encourage him so let's try to ignore it shall we?
http://bayourenaissanceman.blogspot.com/2014/06/child-abuse-under-color-of-law.html
http://forums.officer.com/t194085/
Behold the war on drugs in all its glory.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F-MILKokc0q3k%2FU4umSBsB18I%2FAAAAAAAATm8%2F8Afy_PuUx6M%2Fs1600%2FChild%2Babuse%2Bunder%2Bcolor%2Bof%2Blaw.jpg&hash=42b07e178d9bb1da993c9ee708d440d199b06223)
-
Good commentary on the subject. I've bolded the relevant part.
Fact: The object of the warrant was not even home.
Fact: NO pre raid survielence.
Fact: Relied only on word of CI and then went in blazing.
Fact: Later arrested the subject (apparently without a raid) at another location.
Fact: This is the same department that shot that baptist preacher. I think the family in that civil suit got over $2 million.
You know why gun owners, even gun owners who have general admiration of the police and military, get so pissed about these stories?
Its because we know that if the Liberals get their way, these sort of raids will be coming to our houses because of the guns in our safes. And the "he had guns" justification will be used, as the [tinfoil] Sheriff did here with the "zomg METH!" thing, to call GUN OWNERS "domestic terrorists" and justify killing our kids and families.
I continue to think dynamic raids are over used. If your target has so little contraband that it could be flushed, then it is not a big enough bust to justify the risk of harm to innocent occupants, neighbors and the officers themselves arising out of a raid like this.
Here's the deal, man. Whether you call them human shields or, you know, just "children." These kiddos are not legally or morally responsible for their residence being targeted.
Ergo, it becomes a question of the magnitude of the societal harm on on the one hand (drug dealing, MP3 downloads, owning a magazine with 8 rounds instead of 7), being weighed against the societal harm of wounding and killing innocents, especially children, as mitigated by whatever safeguards can be implemented.
I see this as a typical question of proportionality.
Should we plan on some percentage of wounded or dead infants in our enforcement of:
1. Traffic tickets?
2. Kids downloading MP3s?
3. Teens having a party in a field.
4. Owning guns with the wrong feature?
5. Drug using?
6. Drug dealing?
etc., etc.
You seem to be suggesting that so long as "X" is against the law, killing children of the persons ACCUSED of (or in the same house with persons doing or allegedly doing) "X" constitute acceptable breakage. Its easy to justify it as "*expletive deleted*ck em, kids of drug dealers" when its an activity you don't like, but go on facebook sometime and see what people think of gun owners and you might be shocked to find there's a sizeable part of the country that would not weep if your kiddos were blown up by a flashbang if you were accused of having too large of a ammunition feeding device.
-
Just to make it worse for gun owners, It appears from the sheriff's statement that he got the no-knock treatment not because of the meth, but because he had an AK.
Because of recent history with the individual involved in the alleged drug sales and knowledge of weapons in the residence, the special agent seeking the search warrant requested a "no-knock" warrant, Terrell said
It's very likely that no member of APS will have a warrant served on them in the future. But if you do, rest assured this is how the police will come through your door. I'd bet even cursory recon of any of us would show the ownership of weapons.
-
Just to make it worse for gun owners, It appears from the sheriff's statement that he got the no-knock treatment not because of the meth, but because he had an AK.
It's very likely that no member of APS will have a warrant served on them in the future. But if you do, rest assured this is how the police will come through your door. I'd bet even cursory recon of any of us would show the ownership of weapons.
Ayup. And given the rising popularity of SWATing as a revenge/political intimidation tactic, you can't just parrot the silly "don't do the crime" lines.
Kind of sad when "We will send the cops to your house" is one of the best and most easily achievable threats one can make against a person.
-
Looks like HCSO protected and served the *expletive deleted*it out of that kid.
I really must question the level of danger they thought they would encounter, given the lack of effective recon of the target.
I question a whole lot more, but I can see the way this is trending.
-
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/05/30/drug-task-force-that-burned-a-toddler-this-week-also-killed-an-innocent-pastor-in-2009/?tid=pm_opinions_pop
-
I wonder how difficult it would be to limit the insurance coverages available to law enforcement agencys?
If departments had to pay crazy money in civil suits out of their budgets then maybe it would limit the irresponsible behavior?And kick the bad apples to the unemployement line.
-
I have often wondered......
Hardening a house to the extent that it would kill any team coming through the door would be trivially easy. Especially if you are already committing felonies. I know criminals tend to be a few rounds short of a full magazine, but how is it no one has done this yet?
Don't get me wrong, I don't wish death on these LEO's, even as I fervently wish for them to stop no-knocks, but eventually they are going to get to someone smarter then the average bear, or a vet that the VA has screwed for so long he got his own pills.
-
I wonder how difficult it would be to limit the insurance coverages available to law enforcement agencys?
If departments had to pay crazy money in civil suits out of their budgets then maybe it would limit the irresponsible behavior?And kick the bad apples to the unemployement line.
They'd just crank up the civil asset forfeiture and speed trap ticket writing. Gotta put the fuel in that MRAP somehow.
I have often wondered......
Hardening a house to the extent that it would kill any team coming through the door would be trivially easy. Especially if you are already committing felonies. I know criminals tend to be a few rounds short of a full magazine, but how is it no one has done this yet?
Don't get me wrong, I don't wish death on these LEO's, even as I fervently wish for them to stop no-knocks, but eventually they are going to get to someone smarter then the average bear, or a vet that the VA has screwed for so long he got his own pills.
The vast majority of the criminals to get caught are the really stupid and lazy ones. The smart ones who would do that rarely make it into search warrants in the first place.
-
They'd just crank up the civil asset forfeiture and speed trap ticket writing. Gotta put the fuel in that MRAP somehow.
Exactly my point.If enough sheeple(and I use that not because they don't care but that they don't know about the problem(and how often do you get to use sheeple in a sentence anyways? :) ))were to be effected because a municipality were to have to start pinching the populace to cover bad/overly aggressive/questionable policework,I believe that the non-popo overlords would have to step in.
Let the local politicals put a proposal worth millions on the ballot.Let those who want the money defend their positions in a public forum.The press would have a field day!Let the Chief go to bat for his department.Personal responsibility extended to those in authority?OMG!It would be awesome!
A precedent that limits lawsuits as a result?No wouldn't/couldn't that be a bad thing?
:cool:
-
I'll withhold judgement until I hear CSD's side of the story.
-
I'll withhold judgement until I hear CSD's side of the story.
:rofl:
Lay down in the pack n play with dogs, get a grenade in the face.
Wait, how does that go again?
Also note that no drugs, weapons, paraphanelia, or large amounts of cash were found. Dude they wanted wasn't even there, and was later arrested without incident at another house.
-
It is extremely difficult to reform an organization with a publicly paid for union, a lot of guns, the power to kill and get away with it, and a intelligence branch, combined with the ability and intent to intimidate the public and the politicians who may want change-
Cops in CA were going to folk's houses who were trying to restrain the obscenely generous retirement benefits for the public unions, in order to intimidate them.
If the militarization of the cops continues much longer, and the intelligence/surveillance continues, the cops, Federal ,State and Local, will BE the government. THEY will be telling our "representatives", how high to jump.
-
It is extremely difficult to reform an organization with a publicly paid for union, a lot of guns, the power to kill and get away with it, and a intelligence branch, combined with the ability and intent to intimidate the public and the politicians who may want change-
Cops in CA were going to folk's houses who were trying to restrain the obscenely generous retirement benefits for the public unions, in order to intimidate them.
If the militarization of the cops continues much longer, and the intelligence/surveillance continues, the cops, Federal ,State and Local, will BE the government. THEY will be telling our "representatives", how high to jump.
Yes,I understand.That said,I believe that it could happen,fairly easily(I have no idea how easily I confess.) in the smaller cities such as my own(<600,000 in the urban area).
I guess my point is that it is perhaps a small way to initiate a chain reaction.Not unlike the CCW and gay marriage movements.Different issues but they started small and built traction.
Just a thought.
-
In his Cop Talk column in the July/August 2014 American Handgunner magazine, Massad Ayoob deals with a question from a reader who opines that police forces are getting overly aggressive and militaristic.
Ayoob articulately explains his position and concludes that "No, I don't think America's police forces 'have become too aggressive, too militaristic, and too free with their gunfire.' "
(He was also quite articulate some years back in minimizing the blame accrued to the NYC stakeout squad which unloaded 41 rounds on an unarmed innocent.)
Generally speaking, an awful lot of what he writes is (or should be) common sense, and his insights on court cases should be required reading for anyone who has or carries a gun. But when it comes to defending the actions of officers that so many people find questionable, the reaction he elicits is often :facepalm: . . . and from what I've read, he gets a little testy and retreats to authority ("I'm the expert and you're not! You can have an opinion when you're as smart as I am!") when someone disagrees.
-
So I was scanning that LEO forum Balog linked and found this:
Bad that it turned out this way,still better than a team walking up to the door,announcing themselves and ripped apart by gun fire.
I disagree. Every LEO in this country, at one point or another, decided to put their life on the line to maintain law and order. A conscious decision. So even if this false dichotomy was true (those were the only possible solutions) it would be better for the team (who chose to defend the innocent) to die then to harm the innocent.
But what do I know, I only look at these problems from the mind of an infantryman. We aren't trained to accept as much Collateral Damage as LEO's.
*ETA: I know the US Military has done some pretty horrible things in it's history, including to American citizens. We're not perfect. But we do a decent job of looking back and saying "that's *expletive deleted*ed up. We need to not do that anymore." As opposed to: "Yep that went by the book, shame about the kid. Miller Time!"
-
.
-
So I was scanning that LEO forum Balog linked and found this:
I disagree. Every LEO in this country, at one point or another, decided to put their life on the line to maintain law and order. A conscious decision. So even if this false dichotomy was true (those were the only possible solutions) it would be better for the team (who chose to defend the innocent) to die then to harm the innocent.
But what do I know, I only look at these problems from the mind of an infantryman. We aren't trained to accept as much Collateral Damage as LEO's.
*ETA: I know the US Military has done some pretty horrible things in it's history, including to American citizens. We're not perfect. But we do a decent job of looking back and saying "that's *expletive deleted*ed up. We need to not do that anymore." As opposed to: "Yep that went by the book, shame about the kid. Miller Time!"
Yeah, I saw that same comment a few hours ago. It bugged the heck out of me and I wrote a pretty long reply that I ended up deleting because I ended up getting not very APS. The whole "whatever it takes as long as you can go home at the end of your shift" philosophy seems to be getting all too prevalent. "Whatever it takes" could just as easily be taking a step back and not doing something RTFN. I'm getting to where I'd like to see a bit more inaction and less action. Most especially with warrants.
-
I have often wondered......
Hardening a house to the extent that it would kill any team coming through the door would be trivially easy. Especially if you are already committing felonies. I know criminals tend to be a few rounds short of a full magazine, but how is it no one has done this yet?
Don't get me wrong, I don't wish death on these LEO's, even as I fervently wish for them to stop no-knocks, but eventually they are going to get to someone smarter then the average bear, or a vet that the VA has screwed for so long he got his own pills.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvaEJzoaYZk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvaEJzoaYZk)
-
This just depresses the heck out of me. It will not end well. Power only respects greater power so do not expect to see willing reform. Reform will occur in the same way the current problem did...through the willing exercise of violence.
That assumes there is any great call for reform. We have learned that diversity means less trust and social capital. Regular folk might weigh the costs of leo accretion of authority vs the threat of a "vibrant" culture and figure half civilized leos are the lesser evil.
-
I'f I'm ever so lucky as to have a house built for me to spec, I think the entryways will have double locking doors/mantrap areas etc. [tinfoil]
-
It is extremely difficult to reform an organization with a publicly paid for union, a lot of guns, the power to kill and get away with it, and a intelligence branch, combined with the ability and intent to intimidate the public and the politicians who may want change-
Cops in CA were going to folk's houses who were trying to restrain the obscenely generous retirement benefits for the public unions, in order to intimidate them.
If the militarization of the cops continues much longer, and the intelligence/surveillance continues, the cops, Federal ,State and Local, will BE the government. THEY will be telling our "representatives", how high to jump.
Victims need to hire a private organization with the same powers. I bet there are some that would do this job for cheap or even pro bono.
-
I'f I'm ever so lucky as to have a house built for me to spec, I think the entryways will have double locking doors/mantrap areas etc. [tinfoil]
You've thought of that too?
Will your entryways have a decontamination station that sprays napalm on offending organisms?
-
You've thought of that too?
Will your entryways have a decontamination station that sprays napalm on offending organisms?
Drop shaft, 100 feet deep. Chipper shredder at the bottom.
-
Once again, I have nothing polite or acceptable to say >:D
-
I'f I'm ever so lucky as to have a house built for me to spec, I think the entryways will have double locking doors/mantrap areas etc. [tinfoil]
Yeah.........I once told my wife she had no idea how much of a moderating influence on me she really was.
Given my head, my house would absolutely have a mid sized entry room that could be sealed remotely. Countermeasures optional although these (http://burglarbomb.com/Repulsar-IV.aspx) look like fun, and are more legal then claymores.
And while I have no interest in getting into the undocumented pharmacy industry, If I was, all transactions would be made in the front room of the house, and all countermeasures would be concealed. Any customers would NOT be shown, nor would any hints be made, of weapons, defense in depth, hardened doors windows and walls, secondary egress routes, and incendiary devices. jus' saying
-
I really must question the level of danger they thought they would encounter, given the lack of effective recon of the target.
This; if your concern is actually "officer safety," then the first action is to find out, first hand and in detail, exactly what you're sending them into. The second action is to look at alternatives, like arresting the guy outside the house when he doesn't have access to his evil assault rifle, then search the house properly once he's out of the picture.
This was a bunch of punks playing with their tacticool toys.
-
*ETA: I know the US Military has done some pretty horrible things in it's history, including to American citizens. We're not perfect. But we do a decent job of looking back and saying "that's *expletive deleted*ed up. We need to not do that anymore." As opposed to: "Yep that went by the book, shame about the kid. Miller Time!"
More to the point, a soldier doesn't have the option of saying "No, I won't follow that order. You know where to mail my final paycheck." I've left some good paying jobs and refused others because I considered their "book" to be immoral. The same option is open to these guys, and the fact they don't take it shows that they don't feel too strongly that the book needs a serious rewrite.
-
Given my head, my house would absolutely have a mid sized entry room that could be sealed remotely. Countermeasures optional although these look like fun, and are more legal then claymores.
If you have the JBTs peace officers knocking down on your door, 'legal' and illegal' become quaint notions.
-
If you have the JBTs peace officers knocking down on your door, 'legal' and illegal' become quaint notions.
yes but if actually is a criminal home invasion than the notions are important.
-
yes but if actually is a criminal home invasion than the notions are important.
True, even though it still shouldn't matter.
-
So I was scanning that LEO forum Balog linked and found this:
I disagree. Every LEO in this country, at one point or another, decided to put their life on the line to maintain law and order. A conscious decision. So even if this false dichotomy was true (those were the only possible solutions) it would be better for the team (who chose to defend the innocent) to die then to harm the innocent.
But what do I know, I only look at these problems from the mind of an infantryman. We aren't trained to accept as much Collateral Damage as LEO's.
*ETA: I know the US Military has done some pretty horrible things in it's history, including to American citizens. We're not perfect. But we do a decent job of looking back and saying "that's *expletive deleted*ed up. We need to not do that anymore." As opposed to: "Yep that went by the book, shame about the kid. Miller Time!"
I agree with your statement. I just want to point out that the mission of law enforcement in this country is no longer "maintaining law and order." Their mission is control and subjugation. I still give individual officers the benefit of doubt regarding their motivations, however I no longer have any doubt regarding the motivations of the various "law" organizations in our occupied country.
-
I agree with your statement. I just want to point out that the mission of law enforcement in this country is no longer "maintaining law and order." Their mission is control and subjugation. I still give individual officers the benefit of doubt regarding their motivations, however I no longer have any doubt regarding the motivations of the various "law" organizations in our occupied country.
That part of history that keeps repeating itself- we are almost there.
-
http://forums.officer.com/t194085/
Behold the war on drugs in all its glory.
I just got to reading some of the posts at the link above. Horribly depressing. Most of the posters have an attitude of "Screw 'em! The scumbag meth dealer injured that child, not the grenade!" I weep for our country. The basest, least humane, and most cruel members of society are charged with "protecting" our citizens.
-
Here's a good summary I saw posted. Only point missing is that they guy they were trying to catch in the raid was not present. Top notch work.
1) CI never entered the house.
2) CI stated that there was one drug deal outside the house and weapons at the house.
3) SWAT raid finds no drugs, weapons, or money at the house.
4) Police arrest a relative of the family the next day at separate location with $50 of drugs.
5) Police most likely will have killed a baby of a family that had nothing to do with drug dealing.
-
This is a picture of Habersham County Sherriff Joey Terrell. It is a still capture from an interview he was doing in which he adamantly defended his officers conduct and expressed remorse for severely burning and most likely killing a toddler. As you can tell, he's wracked with guilt.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FIC9yEsz.jpg&hash=0ea0a31ec68f253f5e212b90a85d2ab15e947542)
-
The officer who threw the grenade “is basically upside down,” relates the sheriff. “He’s gone and talked to his pastor, trying to get some counseling and some debriefing just to help him get through what has happened.” If the pastor is a man of God, rather than an agent of Leviathan, he will call that officer to repentance.
Would it be wrong for that pastor to pile on the guilt until the cop eats his gun?
(I don't think the sheriff knows what the word "Leviathan" means. Nor "repentance")
BTW, props to CSD for not defending this one, although it's kind of an echo chamber w/o him.
-
Would it be wrong for that pastor to pile on the guilt until the cop eats his gun?
Depends on the denomination, I guess. I'd go for "counsel him in whatever direction it takes to get him to turn in his badge and spend the rest of his life speaking out and fighting against such practices," though.
Or at least get him to run against the sheriff next election time, with a very outspoken platform of eliminating SWAT raids except in cases of imminent threat to life.
-
"Most of the posters have an attitude of "Screw 'em!..."
Said posters would do well to remember that the sentiment can run in their direction as well. :mad:
-
The cops arrested the guy they wanted the next day at another house but there's no mention of whether or not they no-knocked that house too. Arresting him with a no-knock would make the first raid seem unnecessary.
-
The cops arrested the guy they wanted the next day at another house but there's no mention of whether or not they no-knocked that house too. Arresting him with a no-knock would make the first raid seem unnecessary.
Last article I saw said "without incident." Convenient, isn't it?
Said posters would do well to remember that the sentiment can run in their direction as well.
Anybody want to help me get funding for an energy project? I want to find Sir Robert Peel's corpse, glue some magnets to it, and power the world from his spinning.
-
Anybody want to help me get funding for an energy project? I want to find Sir Robert Peel's corpse, glue some magnets to it, and power the world from his spinning.
I actually had to google him.
1. To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment.
2. To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.
3. To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws.
4. To recognise always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives.
5. To seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion; but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour; and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life.
6. To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective.
7. To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
8. To recognise always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty.
9. To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them.
Sounds like some crazy utopia.
-
I actually had to google him.
Sounds like some crazy utopia.
I'd never heard of him. I'd always wondered where the term "bobbies" came from, now I know.
-
I'd never heard of him. I'd always wondered where the term "bobbies" came from, now I know.
I had heard of Robert Peel - but then I forgot the name :facepalm:
I do however still remember Emma Peel :lol:
-
The other thing that's squirrelly here is the claim that she was using the baby as a human shield. Crib or playpen, how many people have put their baby in the middle of the living room just because it's a fairly convenient spot for keeping an eye on the kid?
IMO, we can infer a lot from the simple fact that departments will spend tens of thousands of dollars on tactical crap, but not $100/officer on wearable cameras and a requirement that they be on and active at all times during these actions.
-
The other thing that's squirrelly here is the claim that she was using the baby as a human shield. Crib or playpen, how many people have put their baby in the middle of the living room just because it's a fairly convenient spot for keeping an eye on the kid?
IMO, we can infer a lot from the simple fact that departments will spend tens of thousands of dollars on tactical crap, but not $100/officer on wearable cameras and a requirement that they be on and active at all times during these actions.
Or top-notch training.
I get more & more anti-SWAT every year. I think recruiting higher-quality beat patrolmen, giving them better training, and having them carry a carbine and maybe some other gear in the trunk is a better solution for 75% of LEO agencies that run SWAT.
So many of the SWAT videos show an unruly & undisciplined knot of SWATties who are well-equipped, but toss tactical soundness out the window from the get-go. They desperately could use some of my old NCOs to put the fear of God (and a size 12R boot up their ass) into them.
-
So many of the SWAT videos show an unruly & undisciplined knot of SWATties who are well-equipped, but toss tactical soundness out the window from the get-go. They desperately could use some of my old NCOs to put the fear of God (and a size 12R boot up their ass) into them.
This. Use the ram, then wait while the guy with the ram sets it down and draws his pistol, then everybody enters in a nice line...watching through a few of the videos, I'm amazed none of their targets has ever managed a "SWAT Stack o' Truth" test of a .30-06 with AP. With good timing, it could get the whole team with a throat shot on the first guy.
-
I get more & more anti-SWAT every year. I think recruiting higher-quality beat patrolmen, giving them better training, and having them carry a carbine and maybe some other gear in the trunk is a better solution for 75% of LEO agencies that run SWAT.
Totally agree. It's too much of an investment to not use, and if there aren't enough cases that really warrant its use then it will be overused and misused.
Better beat cops with a little extra equipment and training would be far better in most cases. For the rare barricaded shooter, ring up the regional statie team, or the nearest metro department with a team.
Not every fire department needs an aerial firefighting division, and not every police department needs SWAT.
-
You guys know that the VAST majority of SWAT teams in this country are regular beat cops with extra equipment in the trunk, right?
Most smaller departments just take some percentage of their force and give them some extra training and equipment and then put them back on patrol. When they decide to call SWAT, or do a No-Knock, they just call up the SWAT trained officers that are on shift and go. That's at least half the reason SWAT teams tend to be so poorly trained.
I'm getting to the point where I'd like to see no cities have SWAT teams. Let the County Sheriff have one team, 5 or so guys, that do all of it for the whole county. And that's all they do. Train, burn ammo, and be on call. Yeah those 5 guys wouldn't do much, but when they had to do it for real, they'd be good at it. And less likely to set houses on fire or char babies.
-
Let the County Sheriff have one team, 5 or so guys, that do all of it for the whole county. And that's all they do. Train, burn ammo, and be on call.
Then there would be even more of an administrative push to use them unnecessarily, just to justify the ongoing expense.
-
I'm getting to the point where I'd like to see no cities have SWAT teams. Let the County Sheriff have one team, 5 or so guys, that do all of it for the whole county. And that's all they do. Train, burn ammo, and be on call. Yeah those 5 guys wouldn't do much, but when they had to do it for real, they'd be good at it. And less likely to set houses on fire or char babies.
I agree*. One of the things I have consistently seen in the Federal government, and I'm positive trickles down to State and Local, is that any agency/dept/locality with a limited budget, instead of not doing something because they can't afford to and don't have the resources to do it right, will ALWAYS decide to half-ass it, just to say they're doing it. Giving a paper-pusher one extra collateral duty that involves different paper pushing that they do a crappy job at may be screwing the taxpayers, but giving someone a collateral duty, without proper training, that involves life and death decisions, is simply dangerous.
* I think the debate on SWAT teams existing and how they act and how they are deployed, is different than the debate that if they do exist, that they at least need to be trained well and continuously train. If your "SWAT team" is a few guys you threw extra battle rattle, a surplus APC, and a nifty mil-dot scope to, then sorry, no.
-
You guys know that the VAST majority of SWAT teams in this country are regular beat cops with extra equipment in the trunk, right?
Yeah, that is how our local ERT team is staffed too, but that's not really what I'm talking about. That is still assigning a group of guys to a SWAT role which leads to SWAT funding with leads to seeking ways to use the SWAT investment.
-
Then there would be even more of an administrative push to use them unnecessarily, just to justify the ongoing expense.
OK. Addendum to plan. County SWAT is it's own little department. Has a budget, a boss, and some training area. Get your teams out there and train. It does NOT however have the authority to go somewhere and SWAT on it's own. Set it up so another agency has to request SWAT. Charge the requesting agency. A lot*. Don't give that money to SWAT. Put it into libraries or something.
So SWAT's incentive is to sit there and train. THat's all the budget they're going to get. Going on a call just messes up the training schedule. The folks that are supplying that budget CAN'T use the team.
Local LEA's incentive is to figure out a non SWAT way to solve the problem, because if you call SWAT a big chunk of your budget is going into replacing Twilight novels that girls didn't return.
If you do get a criminal that needs SWATing, your team is top notch because they've spent the last 5 years training 40 hrs a week.
*Sliding scale based on the size of the department's budget. And make add a law that any local officer that crosses into SWAT territory loses immunity. And any administrator or higher up that allows one of their officers to get tactical looses immunity and is personally liable for any damages.
-
This. Use the ram, then wait while the guy with the ram sets it down and draws his pistol, then everybody enters in a nice line...watching through a few of the videos, I'm amazed none of their targets has ever managed a "SWAT Stack o' Truth" test of a .30-06 with AP. With good timing, it could get the whole team with a throat shot on the first guy.
I am intrigued by your ideas and wish to subscribe to your newsletter >:D
-
Guys, let's please be careful that our discussions are not becoming what we're protesting. Thanks.
-
The cops arrested the guy they wanted the next day at another house but there's no mention of whether or not they no-knocked that house too. Arresting him with a no-knock would make the first raid seem unnecessary.
The first raid was clearly unnecessary. It
- Found no drugs
- Found no weapons
- Did not find the intended suspect
- Critcally injured an innocent toddler
How could it have been any less necessary?
-
I'm surprised nobody in the apartment was charged with child endangerment for placing the tyke in the path of a police grenade - maybe now that the original suspect is in custody, additional charges of harm to a child can be filed, too.
-
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwesternrifleshooters.files.wordpress.com%2F2014%2F06%2Fswatco-flashbang.png%3Fw%3D500%26amp%3Bh%3D887&hash=300ad505d4ff993401cc3f0684925f28b079aabd)
-
I'm surprised nobody's talked about the judges who OK these warrants without demanding better justification for the no-knock entries.
Who was that judge anyhow? Who was the police official who made the claim that a no-knock was necessary?
And someone made an appealing point: If there's only enough "stuff" that someone could flush it down the toilet, why was it such a big deal?
-
I'm surprised nobody's talked about the judges who OK these warrants without demanding better justification for the no-knock entries.
Who was that judge anyhow? Who was the police official who made the claim that a no-knock was necessary?
And someone made an appealing point: If there's only enough "stuff" that someone could flush it down the toilet, why was it such a big deal?
Judge Rubberstamp.
For these sorts of things to occur and be considered "legal," all three branches of gov't must be oath-breakers.
-
Roo_ster spake thus:
Judge Rubberstamp.
For these sorts of things to occur and be considered "legal," all three branches of gov't must be oath-breakers.
Quoted for excellence.
-
And someone made an appealing point: If there's only enough "stuff" that someone could flush it down the toilet, why was it such a big deal?
Exactly; and if you do it every couple weeks, eventually the guy might get tired enough of having to flush his stash at random intervals to quit keeping any at home anyway.
-
In a shocking revelation, the guy who laughs about his boys burning a baby's face with a grenade lied about what happened. Our resident apologists are certainly quiet on this one aren't they?
http://www.wect.com/story/25685094/us-attorney-meets-with-family-of-child-hurt-in-drug-raid
Habersham County Sheriff Joey Terrell said deputies used the flashbang because they couldn't get in a door blocked by Phonesavanh's playpen. The grenade landed in the playpen, going off inches from the 19-month-old's face. Davis said independent investigators discovered Terrell's statement was wrong.
"We have taken measurements where the playpen was at the time of the incident from the doorway, which was breached by this SWAT team. It measures six feet away from the door, so the notion that this playpen was pressed up against this door is an absolute lie," Davis said.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FIC9yEsz.jpg&hash=0ea0a31ec68f253f5e212b90a85d2ab15e947542)
-
In a shocking revelation, the guy who laughs about his boys burning a baby's face with a grenade lied about what happened. Our resident apologists are certainly quiet on this one aren't they?
I think that says a lot. Don't you?
-
I think that says a lot. Don't you?
Only other time I can think of that happening was the Spokane cop who beat the retarded guy to death for no reason, and his fellow thin blue liners showed up to applaud and support him when he was convicted. Some things are so bad they can't be spun.
-
*Sliding scale based on the size of the department's budget. And make add a law that any local officer that crosses into SWAT territory loses immunity. And any administrator or higher up that allows one of their officers to get tactical looses immunity and is personally liable for any damages.
I'd give them a little leeway on this; for truly time-critical situations, they should be able to act without waiting for SWAT to roll, but it would need to be absolutely clear that nothing short of imminent danger of serious injury or death to innocent parties qualifies as being that time critical. (I'm thinking clearly unstable hostage taker doing the "I'm going to kill one every x minutes" routine, or drugged up kidnapper, not Bubba holed up all alone with a deer rifle, only threatening people who actually approach the house. For Bubba, the regulars set up a perimeter and ask cavalry to roll the MRAP and take over.)
ETA: Don't I remember from somewhere that the procedure for pyrotechnics through the door on entry is supposed to be "throw low?" i.e. an underhanded, level toss around knee level, specifically so it doesn't end up in someone's lap or bed?
-
For Bubba, the regulars set up a perimeter and ask cavalry to roll the MRAP and take over.)
For bubba, cut the power and water, and park a few extra squads on the street near his house. He'll be out in a day or two. No need for mrap retardedness.
-
For bubba, cut the power and water, and park a few extra squads on the street near his house. He'll be out in a day or two. No need for mrap retardedness.
MRAP, gas grenades, drag his butt out and let the neighbors go home. Don't drag the situation out.
While we're at it, roll SWAT on traffic accidents; while the locals are playing Kojak out there, pretending there is anything to investigate in 99% of wrecks, MRAP plows through and restores free flowing traffic to reduce the risk of more wrecks. Gas and other less-than-lethal grenades on rubberneckers encouraged.
-
For bubba, cut the power and water, and park a few extra squads on the street near his house. He'll be out in a day or two. No need for mrap retardedness.
If I were bubba's neighbor, I'd be pretty pissed if my family and I were evicted from my home for an indefinite period to wait out the jerk taking shots at all comers. A barricaded shooter is one of those rare cases I think SWAT makes sense, but it is also one that usually gives you time to wait for some sort of regional team of professionals to gear up and come in.
-
If I were bubba's neighbor, I'd be pretty pissed if my family and I were evicted from my home for an indefinite period to wait out the jerk taking shots at all comers. A barricaded shooter is one of those rare cases I think SWAT makes sense, but it is also one that usually gives you time to wait for some sort of regional team of professionals to gear up and come in.
Not as pissed as you'll be when Officer Mikey Milsim burns your place to the ground after chucking some "burners" into Bubba's place.
-
For bubba, cut the power and water, and park a few extra squads on the street near his house. He'll be out in a day or two. No need for mrap retardedness.
This has always been my philosophy on the matter. "We've got the place surrounded, come out with your hands up!"
Drugs may be flushed down the toilet, but big deal. You have less risk of injury or death on both sides. Bubba, if he has a brain cell or two, has time to call a lawyer before he comes out. If they got my house by mistake, I also have time to figure out what's going on and call someone myself, or at the very least, can walk out and deal with the cops in public. If shots are fired, or there is a legitimate bomb threat or similar, then the police can start looking at displacing neighbors and/or using more aggressive methods to end the situation. If not, there's no reason to evacuate the whole block.
I'm fine with my tax dollars paying for LE to sit outside a place and wait. I think it ends up being a lot cheaper than say, the lawsuit that will likely come from the OP, that my tax dollars would pay for.
-
Not as pissed as you'll be when Officer Mikey Milsim burns your place to the ground after chucking some "burners" into Bubba's place.
Right, although there probably some sort of middle ground between burning down the neighborhood and evicting everyone until bubba runs out of water and either offs himself or gives up and comes out.
-
But if they flush the baggie of drugs, you might not be able to seize the house and everything in it. :police: The sheriffs and the chiefs (you know, the ones not actually there and at risk) care a lot more about asset forfeiture than they do about actual officer safety or public safety.
-
Right, although there probably some sort of middle ground between burning down the neighborhood and evicting everyone until bubba runs out of water and either offs himself or gives up and comes out.
ISPRA, Clear Out and plenty of others offer non-incendiary CS, CN and/or OC options. Not that hard to come up with ways to disperse anything that can be pressurized in gas or aerosol form without fire. ISPRA specifically offers 40mm CS powder rounds, and Clear Out has what amounts to an OC/CS bug bomb for $17 a can. So, say, $500 worth of those, and you can lob in one every 30 minutes and wait him out up to 15 hours until his surplus gas mask's 20 year old canister gives up. Something along the lines of the CO2 pressure burst grenades used for Airsoft will keep him awake and disoriented. A mason jar full of angry hornets might be a fun plan too.
-
But if they flush the baggie of drugs, you might not be able to seize the house and everything in it.
Hmmm... a significant observation.
-
First news update I've seen about the baby: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/06/23/toddler-injured-flash-grenade-drug-raid/11254289/
-
Right, although there probably some sort of middle ground between burning down the neighborhood and evicting everyone until bubba runs out of water and either offs himself or gives up and comes out.
Cutting off power and water usually results in the alleged giving up within 24 hours. Rarely will they make to 48. People have to sleep sometime. ;)
-
Cutting off power and water usually results in the alleged giving up within 24 hours. Rarely will they make to 48. People have to sleep sometime. ;)
Sure, there are options available outside of Tommy Tactical storming the fort, but if someone gets to the point that they are cranking off rounds at passers by or cops in my neighborhood, I no longer particularly care about preserving their life. It isn't worth 24 to 48 hours of my family and a dozen or two of our neighbors being dispossessed and forced into hotels (or your parents' couch if they'll let me!) to soft-touch the wannabe sniper. If we're going to outfit and pay for a bunch of paramilitary cops, that's exactly the kind of scenario that they exist for.
That said, if the locals lacked a SWAT/ERT type team, waiting the jackwagon out seems reasonable.
-
Sure, there are options available outside of Tommy Tactical storming the fort, but if someone gets to the point that they are cranking off rounds at passers by or cops in my neighborhood, I no longer particularly care about preserving their life. It isn't worth 24 to 48 hours of my family and a dozen or two of our neighbors being dispossessed and forced into hotels (or your parents' couch if they'll let me!) to soft-touch the wannabe sniper. If we're going to outfit and pay for a bunch of paramilitary cops, that's exactly the kind of scenario that they exist for.
Doesn't take a SWAT team or a bunch of fancy crap. See "killdozer." Add a slit for a rifle, and one officer with a semiauto .308 can deal with a holed up redneck whose "cover" is a standard residential exterior wall.
-
Doesn't take a SWAT team or a bunch of fancy crap. See "killdozer." Add a slit for a rifle, and one officer with a semiauto .308 can deal with a holed up redneck whose "cover" is a standard residential exterior wall.
(https://yy2.staticflickr.com/5044/5269558397_64406aeb94_z.jpg)
-
Doesn't take a SWAT team or a bunch of fancy crap. See "killdozer." Add a slit for a rifle, and one officer with a semiauto .308 can deal with a holed up redneck whose "cover" is a standard residential exterior wall.
Well a swat killdozer would need about $300 worth if tactical flat black spray paint applied to it before cops would feel comfortable using it-its their gang color.
-
(https://yy2.staticflickr.com/5044/5269558397_64406aeb94_z.jpg)
The original killdozer took out a good chunk of a town. You don't think it could deal with one bozo in a house?
-
The original killdozer took out a good chunk of a town. You don't think it could deal with one bozo in a house?
No ... not arguing that. Just trying to figure out if you think that is really a better way to go than a SWAT team. I mean, a SMAW would work too, but that probably isn't the best solution, or the most flexible for other scenarios.
Although, the way things are going these days there'll be a good chance that your local SWATties will have an armored vehicle too. So there's that.
-
Although, the way things are going these days there'll be a good chance that your local SWATties will have an armored vehicle too. So there's that.
I have on good authority those soon to be retired A-10's are going to go to metro police depts.
Just joking. sort of. Maybe some of you remember the BATF trying to get hold of the surplussed OV 10 Bronco's, I think it was in the eighties.
-
I have on good authority those soon to be retired A-10's are going to go to metro police depts.
But they will be free!
-
No ... not arguing that. Just trying to figure out if you think that is really a better way to go than a SWAT team. I mean, a SMAW would work too, but that probably isn't the best solution, or the most flexible for other scenarios.
Bulldozers are relatively cheap and easy to maintain, and have lots of other uses for a municipality. They're also not particularly glamorous, so less conducive to the tacticool mentality.
-
Bulldozers are relatively cheap and easy to maintain, and have lots of other uses for a municipality. They're also not particularly glamorous, so less conducive to the tacticool mentality.
Are bulldozers really all that cheap and easy to maintain? Also, pretty sure maintenance becomes more of an issue as you up-armor a vehicle. Plus, the added armor would necessarily result in drastically reduced visibility, thus limiting the killdozer's usability in other roles.
As to glamour ... eh ... paint it flat black and put SVAT (Special Vehicles And Tactics) on the side and it'll be almost as glamorous as the rest of the armored trucks cops are getting.
-
Are bulldozers really all that cheap and easy to maintain? Also, pretty sure maintenance becomes more of an issue as you up-armor a vehicle. Plus, the added armor would necessarily result in drastically reduced visibility, thus limiting the killdozer's usability in other roles.
Hey, a bulldozer worked for John Wayne in one of his WW2 flicks. Was it Fighting Seabees? Don't remember the title, just vague recollections of The Duke single-handedly fighting off the entire Japanese army with a bulldozer (and maybe a 1911).
-
As to glamour ... eh ... paint it flat black and put SVAT (Special Vehicles And Tactics) on the side and it'll be almost as glamorous as the rest of the armored trucks cops are getting.
Aha! The cure for tacticool! We need a Federal mandate that all milsurp hardware in the hands of police departments be painted and maintained in a tasteful shade of baby pink, with teddy bear and daisy graphics.
-
Aha! The cure for tacticool! We need a Federal mandate that all milsurp hardware in the hands of police departments be painted and maintained in a tasteful shade of baby pink, with teddy bear and daisy graphics.
My daughter could work that gig.
-
Aha! The cure for tacticool! We need a Federal mandate that all milsurp hardware in the hands of police departments be painted and maintained in a tasteful shade of baby pink, with teddy bear and daisy graphics.
Though you're joking, I believe that would really be a "cure" for a lot of the militarization of both personnel and assets in law enforcement. Perhaps not pink with flowers, :) , but I believe there is a big psychological factor to appearance that affects both LE and those they serve. There's a big difference between how we perceive the Andy Griffith type of cop in a khaki "business casual" uniform that includes a tie, and "Joe Armored Tacticool". I certainly wouldn't want to constrain LE in the field to office dress attire and shoes, but dressing them in EMS type of clothing and color (though some of that is getting pretty tactical as well) would, I believe, considerably change perception, and perhaps, attitude. The same with the equipment they use and vehicles they drive. I believe a lot of European police departments choose non-intimidating colors and design for their uniforms and vehicles.
-
Though you're joking, I believe that would really be a "cure" for a lot of the militarization of both personnel and assets in law enforcement. Perhaps not pink with flowers, :) , but I believe there is a big psychological factor to appearance that affects both LE and those they serve. There's a big difference between how we perceive the Andy Griffith type of cop in a khaki "business casual" uniform that includes a tie, and "Joe Armored Tacticool".
I wouldn't recommend a tie in the field, but I can tell you that there's a huge difference in perception between the TXDPS "Texas Tan" uniforms or many sheriffs' lighter khaki, and virtually all local PD's "blue" black uniforms. That also seems to translate at least somewhat to their attitudes, though I suspect it's more of a reflection of the hiring and training policies of the person(s) who chose the uniforms.
-
I wouldn't recommend a tie in the field,
I thought that cops wore clip ons?
I agree on the uniform argument.I'd add that a less tactical cop *might*have less of a "us vs.them"attitude as well.
-
I suspect the uniforms are a result of the attitude, not vice versa. Those batman belts just don't go with beige . . .
-
I thought that cops wore clip ons?
They do.
Aha! The cure for tacticool! We need a Federal mandate that all milsurp hardware in the hands of police departments be painted and maintained in a tasteful shade of baby pink, with teddy bear and daisy graphics.
Not a terrible idea. Tactical teams could wear all white with lace trim.
-
Not a terrible idea. Tactical teams could wear all white with lace trim.
Lace 'n' Mace!! :police:
-
Apparently some updates: swat-threw-stun-grenade-ino-toddlers-crib-refuse-pay-medical-bills (http://thefreethoughtproject.com/swat-threw-stun-grenade-ino-toddlers-crib-refuse-pay-medical-bills/)
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/10632619_10152619749703189_851833631791596587_n.jpg?oh=6b00713e179155d282d594dc2801a184&oe=547332F9&__gda__=1415246995_9e637df89e4321fdb257d28eb4576690)
-
I'm not making any suggestions of course, but it's somewhat coincidental that the following thread is right above this one at this moment:
http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=45414.0
-
Refusing to pay now means they're going to pay a LOT more once the civil suit is finished...I'd imagine that their attorney is taking that one on contingency.