Government Death Squad
0
-
quote:Originally posted by Blckhrn
Which is worse, the leos or the MC group sponsoring a toy drive?
I once saw a picture of Ted Bundy petting a puppy. Maybe they should've just let him go.0 -
quote:Originally posted by warriorsfan
Well, I think it goes back to what EMM was saying, not only are SWAT teams proliferating but they are also more widely used to address relatively minor crimes like prostitution or drug buys. Do we really need eight guys dressed all in black body armor and carrying MP5s to arrest some johns during a prostitution sting or some kid buying marijuana from an undercover officer?
I hope I didn't edit so much as to lose context here, but you make a great point. And I agree. But I still want meth labs raided in as military fashion as is possible.
You can tell I have a nearly unquenchable blood lust for those who manufacture, sell, use or distribute meth. I'm pretty militant about it.
I maintain that there are situations that call for the tactics and equipment of SRT teams. And I agree that in order to continue funding and rationalize the existence of such teams, Police agencies have misused them.0 -
Meth labs yes, but innocent veterans who the police have intelligence specifically saying that he was not armed nor a flight risk... NO.
Its happened far to many times at this point and something needs to be done. I hate to see a police officer receive the death penalty or life in prison because they have families as well, but we need to do something.
What would any of you do, if you were confronted by multiple heavily armed people, dressed in black, not identified as police, in a bad neighborhood? Especially if you just got back from TWO tours in Iraq? I sure as HE** know what I would have done if I had the ability at all.0 -
quote:Originally posted by fu007dan
Meth labs yes, but innocent veterans who the police have intelligence specifically saying that he was not armed nor a flight risk... NO.
Its happened far to many times at this point and something needs to be done. I hate to see a police officer receive the death penalty or life in prison because they have families as well, but we need to do something.
What would any of you do, if you were confronted by multiple heavily armed people, dressed in black, not identified as police, in a bad neighborhood? Especially if you just got back from TWO tours in Iraq? I sure as HE** know what I would have done if I had the ability at all.
I think we're very much in agreement here. Like I said, there is a lot of misuse of "Tactical Response" going on. Make no mistake, if it were my home and family, I wouldn't rest until I had complete restitution and maybe even some punitive thrown in for good measure.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Colonel Plink
quote:Originally posted by fu007dan
Meth labs yes, but innocent veterans who the police have intelligence specifically saying that he was not armed nor a flight risk... NO.
Its happened far to many times at this point and something needs to be done. I hate to see a police officer receive the death penalty or life in prison because they have families as well, but we need to do something.
What would any of you do, if you were confronted by multiple heavily armed people, dressed in black, not identified as police, in a bad neighborhood? Especially if you just got back from TWO tours in Iraq? I sure as HE** know what I would have done if I had the ability at all.
I think we're very much in agreement here. Like I said, there is a lot of misuse of "Tactical Response" going on. Make no mistake, if it were my home and family, I wouldn't rest until I had complete restitution and maybe even some punitive thrown in for good measure.
I think this officer deserves to face a firing squad...not only would this be appropriate "punative" (or punishment), but it would send a clear message to LEO's that this type of behavior will be prosecuted.0 -
quote:Originally posted by ECC
I think this officer deserves to face a firing squad...not only would this be appropriate "punative" (or punishment), but it would send a clear message to LEO's that this type of behavior will be prosecuted.
Can we at least wait until after the trial to execute him?0 -
Trial, what do we need a trial for? Everyone knows all that you read on the internet is completely accurate and, besides, trials are just a waste of time and money. Whenever you see or read something you don't agree with, just grab a gun and start shooting. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Colonel Plink
quote:Originally posted by ECC
I think this officer deserves to face a firing squad...not only would this be appropriate "punative" (or punishment), but it would send a clear message to LEO's that this type of behavior will be prosecuted.
Can we at least wait until after the trial to execute him?
Absolutely...but I believe that if he's found guilty (as it sounds like he should be), I believe the punishment should fit the crime.0 -
quote:Originally posted by dlrjj
Trial, what do we need a trial for? Everyone knows all that you read on the internet is completely accurate and, besides, trials are just a waste of time and money. Whenever you see or read something you don't agree with, just grab a gun and start shooting.
Well, at this point. I am basing my opinion on multiple articles, with several unaffiliated witnesses. Did you read all the provided articles to form your opinion, or just the one that you called biased?
(which it may or may not have been..that isn't the point I'm arguing)0 -
quote:Originally posted by Colonel Plink
quote:Originally posted by fu007dan
Meth labs yes, but innocent veterans who the police have intelligence specifically saying that he was not armed nor a flight risk... NO.
Its happened far to many times at this point and something needs to be done. I hate to see a police officer receive the death penalty or life in prison because they have families as well, but we need to do something.
What would any of you do, if you were confronted by multiple heavily armed people, dressed in black, not identified as police, in a bad neighborhood? Especially if you just got back from TWO tours in Iraq? I sure as HE** know what I would have done if I had the ability at all.
I think we're very much in agreement here. Like I said, there is a lot of misuse of "Tactical Response" going on. Make no mistake, if it were my home and family, I wouldn't rest until I had complete restitution and maybe even some punitive thrown in for good measure.
I think it's simply a way for the government to get around that pesky "Posse Comitatus Act." They can't use the military against American civilians, so they do the next best thing. Civilian police officers get military equipment and military-style training and they CAN be used against us. Twenty years ago, such a sight would have been unthinkable. Today, it is commonplace to see police walking around in tactical gear and carrying AR-15s or MP5s. I have to wonder, twenty years from now, will we see police driving around our neighborhoods in Armored Personnel Carriers and will that be considered "normal?" Will checkpoints and "papers please" become a routine part of our daily lives?0 -
warriorsfan, I'd be willing to bet you'll be right, unless something is done to change it. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by fu007dan
quote:Originally posted by dlrjj
Trial, what do we need a trial for? Everyone knows all that you read on the internet is completely accurate and, besides, trials are just a waste of time and money. Whenever you see or read something you don't agree with, just grab a gun and start shooting.
Well, at this point. I am basing my opinion on multiple articles, with several unaffiliated witnesses. Did you read all the provided articles to form your opinion, or just the one that you called biased?
(which it may or may not have been..that isn't the point I'm arguing)
Please find ANY POST here where I stated that ANY of these were biased. You can't even find a post where I stated ANY opinion on those articles.
The fact that you can't even come close to such an event is EXACTLY why trials are needed instead of half baked vigilante "justice" meted out by nut jobs that are too busy being paranoid to take the time to at least wait to actually arrive at the truth before you start your witch hunt induced executions.
If your analysis of those articles is as decrepit as your analysis of what I have posted up to this point, your opinion is worth exactly zero.0 -
Yes. I read all of your posts, and got yours mixed up with someones from above. Once you read all the articles and formulate an opinion like an adult you will be allowed to call my opinion worthless. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by fu007dan
Yes. I read all of your posts, and got yours mixed up with someones from above. Once you read all the articles and formulate an opinion like an adult you will be allowed to call my opinion worthless.
You've already demonstrated the value of your opinions with your so very cogent and succinct evaluation of my previous posts. Based on that level of accomplishment, I'm not much concerned with obtaining your permission to take a leak, let alone to evaluate the worth of your opinion on any article posted.0 -
quote:Originally posted by dlrjj
quote:Originally posted by fu007dan
Yes. I read all of your posts, and got yours mixed up with someones from above. Once you read all the articles and formulate an opinion like an adult you will be allowed to call my opinion worthless.
You've already demonstrated the value of your opinions with your so very cogent and succinct evaluation of my previous posts. Based on that level of accomplishment, I'm not much concerned with obtaining your permission to take a leak, let alone to evaluate the worth of your opinion on any article posted.
As a matter of fact, I would not like to hear when you have to "take a leak" but at the rate our country is going, "big brother" will soon know, and you will ask them for your permission. As for your calling my opinions worthless, I won't stoop to your childlike level of coming quite close to name calling.0 -
You already went there when you stated "Once you read all the articles and formulate an opinion like an adult you will be allowed to call my opinion worthless."
You again failed analysis 101 since the obvious implication of your statement is that you were of the opinion that I had not read the articles and had not formed an opinion, and certainly not one as "an adult". There is nothing in any of my posts that can be construed reasonably to mean that I had, or had not, read any or all of the articles listed, yet you decided that I hadn't, and for some reason would need your permission to formulate an opinion once I had.
You have clearly demonstrated sadly deficient analytical skills and completely missing deductive reasoning talent, so I'm not going to stay up tonight worrying about your "boogieman" and how closely I'm being watched.
Don't forget your tinfoil hat when you go out, if you still dare to go out.0 -
quote:Originally posted by nunn
And, how do we know that the account cited is accurate? Geez, I wouldn't want some of you on my jury.
You certainly wouldn't. Not that I would ever serve on one.
Seems that every accusation invloving any questionable behavior by an leo gets this response from you. OTOH, I have read your posts advocating for civil rights violations of convicted citizens. There are definitely two sets of rules where you are concerned.0 -
Now now Eric, don't you know that useing terms like "jackboot", and "S.R.T." will lead some dumbasses here to believe that you are in fact some 18 year old punk in "jersey city" whos an anti LEO troll.quote:Originally posted by ECC
quote:Originally posted by fu007dan
quote:Originally posted by Colonel Plink
quote:Originally posted by warriorsfan
quote:Originally posted by ElMuertoMonkey
"Protect and serve" has given way to "search and destroy" to many officers. They place their own safety above that of anyone else's - which is not a police officer's duty. Their job is to serve the public, not themselves.
On the same note, I've noticed the proliferation of "SWAT" and SRT (special response) units. It seems like every podunk PD has one now, no matter how small or remote. Does Bumf**k County Montanta, population 25,000, really need a SWAT team? Or is it just an excuse for these tiny rural departments to spend that Homeland Security money on some cool "toys" and gives them an opportunity to dress up in body armor with automatic weapons and live out their special forces fantasies?
Here in rural Colorado, we're still weathering a lot of Meth-related crimes. Given the volatile nature of the substance itself and the mindset of those under it's influence, I'm glad we have officers with SRT training and equipment. So I don't know about Bumf**k, Montana, but Logan County, Colorado has put ours to good use.
Yes, they should have the advanced training and equipment, but they don't need to use the extreme "military style" attacks, they are still peace officers, or is that another thing we lost along with our freedoms?
You are exactly right! The blatant militarization of our police forces is obvious to anyone who is watching...a true Peace Officer is hard to find anymore...we have a couple on this board, but sadly they are the oddity these days.0 -
quote:Originally posted by ElMuertoMonkey
The problem is that a great many police officers belong to a new breed who subscribe to the motto "It's us versus them," with "them" meaning the rest of society.
"Protect and serve" has given way to "search and destroy" to many officers. They place their own safety above that of anyone else's - which is not a police officer's duty. Their job is to serve the public, not themselves.
I do not blame all police officers - the majority are upstanding professionals with more guts than I've got... but the bad ones are so malignant as to engender a widespread mistrust of the police as a whole - which only serves to feed the violent cycle of "us versus them."
Let these officers face the law and, if found guilty, suffer for their crimes. But let us not assume that all police are jackbooted thugs with a hard-on for violence against everyone in sight.
my dad used to be a cop and you're right on the money, sorry to say in some ways. He said him and his fellow officers had a motto: "If someone's gonna die today, it's not gonna be me." On one level, this is an admirable maxim. On another, the hyperavoidance of dangerous situations leads to needless deaths, think Columbine and the authorities' slow and anemic response. On yet another, it may encourage OVERreaction and unnecessary escalation.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Fatboy lives
Now now Eric, don't you know that useing terms like "jackboot", and "S.R.T." will lead some dumbasses here to believe that you are in fact some 18 year old punk in "jersey city" whos an anti LEO troll.quote:Originally posted by ECC
quote:Originally posted by fu007dan
quote:Originally posted by Colonel Plink
quote:Originally posted by warriorsfan
quote:Originally posted by ElMuertoMonkey
"Protect and serve" has given way to "search and destroy" to many officers. They place their own safety above that of anyone else's - which is not a police officer's duty. Their job is to serve the public, not themselves.
On the same note, I've noticed the proliferation of "SWAT" and SRT (special response) units. It seems like every podunk PD has one now, no matter how small or remote. Does Bumf**k County Montanta, population 25,000, really need a SWAT team? Or is it just an excuse for these tiny rural departments to spend that Homeland Security money on some cool "toys" and gives them an opportunity to dress up in body armor with automatic weapons and live out their special forces fantasies?
Here in rural Colorado, we're still weathering a lot of Meth-related crimes. Given the volatile nature of the substance itself and the mindset of those under it's influence, I'm glad we have officers with SRT training and equipment. So I don't know about Bumf**k, Montana, but Logan County, Colorado has put ours to good use.
Yes, they should have the advanced training and equipment, but they don't need to use the extreme "military style" attacks, they are still peace officers, or is that another thing we lost along with our freedoms?
You are exactly right! The blatant militarization of our police forces is obvious to anyone who is watching...a true Peace Officer is hard to find anymore...we have a couple on this board, but sadly they are the oddity these days.
I couldn't care less what somebody thinks. I call it like I see it.0 -
I know what you mean buddy, so do I. Was just letting you know, those terms seem to cause at least two dumbasses here to start a pissin match.quote:Originally posted by ECC
quote:Originally posted by Fatboy lives
Now now Eric, don't you know that useing terms like "jackboot", and "S.R.T." will lead some dumbasses here to believe that you are in fact some 18 year old punk in "jersey city" whos an anti LEO troll.quote:Originally posted by ECC
quote:Originally posted by fu007dan
quote:Originally posted by Colonel Plink
quote:Originally posted by warriorsfan
quote:Originally posted by ElMuertoMonkey
"Protect and serve" has given way to "search and destroy" to many officers. They place their own safety above that of anyone else's - which is not a police officer's duty. Their job is to serve the public, not themselves.
On the same note, I've noticed the proliferation of "SWAT" and SRT (special response) units. It seems like every podunk PD has one now, no matter how small or remote. Does Bumf**k County Montanta, population 25,000, really need a SWAT team? Or is it just an excuse for these tiny rural departments to spend that Homeland Security money on some cool "toys" and gives them an opportunity to dress up in body armor with automatic weapons and live out their special forces fantasies?
Here in rural Colorado, we're still weathering a lot of Meth-related crimes. Given the volatile nature of the substance itself and the mindset of those under it's influence, I'm glad we have officers with SRT training and equipment. So I don't know about Bumf**k, Montana, but Logan County, Colorado has put ours to good use.
Yes, they should have the advanced training and equipment, but they don't need to use the extreme "military style" attacks, they are still peace officers, or is that another thing we lost along with our freedoms?
You are exactly right! The blatant militarization of our police forces is obvious to anyone who is watching...a true Peace Officer is hard to find anymore...we have a couple on this board, but sadly they are the oddity these days.
I couldn't care less what somebody thinks. I call it like I see it.0 -
quote:You certainly wouldn't. Not that I would ever serve on one.
So, you would never serve on a jury? Fine example of citizenship and civic responsibility. [xx(]
quote:Seems that every accusation invloving any questionable behavior by an leo gets this response from you.
BS. It is simply an improbable-sounding story, and I asked whether it was checked for accuracy.
quote:OTOH, I have read your posts advocating for civil rights violations of convicted citizens.
WTH do you mean? A "convicted" citizen has already given up his civil rights, and he has certain restrictions put on his freedom. Beyond that, I have no idea what you mean, there Sparky.
quote:There are definitely two sets of rules where you are concerned.
There may be more than two, and you are free to not like it. How are things on the Vietnam Vet forum?0 -
quote:Originally posted by fu007dan
To restate my post, I didn't call for an execution. But these officers do need to be held accountable for their actions. Hopefully prison time and for the officer who fire, maybe more.
I've read all three of these articles and still stand by my words, the so called "officers of the peace" need to be held accountable.
The police had been informed that Derek didn't pose a threat and didn't have any weapons on his person. This information is documented by the surveillance team that provided the information to the officers.
http://www.rutherford.org/pdf/hale_complaint.pdf
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/27/AR2007032702486.html
http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070324/NEWS/703240357
Those three posts still are not conclusive, but they're a WHOLE lot more credible than the original post. I noted that the Washington Post mentioned several witnesses who essentially corroborated the 'tasered without cause and shot while incapacitated' line. But it doesn't say who the witnesses were or who gathered their statements.
Anyway, thanks for posting them. I think I have a better sense for the case. As many others have said, the original post left me extraordinarily skeptical of the 'murder' charge.0 -
quote:Originally posted by spurgemastur
Those three posts still are not conclusive, but they're a WHOLE lot more credible than the original post. I noted that the Washington Post mentioned several witnesses who essentially corroborated the 'tasered without cause and shot while incapacitated' line. But it doesn't say who the witnesses were or who gathered their statements.
Anyway, thanks for posting them. I think I have a better sense for the case. As many others have said, the original post left me extraordinarily skeptical of the 'murder' charge.
[/quote]
That's what I was gonna say.
But I wouldn't have said it that succinctly.0 -
quote:Originally posted by nunn
...Geez, I wouldn't want some of you on my jury.
Yes you would. Dummies are easily swayed...
[:0][;)]0 -
quote:Originally posted by TrinityScrimshaw
Some are just too quick to judge. The reason why LEO's feel "it is us against them" is easy to understand by just reading some of the postings here.
Trinity +++
Trinity,
I can understand your reasoning. You have to admit that it is not unheard of, in fact, it's the norm, that an officer will lie for a brother officer rather than let him suffer justice for an error in judgement.
Granted, a fellow may have a family to support or whatever, but you guys take an oath to protect and serve the public. Not each other.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
56 comments