# Cops or soldiers?



## Padre

America’s police have become too militarised

Mar 22nd 2014*|*ATLANTA*|*From the print edition

FROM the way police entered the house—helmeted and masked, guns drawn and shields in front, knocking down the door with a battering ram and rushing inside—you might think they were raiding a den of armed criminals. In fact they were looking for $1,000-worth of clothes and electronics allegedly bought with a stolen credit card. They found none of these things, but arrested two people in the house on unrelated charges.

They narrowly avoided tragedy. On hearing intruders break in, the homeowner’s son, a disabled ex-serviceman, reached for his (legal) gun. Luckily, he heard the police announce themselves and holstered it; otherwise, “they probably would have shot me,” he says. His mother, Sally Prince, says she is now traumatised.

In this section

Cops or soldiers?Sex, lies and statisticsA Gray areaA purple state sees redThe new border warNot black and whiteKoch-fuelled politics

Reprints

Related topics

PoliceLaw EnforcementCrime and lawRadley Balko

Gary Mikulec, chief of the Ankeny, Iowa police force, which raided Ms Prince’s home in January, said that the suspects arrested “were not very good people”. One had a criminal history that included three assault charges, albeit more than a decade old, and on his arrest was found to have a knife and a meth pipe.

It is easy to see why the police like to be better armed than the people they have to arrest. They risk their lives every day, and are understandably keen to get home in one piece. A big display of force can make a suspect think twice about pulling a gun. “An awful lot of SWAT tactics are focused on forcing the suspect to surrender,” says Bill Bratton, New York’s police chief.

But civil libertarians such as Radley Balko, the author of “Rise of the Warrior Cop”, fret that the American police are becoming too much like soldiers. Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) teams (ie, paramilitary police units) were first formed to deal with violent civil unrest and life-threatening situations: shoot-outs, rescuing hostages, serving high-risk warrants and entering barricaded buildings, for instance. Their mission has crept.

Boozers, barbers and cockfighters

Peter Kraska, a professor at Eastern Kentucky University’s School of Justice Studies, estimates that SWAT teams were deployed about 3,000 times in 1980 but are now used around 50,000 times a year. Some cities use them for routine patrols in high-crime areas. Baltimore and Dallas have used them to break up poker games. In 2010 New Haven, Connecticut sent a SWAT team to a bar suspected of serving under-age drinkers. That same year heavily-armed police raided barber shops around Orlando, Florida; they said they were hunting for guns and drugs but ended up arresting 34 people for “barbering without a licence”. Maricopa County, Arizona sent a SWAT team into the living room of Jesus Llovera, who was suspected of organising cockfights. Police rolled a tank into Mr Llovera’s yard and killed more than 100 of his birds, as well as his dog. According to Mr Kraska, most SWAT deployments are not in response to violent, life-threatening crimes, but to serve drug-related warrants in private homes.

He estimates that 89% of police departments serving American cities with more than 50,000 people had SWAT teams in the late 1990s—almost double the level in the mid-1980s. By 2007 more than 80% of police departments in cities with between 25,000 and 50,000 people had them, up from 20% in the mid-1980s (there are around 18,000 state and local police agencies in America, compared with fewer than 100 in Britain).

The number of SWAT deployments soared even as violent crime fell. And although in recent years crime rates have risen in smaller American cities, Mr Kraska writes that the rise in small-town SWAT teams was driven not by need, but by fear of being left behind. Fred Leland, a police lieutenant in the small town of Walpole, Massachusetts, says that police departments in towns like his often invest in military-style kit because they “want to keep up” with larger forces.

The courts have smiled on SWAT raids. They often rely on “no-knock” warrants, which authorise police to force their way into a home without announcing themselves. This was once considered constitutionally dubious. But the Supreme Court has ruled that police may enter a house without knocking if they have “a reasonable suspicion” that announcing their presence would be dangerous or allow the suspect to destroy evidence (for example, by flushing drugs down the toilet).

Often these no-knock raids take place at night, accompanied by “flash-bang” grenades designed temporarily to blind, deafen and confuse their targets. They can go horribly wrong: Mr Balko has found more than 50 examples of innocent people who have died as a result of botched SWAT raids. Officers can get jumpy and shoot unnecessarily, or accidentally. In 2011 Eurie Stamps, the stepfather of a suspected drug-dealer but himself suspected of no crimes, was killed while lying face-down on the floor when a SWAT-team officer reportedly tripped, causing his gun to discharge.

Householders, on hearing the door being smashed down, sometimes reach for their own guns. In 2006 Kathryn Johnston, a 92-year-old woman in Atlanta, mistook the police for robbers and fired a shot from an old pistol. Police shot her five times, killing her. After the shooting they planted marijuana in her home. It later emerged that they had falsified the information used to obtain their no-knock warrant.

Big grants for big guns

Federal cash—first to wage war on drugs, then on terror—has paid for much of the heavy weaponry used by SWAT teams. Between 2002 and 2011 the Department of Homeland Security disbursed $35 billion in grants to state and local police. Also, the Pentagon offers surplus military kit to police departments. According to Mr Balko, by 2005 it had provided such gear to more than 17,000 law-enforcement agencies.

These programmes provide useful defensive equipment, such as body armour and helmets. But it is hard to see why Fargo, North Dakota—a city that averages fewer than two murders a year—needs an armoured personnel-carrier with a rotating turret. Keene, a small town in New Hampshire which had three homicides between 1999 and 2012, spent nearly $286,000 on an armoured personnel-carrier known as a BearCat. The local police chief said it would be used to patrol Keene’s “Pumpkin Festival and other dangerous situations”. A*Reason-Rupe poll found that 58% of Americans think the use of drones, military weapons and armoured vehicles by the police has gone “too far”.

Because of a legal quirk, SWAT raids can be profitable. Rules on civil asset-forfeiture allow the police to seize anything which they can plausibly claim was the proceeds of a crime. Crucially, the property-owner need not be convicted of that crime. If the police find drugs in his house, they can take his cash and possibly the house, too. He must sue to get them back.

Many police departments now depend on forfeiture for a fat chunk of their budgets. In 1986, its first year of operation, the federal Asset Forfeiture Fund held $93.7m. By 2012, that and the related Seized Asset Deposit Fund held nearly $6 billion.

Mr Balko contends that these forfeiture laws are “unfair on a very basic level”. They “disproportionately affect low-income people” and provide a perverse incentive for police to focus on drug-related crimes, which “come with a potential kickback to the police department”, rather than rape and murder investigations, which do not. They also provide an incentive to arrest suspected drug-dealers inside their houses, which can be seized, and to bust stash houses after most of their drugs have been sold, when police can seize the cash.

Kara Dansky of the American Civil Liberties Union, who is overseeing a study into police militarisation, notices a more martial tone in recent years in the materials used to recruit and train new police officers. A recruiting video in Newport Beach, California, for instance, shows officers loading assault rifles, firing weapons, chasing suspects, putting people in headlocks and releasing snarling dogs.

This is no doubt sexier than showing them poring over paperwork or attending a neighbourhood-watch meeting. But does it attract the right sort of recruit, or foster the right attitude among serving officers? Mr Balko cites the T-shirts that some off-duty cops wear as evidence of a culture that celebrates violence (“We get up early to beat the crowds”; “You huff and you puff and we’ll blow your door down”).

Others retort that Mr Balko and his allies rely too much on cherry-picked examples of raids gone wrong. Tragic accidents happen and some police departments use their SWAT teams badly, but most use them well, says Lance Eldridge, a former army officer and ex-sheriff’s deputy in Colorado.

It would be easier to determine who is right if police departments released more information about how and how often they deploy SWAT teams. But most are extremely cagey. In 2009 Maryland’s governor, Martin O’Malley, signed a law requiring the police in his state to report such information every six months. Three published reports showed that SWAT teams were most often deployed to serve search warrants on people suspected of crimes involving drugs and other contraband, but the law is set to expire this year. Utah’s legislature has passed a similar measure; it awaits the governor’s signature.

No one wants to eliminate SWAT teams. Imminent threats to human life require a swift, forceful response. That, say critics, is what SWAT teams should be used for: not for serving warrants on people suspected of nonviolent crimes, breaking up poker games or seeing that the Pumpkin Festival doesn’t get out of hand.



Sent from my XT1080 using Survival Forum mobile app


----------



## Sentry18

I have a picture proving this recent police militarization! I think this is from 2012, maybe a few years before.


----------



## camo2460

Well here we go again, another cop bashing, witch hunt based on ignorance, misinformation, and lack of education. We should all move to Salem, Mass. so we can be properly burned at the stake, hanged, or pressed.


----------



## bbrider

Camo, how do we stop it and protect both sides?
We know it happens. We know it is dangerous to LE and the citizens. Is it always the right way to go?
What other options are there to arrest the bad guys and keep everyone safe?

Sent from my C811 4G using Survival Forum mobile app


----------



## camo2460

bbrider said:


> Camo, how do we stop it and protect both sides?
> We know it happens. We know it is dangerous to LE and the citizens. Is it always the right way to go?
> What other options are there to arrest the bad guys and keep everyone safe?
> 
> Sent from my C811 4G using Survival Forum mobile app


bb, I used to work at a large resort as security. One night a joker in the engineering dept. decided to fill four black trash bags with Helium, and attached several light sticks to them. He let them go from the roof of one of the buildings, and they floated over a large group of guests at about 200'. There was a hush, and then someone said what are they? The answers ranged from alien space craft, to fighter jets flying in formation, and this from a former military pilot.

What is my point? different people are going to see things differently, even trained experienced people can misinterpret things that they see. When someone in a neighborhood hears a commotion at 3:00 AM and looks out her window to see S.W.A.T. kicking down the door, what is she going to think? If she has any knowledge of LE tactics she may have an idea, or she may think Burglars, or she may think those men in black attached to alien space craft. Some one else may see something entirely different.

Then there those that only see bad all around them, and everywhere they go, or are or have been involved in some kind of criminal behavior, and may or may not have been in jail or prison. I can tell you with 100% certainty that criminals have a RABID hatred for LE.

You might also consider that most people are misinformed, ignorant of, or have no education concerning the law. The tendency of most people is to listen to "my brother in law's cousin who works at the jail/prison". Another thing is that there are a lot of jail house/prison lawyers who, when the get out like to "counsel" people in what they think is the law.

So, are there bad "cops" out there? You bet, Are mistakes made? Yes, Does LE wear scary black uniforms? Yes, and do they use quasi military tactics? Yes they do. But consider this: do you not use the most efficient equipment available to you in your work environment? If you work in construction would you rather use a hammer or a nail gun? Do you make mistakes when building that house? If you are the contractor and have a worker not following procedure would you not fire him? and when you show the home owner the blue prints, do they really understand what you're going to do?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to make excuses for stupidity, and I don't have all the answers. What I find objectionable is the hate mongering, the ignorance, and lack of reason displayed by many people, whose only agenda is to create a fire storm and spread mal-content. I have no objection to a person who has a reasonable question or complaint, but when that complaint or question is addressed with a reasonable explanation, the reply is always negative, and "cops" are to blame for their legal misadventures.

I'm sorry that there are some cops that are dumb asses, and I'm sorry that cops don't fall down and worship the ground that "Joe Citizen" walks on, I'm sorry that he/they sometimes don't get the respect that he/they think is deserved, but I have no sympathy for drug addicts, pushers, drunk drivers, perverts, etc., etc. Nor do I have any sympathy for a person who Knowingly breaks the law, and then bitches that he/she got a ticket or was arrested.


----------



## mosquitomountainman

Maybe it's time the LEO community began looking at what's being said instead of just getting.defensive. Too many of us have been victims of overzealous, incompetent, lazy, and/or crooked cops. I used to have more respect for cops than I now have. In the vast majority of times in the past my encounters were positive. Most of the time even those annoying, BS traffic stops were done in a professional and courteous manner. I've seen t:he other side too. I've also had too many dealings with lazy cops and cops on power trips. I've recounted many of those on threads like this one.

I'm sure .cops get riled over these threads but to whine about "another cop bashing thread" is only going to further the stereotype that these threads highlight. What every cop needs to understand is that the presence of bad cops makes any encounter a game of Russian Roulette for the rest of us. You have the guns and the badges. Therefore you have the responsibility to be right every time. Being sorry isn't good enough.

If you truly want respect don't make excuses and don't attack the victims. SWAT tactics are acceptable at times. Unfortunately the militarization of the police is showing it's ugly side as well.


----------



## Jim1590

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...or-and-what-she-found-when-she-returned-home/

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/08/107-year-old-man-dies-in-shootout-with-swat-team/

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...-drug-bust-and-took-20420-pounds-of-material/

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...rrest-two-for-obstruction-when-owner-refuses/

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...atting-attacks-against-conservative-bloggers/

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...ts-down-mans-door-over-estranged-wifes-loans/

Sure glad I ain't a really bad person like these people :sarcasm1:


----------



## camo2460

mosquitomountainman said:


> Maybe it's time the LEO community began looking at what's being said instead of just getting.defensive. Too many of us have been victims of overzealous, incompetent, lazy, and/or crooked cops. I used to have more respect for cops than I now have. In the vast majority of times in the past my encounters were positive. Most of the time even those annoying, BS traffic stops were done in a professional and courteous manner. I've seen t:he other side too. I've also had too many dealings with lazy cops and cops on power trips. I've recounted many of those on threads like this one.
> 
> I'm sure .cops get riled over these threads but to whine about "another cop bashing thread" is only going to further the stereotype that these threads highlight. What every cop needs to understand is that the presence of bad cops makes any encounter a game of Russian Roulette for the rest of us. You have the guns and the badges. Therefore you have the responsibility to be right every time. Being sorry isn't good enough.
> 
> If you truly want respect don't make excuses and don't attack the victims. SWAT tactics are acceptable at times. Unfortunately the militarization of the police is showing it's ugly side as well.


First of all MMM, I agree that incompetent, crooked cops should have their ass handed to them on a silver platter. However to "whine" about a cop being lazy or over zealous is simply your perspective, and puts you in the same boat you put me in. You also stated that you have had too many dealings with...cops. You make it sound like you have a negative experience every other day, which I seriously doubt. Further your analogy of "Russian Roulette" is B/S simply because, out of the 300 million people in the USA, most encounters with LE is of a minor nature.

Second, I have never made excuses for incompetent or crooked cops, nor do I condone bad or unprofessional behavior. As for attacking the "victims", I only get defensive when good people are "burned at the stake" along with the bad, and if you think that is "whining", to bad. I am not going to allow anyone to run ruff shod over me or anybody else.


----------



## Geek999

Gee, no one has accused me of "cop bashing" yet. You guys are really not on the ball.


----------



## mosquitomountainman

camo2460 said:


> First of all MMM, I agree that incompetent, crooked cops should have their ass handed to them on a silver platter. However to "whine" about a cop being lazy or over zealous is simply your perspective, and puts you in the same boat you put me in. You also stated that you have had too many dealings with...cops. You make it sound like you have a negative experience every other day, which I seriously doubt. Further your analogy of "Russian Roulette" is B/S simply because, out of the 300 million people in the USA, most encounters with LE is of a minor nature.
> 
> Second, I have never made excuses for incompetent or crooked cops, nor do I condone bad or unprofessional behavior. As for attacking the "victims", I only get defensive when good people are "burned at the stake" along with the bad, and if you think that is "whining", to bad. I am not going to allow anyone to run ruff shod over me or anybody else.


I'm 59 years old. I have a lot of experience to draw from so though it doesn't happen every day there have been enough bad experiences to sour me on the status of some LEO's. Because bad cops don't wear a sign around their neck it means that each encounter is indeed like Russian Roulette because I don't know who is good and who is not.

The Russian Roulette is completely accurate and a fair representation. Even though "most" encounters may be minor there are always those exceptions. Again, because the civilian populace doesn't know who is good or who is not it is very much like Russian Roulette to those being stopped.

The lazy reference does indeed have basis in fact. If you're familiar with my other posts on this subject you are aware of the times we've attempted to get LEO's at local, state and federal levels involved in solving an identity theft problem our SIL was having. An IRS representative admitted that it was clearly identity theft but they were going after our SIL and daughter because they were easier to find (and hassle plus they are Caucasian and speak English). The FBI, Border Patrol, Homeland (in)Security, ICE, and local sheriff and police departments in both states all refused to get involved even though we could hand them the guy's address and place of employment! We had a neighbor illegally doing road expansion on our property and the cops declined to come stop them until the neighbor called them too after I blocked the road with my truck.

Looking back I can sincerely (and accurately) state that calling cops has had zero positive effects. I've never had stolen merchandise returned and had one problem semi-resolved and one put on hold by calling the cops.

I've also recounted numerous examples of personal experiences with bad cops in past posts. If you have any interest do some searching. I'm not interested in dredging up all those posts. Especially knowing it will be met with a bucket full of excuses and denials anyway.

I've rubbed shoulders with cops and heard their bragging about speeding and flashing a badge and never getting a ticket for it. I've heard a lot of other remarks as well. I've seen their overzealous reactions in our own county, calling in a SWAT team to follow up on a guy who was having a dispute with a bank in another state.

When I saw this thread I resolved to stay out of it because it always results in hard feelings and it's always the same people saying the same things. Quite frankly, I have better things to do with my time so make all the excuses you want. This is my last post on the subject.


----------



## lotsoflead

*I'm 59 years old. I have a lot of experience to draw from so though it doesn't happen every day there have been enough bad experiences to sour me on the status of some LEO's. Because bad cops don't wear a sign around their neck it means that each encounter is indeed like Russian Roulette because I don't know who is good and who is not.
*

I'm 75 and they're all bad when in a group, have you ever seen a cop step in and tell another cop to lay off or lighten up when some thug cop keeps putting someone down or demeaning them. I know some cops that are almost human when alone, but when with another cop, the real person comes out.


----------



## Outpost

We all filter things through our own life experience. Those experiences depend, it seems, primarily on geographic location.

Here in New Hampshire, for example, while I can tell you that there are some, primarily locals, that never should have found their way behind a badge (research the histories of Hudson, Laconia, Weare, etc...), for the most part, if it is behind a N.H. badge, it's a pretty safe bet that it's a good guy.

I've had acquaintances in Chicago P.D. as well. One such acquaintance literally couldn't stand the general mentality of "Cops and Everybody else", and left for a location I shall not disclose.

In my personal experience (not just, by the way, being "stopped" by, but with a variety of interactions on a variety of levels) I can say that when it comes to self-righteous badge-heavy corruption, Chicago politicians and cops have nothing on Boston. (where Padre is apparently residing).

Through other friends and acquaintances, I can also say that country-wide, in varying degrees, there is a push to segregate, isolate, and alienate us all from another (a house divided, and all that jazz). Society in general, and most visibly Law Enforcement Personnel (but only most *visibly*), are systematically being indoctrinated with the "us vs. them" mentality.

"Civilians can't understand cops" and "cops don't understand life in the everybody else category". I hear this frequently. Perhaps there's even a seed of truth at the bottom of the respective beliefs, but I know this with absolute certainty; while being in a position of authority *requires*, by its very nature, a closer level of scrutiny, we must *ALL* pursue justice, and denounce (even fight) that which is unjust. One of the greatest injustices that one can perpetrate is to fail to judge an individual by their own merits, or lack thereof.

If good men (and women) are dissuaded from acting in accordance to their conscience because of unjust condemnation (be they L.E.O. or "common citizen"), then bad men (and women) will certainly not be dissuaded from acting in accordance to theirs (be they L.E.O., or common citizen).

To put it simply, regardless of profession (cop or otherwise) the "good-guys" had damned well better start sticking together, because the "bad-guys" seem to be winning.

God, Bless the Honorable.
God, Give Strength to the weary.
God, Enlighten the ignorant. 
And may the rest go to hell.

$.02


----------



## Geek999

Outpost said:


> We all filter things through our own life experience. Those experiences depend, it seems, primarily on geographic location.
> 
> Here in New Hampshire, for example, while I can tell you that there are some, primarily locals, that never should have found their way behind a badge (research the histories of Hudson, Laconia, Weare, etc...), for the most part, if it is behind a N.H. badge, it's a pretty safe bet that it's a good guy.
> 
> I've had acquaintances in Chicago P.D. as well. One such acquaintance literally couldn't stand the general mentality of "Cops and Everybody else", and left for a location I shall not disclose.
> 
> In my personal experience (not just, by the way, being "stopped" by, but with a variety of interactions on a variety of levels) I can say that when it comes to self-righteous badge-heavy corruption, Chicago politicians and cops have nothing on Boston. (where Padre is apparently residing).
> 
> Through other friends and acquaintances, I can also say that country-wide, in varying degrees, there is a push to segregate, isolate, and alienate us all from another (a house divided, and all that jazz). Society in general, and most visibly Law Enforcement Personnel (but only most *visibly*), are systematically being indoctrinated with the "us vs. them" mentality.
> 
> "Civilians can't understand cops" and "cops don't understand life in the everybody else category". I hear this frequently. Perhaps there's even a seed of truth at the bottom of the respective beliefs, but I know this with absolute certainty; while being in a position of authority *requires*, by its very nature, a closer level of scrutiny, we must *ALL* pursue justice, and denounce (even fight) that which is unjust. One of the greatest injustices that one can perpetrate is to fail to judge an individual by their own merits, or lack thereof.
> 
> If good men (and women) are dissuaded from acting in accordance to their conscience because of unjust condemnation (be they L.E.O. or "common citizen"), then bad men (and women) will certainly not be dissuaded from acting in accordance to theirs (be they L.E.O., or common citizen).
> 
> To put it simply, regardless of profession (cop or otherwise) the "good-guys" had damned well better start sticking together, because the "bad-guys" seem to be winning.
> 
> God, Bless the Honorable.
> God, Give Strength to the weary.
> God, Enlighten the ignorant.
> And may the rest go to hell.
> 
> $.02


So who do you think are the good guys and who are the bad guys and where do the idiots fit in?


----------



## BillS

camo2460 said:


> Well here we go again, another cop bashing, witch hunt based on ignorance, misinformation, and lack of education. We should all move to Salem, Mass. so we can be properly burned at the stake, hanged, or pressed.


I'm sorry but that was so stupid that I'm blocking you too.


----------



## BillS

The police are definitely becoming more militarized and more violent. It's not just violence against people that film them doing their job. It's also the vehicles, weapons, and tactics used on ordinary citizens that a reasonable person wouldn't consider dangerous. Expect all that to continue to get worse as we get closer to the coming economic collapse.


----------



## Geek999

BillS said:


> The police are definitely becoming more militarized and more violent. It's not just violence against people that film them doing their job. It's also the vehicles, weapons, and tactics used on ordinary citizens that a reasonable person wouldn't consider dangerous. Expect all that to continue to get worse as we get closer to the coming economic collapse.


I'm sorry you lost me with the connection of economics and militarization of the police. How are they connected?


----------



## Outpost

Geek999 said:


> So who do you think are the good guys and who are the bad guys and where do the idiots fit in?


The good guys are the ones who refuse to cause harm or hardship to an innocent, the bad guys are the ones who like to cause such harm and the idiots are the ones who don't know the difference.


----------



## Geek999

Outpost said:


> The good guys are the ones who refuse to cause harm or hardship to an innocent, the bad guys are the ones who like to cause such harm and the idiots are the ones who don't know the difference.


and how do you recognize them?


----------



## Outpost

BillS said:


> The police are definitely becoming more militarized and more violent. It's not just violence against people that film them doing their job. It's also the vehicles, weapons, and tactics used on ordinary citizens that a reasonable person wouldn't consider dangerous. Expect all that to continue to get worse as we get closer to the coming economic collapse.


I'm honestly not convinced there will be *any* actual "police" in the event of such economic disaster. Historically, prior to such an event authority is nationalized and "local" authority is essentially non-existent. Leading up to the actual nationalization, local heads of agencies are culled out and replaced with national loyalists. The National Socialist Workers Party was very effective in controlling the people using such means.

Not being known by the "locals", the loyalists (to the National Party) felt no compassion for the locals and simply followed orders, slaughtering thousands.

Displacement of local authority personnel would in all likelihood, actually work in our favor, so I don't think they're ready yet.


----------



## Outpost

Geek999 said:


> and how do you recognize them?


I could answer that question directly and lead us into a philosophical volley-ball session, but it would serve no purpose, so lets just cut to the chase.

What's your solution? Shall we start shooting all the police and the politicians to whom they answer?

If the police in your area genuinely present more of a threat to the general public than the bad-guys they've sworn to protect us from, why would you refrain from doing so?


----------



## Geek999

Outpost said:


> I could answer that question directly and lead us into a philosophical volley-ball session, but it would serve no purpose, so lets just cut to the chase.
> 
> What's your solution? Shall we start shooting all the police and the politicians to whom they answer?
> 
> If the police in your area genuinely present more of a threat to the general public than the bad-guys they've sworn to protect us from, why would you refrain from doing so?


I was asking a question not taking a position, so you are off base. I cannot tell a good cop from a bad cop until they act in a good or bad fashion. In my experience most seem to be idiots. I am not in favor of shooting idiots. Besides, there is no right to bear arms in this state and I am a law abiding citizen.

New question: Have the police sworn to protect us from bad guys? My local police informed me that it is "not their job" to protect me, so I am not aware of any such oath. My impression was their oath was to uphold the Constitution.


----------



## Outpost

Geek999 said:


> I was asking a question not taking a position, so you are off base. I cannot tell a good cop from a bad cop until they act in a good or bad fashion. In my experience most seem to be idiots. I am not in favor of shooting idiots. Besides, there is no right to bear arms in this state and I am a law abiding citizen.
> 
> New question: Have the police sworn to protect us from bad guys? My local police informed me that it is "not their job" to protect me, so I am not aware of any such oath. My impression was their oath was to uphold the Constitution.


Alright then.... Now we have something to work with.

There is, always has been, and always will be, only one way to tell a good guy from a bad guy, and you stated the procedure rather concisely; observe his or her actions. And yes, if your profile location is accurate "New York, NJ", they you most certainly have a higher per-capita ratio of sh!+ heads behind badges than we do here in N.H. Surely, there must be one or two with whom you can have a civil conversation. If *my* experience in my travels holds true in your area, the decent ones are (at least on some psychological level) looking for trustworthy honorable "citizens" as much as "citizens" are looking for trustworthy honorable cops. Differing opinions on various subjects aside, this gives you something in common and provides a basis for some kind of "understanding" that, on some level, you *both* benefit from.

Then next course would be some kind of benevolent political action. I'm not sure what kind of involvement is available where you live, but regardless, a single person can influence a lot! I'm not saying to run for office..... From my perspective, that would be like wishing you into a car wreck.... but there must be some way to begin influencing things in the right direction, even if it's only getting together with folks in your neighborhood, or another neighborhood. Simply begin by having benevolent, *civil* conversations. If more people did that, we'd all gain ground.

As to your point of it "not being their job" to protect you, that alone can become a catalyst for positive change. That policy, by the way, varies from place to place. While it's universally accepted that nobody, cop or otherwise, is obligated to put themselves in immediate harms way to "protect", I can tell you that in my neck of the woods, it happens on a regular basis. Yes, we still have a few yahoos to lose, but... I'm not afraid of my cops.... and they know they have nothing to fear from me, and we give each other no reason to believe otherwise.

I *have* been to NJ and to NY, from NY City to various places "Upstate". I do understand your predicament, but these problems aren't solved in isolation, and I promise you, those problems are *not* universal. There really are a lot of good-guys behind badges.

...but as I said in a previous post, we all filter things through our own life experience. This is just mine.

Hang in there Geek.


----------



## Geek999

Given my past experiences I might follow your suggestions in some other part of the country. I am not enough of a masochist to try any of that here in NJ. To the extent there are any good cops here they tend to get out once they realize the level of corruption in place.


----------



## Outpost

Geek999 said:


> Given my past experiences I might follow your suggestions in some other part of the country. I am not enough of a masochist to try any of that here in NJ. To the extent there are any good cops here they tend to get out once they realize the level of corruption in place.


Believe it or not, I genuinely do understand.

One of my favorite gun-shops here is owned and operated by a retired NH cop. Prior to that, he was a cop in NJ. That was a long time ago, but it was getting "bad" back then. When he came to NH to become a cop up here, he had to go through the NH police academy and it just so happens, that my best buddy (now a retired NH State cop), was one of the guys who trained and certified him.

Trust me when I tell you that I've heard *many* tales.

The problem is though, even if we lose our society, the only hope is change from within. *That* change, starts within each of *us.* Have a positive impact on enough people, things will begin to change. Even if they don't change, at least you will have found benevolent like-minded people. Given enough time, and an open mind, one or two of them may even be cops.... maybe you'll even stumble across one in NJ. But that can never happen if a generalization is applied universally.

Hell.... I've even met *Boston* cops I like...!


----------



## *Andi

camo2460 said:


> Well here we go again, another cop bashing, witch hunt based on ignorance, misinformation, and lack of education. We should all move to Salem, Mass. so we can be properly burned at the stake, hanged, or pressed.


Sorry... but no ...

As of the last government shutdown, I saw with my own eyes which way the dice will fall. (Something I said would not happen but it did ...


Sad but true ...


----------



## Geek999

Outpost said:


> Believe it or not, I genuinely do understand.
> 
> One of my favorite gun-shops here is owned and operated by a retired NH cop. Prior to that, he was a cop in NJ. That was a long time ago, but it was getting "bad" back then. When he came to NH to become a cop up here, he had to go through the NH police academy and it just so happens, that my best buddy (now a retired NH State cop), was one of the guys who trained and certified him.
> 
> Trust me when I tell you that I've heard *many* tales.
> 
> The problem is though, even if we lose our society, the only hope is change from within. *That* change, starts within each of *us.* Have a positive impact on enough people, things will begin to change. Even if they don't change, at least you will have found benevolent like-minded people. Given enough time, and an open mind, one or two of them may even be cops.... maybe you'll even stumble across one in NJ. But that can never happen if a generalization is applied universally.
> 
> Hell.... I've even met *Boston* cops I like...!


Well, if a NJ cop wants my trust, he can quit out of disgust. That would earn my respect.

To show how bad this is, I have a nephew who joined an Explorer group that was law enforcement oriented. My wife was encouraging me to take him to the range as he had some firearms instruction through the Explorers. He voiced a bunch of anti-gun, for anyone except police, BS. Typical NJ police disarm the population garbage.

I have concluded he is not to be trusted even though he is family. I will not take him to the range. I don't want him to have any idea what firearms I own. I've told my wife this and she has accepted that decision.


----------



## Tirediron

Does anybody bother to consider that the LEO has no or very little time for positive community interaction when his/her numbers have been slashed to a bare minimum. 
Sure a few control freaks make it into their ranks, but most start out with the idea to serve and protect. I am pretty certain the cold jaded cop you see is a product of the job, not their real personality.


----------



## Geek999

Tirediron said:


> Does anybody bother to consider that the LEO has no or very little time for positive community interaction when his/her numbers have been slashed to a bare minimum.
> Sure a few control freaks make it into their ranks, but most start out with the idea to serve and protect. I am pretty certain the cold jaded cop you see is a product of the job, not their real personality.


There has been no reduction in the number of cops around here. Government employment is the only secure employment in this area.

I'll ask again about this idea of "protect". Protect who? My local cops have told me that protecting me is "not their job". I believe them. The only folks they seem to be protecting is themselves.


----------



## tenntrucker

Well my son was a LEO in the city of New Orleans for 4 years before he quit in disgust. He was there during Katrina, when most of his fellow LEOs cut and ran. And the horror stories he's told me from working the Bourbon Street area of how things are run. So don't try and sell me on the ideal of the noble brotherhood of LEO's, take the koolaid someplace else, I ain't drinking it. When things turn bad, most go with it.

Sent from my GT-P3113 using Survival Forum mobile app


----------



## Geek999

tenntrucker said:


> Well my son was a LEO in the city of New Orleans for 4 years before he quit in disgust. He was there during Katrina, when most of his fellow LEOs cut and ran. And the horror stories he's told me from working the Bourbon Street area of how things are run. So don't try and sell me on the ideal of the noble brotherhood of LEO's, take the koolaid someplace else, I ain't drinking it. When things turn bad, most go with it.
> 
> Sent from my GT-P3113 using Survival Forum mobile app


Your son sounds like a decent man. Congratulations on having raised him right.

I'd be curious how he dealt with the gun confiscation order or any story he may have related to that.


----------



## tenntrucker

Geek999 said:


> Your son sounds like a decent man. Congratulations on having raised him right.
> 
> I'd be curious how he dealt with the gun confiscation order or any story he may have related to that.


He never got that order, he was posted to downtown area. Most days he was teamed up National Guard troops and potroled the streets in a hummer with a 50 cal turret running off looters.

Sent from my GT-P3113 using Survival Forum mobile app


----------



## mosquitomountainman

tenntrucker said:


> Well my son was a LEO in the city of New Orleans for 4 years before he quit in disgust. He was there during Katrina, when most of his fellow LEOs cut and ran. And the horror stories he's told me from working the Bourbon Street area of how things are run. So don't try and sell me on the ideal of the noble brotherhood of LEO's, take the koolaid someplace else, I ain't drinking it. When things turn bad, most go with it.
> 
> Sent from my GT-P3113 using Survival Forum mobile app


Watch out, you'll be accused of being a delusional cop hater.


----------



## HardCider

Living in the boondocks, our local law enforcement looks nothing like what you guys see living in highly populated areas but I see it in the news. Our locals are more like Andy Griffith than the Universal Soldier. I try not to paint any one group with a broad brush so just like people everywhere, there are excellent examples to extremely bad examples, with most people somewhere in the center. Having said that, the police are not there to protect you. They don't show up until after a crime is committed. So within the context of the law you should be prepared to protect yourself or your family. If you live where you cannot protect yourself within the context of the law, that's ultimately your choice but I think I would chose elsewhere.


----------



## BillS

Geek999 said:


> I'm sorry you lost me with the connection of economics and militarization of the police. How are they connected?


When the dollar collapses we will have civil unrest on a massive scale throughout the country. The federal government is doing all they can to prepare local police departments to be ready for it with equipment and tactics.


----------



## Sentry18

Geek999 said:


> There has been no reduction in the number of cops around here. Government employment is the only secure employment in this area.


That's interesting because I have read numerous articles about New Jersey being one of the hardest hit with police layoffs. Seems like over 4000+ cops losing their jobs would qualify as a reduction.

http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/...ake-their-toll-on-nj-s-troubled-cities/?p=all



> VIOLENT CRIMES CLIMB AS POLICE LAYOFFS TAKE THEIR TOLL ON NJ'S TROUBLED CITIES | SEPTEMBER 18, 2013


http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/10/25/352699/christie-budget-4000-police/#



> Those cuts have also left 4,000 New Jersey police officers without a job and left drug-related crime to flourish


----------



## Sentry18

> Originally Posted by tenntrucker
> Well my son was a LEO in the city of New Orleans for 4 years before he quit in disgust. He was there during Katrina, when most of his fellow LEOs cut and ran. And the horror stories he's told me from working the Bourbon Street area of how things are run. So don't try and sell me on the ideal of the noble brotherhood of LEO's, take the koolaid someplace else, I ain't drinking it. When things turn bad, most go with it.





mosquitomountainman said:


> Watch out, you'll be accused of being a delusional cop hater.


But the good news is that your unsupported and unverifiable claims will be taken as the gospel and cheered on as fact. Theories are perfectly fine until people stop stop realizing that they are theoretical.


----------



## Geek999

Sentry18 said:


> That's interesting because I have read numerous articles about New Jersey being one of the hardest hit with police layoffs. Seems like over 4000+ cops losing their jobs would qualify as a reduction.
> 
> http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/...ake-their-toll-on-nj-s-troubled-cities/?p=all
> 
> http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/10/25/352699/christie-budget-4000-police/#


There are certain cities like Trenton and Camden that are mini-Detroits. They are not representative of the state as a whole just as Detroit is not representative of Michgan. My town has exactly the same number of cops as it has had since I moved here 15 years ago. Same for the surrounding towns.

BTW: those towns have been a mess for decades.


----------



## Turtle

Well and fairly said, sir. 


Outpost said:


> We all filter things through our own life experience. Those experiences depend, it seems, primarily on geographic location.
> 
> Here in New Hampshire, for example, while I can tell you that there are some, primarily locals, that never should have found their way behind a badge (research the histories of Hudson, Laconia, Weare, etc...), for the most part, if it is behind a N.H. badge, it's a pretty safe bet that it's a good guy.
> 
> I've had acquaintances in Chicago P.D. as well. One such acquaintance literally couldn't stand the general mentality of "Cops and Everybody else", and left for a location I shall not disclose.
> 
> In my personal experience (not just, by the way, being "stopped" by, but with a variety of interactions on a variety of levels) I can say that when it comes to self-righteous badge-heavy corruption, Chicago politicians and cops have nothing on Boston. (where Padre is apparently residing).
> 
> Through other friends and acquaintances, I can also say that country-wide, in varying degrees, there is a push to segregate, isolate, and alienate us all from another (a house divided, and all that jazz). Society in general, and most visibly Law Enforcement Personnel (but only most *visibly*), are systematically being indoctrinated with the "us vs. them" mentality.
> 
> "Civilians can't understand cops" and "cops don't understand life in the everybody else category". I hear this frequently. Perhaps there's even a seed of truth at the bottom of the respective beliefs, but I know this with absolute certainty; while being in a position of authority *requires*, by its very nature, a closer level of scrutiny, we must *ALL* pursue justice, and denounce (even fight) that which is unjust. One of the greatest injustices that one can perpetrate is to fail to judge an individual by their own merits, or lack thereof.
> 
> If good men (and women) are dissuaded from acting in accordance to their conscience because of unjust condemnation (be they L.E.O. or "common citizen"), then bad men (and women) will certainly not be dissuaded from acting in accordance to theirs (be they L.E.O., or common citizen).
> 
> To put it simply, regardless of profession (cop or otherwise) the "good-guys" had damned well better start sticking together, because the "bad-guys" seem to be winning.
> 
> God, Bless the Honorable.
> God, Give Strength to the weary.
> God, Enlighten the ignorant.
> And may the rest go to hell.
> 
> $.02


Sent from my iPhone using Survival Forum


----------



## Turtle

tenntrucker said:


> Well my son was a LEO in the city of New Orleans for 4 years before he quit in disgust. He was there during Katrina, when most of his fellow LEOs cut and ran. And the horror stories he's told me from working the Bourbon Street area of how things are run. So don't try and sell me on the ideal of the noble brotherhood of LEO's, take the koolaid someplace else, I ain't drinking it. When things turn bad, most go with it.
> 
> Sent from my GT-P3113 using Survival Forum mobile app


I am actually really glad that you brought up the New Orleans situation.

As I was reading some of the initial responses, I was going to reference the fact that police in the town of New Orleans have had a less than stellar reputation, largely due to corruption, for a number of years.

I have a good friend who is a police sergeant, and also runs a volunteer search and rescue unit. He was down in New Orleans during Katrina, in a Search and rescue capacity, not that of a law-enforcement officer. He met a lot of good officers down there; perhaps your son was one of them.

Sent from my iPhone using Survival Forum


----------



## Padre

camo2460 said:


> Well here we go again, another cop bashing, witch hunt based on ignorance, misinformation, and lack of education. We should all move to Salem, Mass. so we can be properly burned at the stake, hanged, or pressed.


I actually had hoped to suggest that one method of being prepared is staying engaged particularly in local politics. SENTRY's photo from the 1920s ignores the fact that the article laments the militarization of small town police departments and the use of military tactics to execute warrants that do not in any way require swat tactics.

Anyway...SWAT teams may be a foregone conclusion in cities, and perhaps with cause, and I don't mind the state patrol having a few HRTs stationed to provide support when needed but most of us live in small towns or unincorporated areas of counties and in these localities our voices can be raised to oppose purchasing or being gifted tanks and the like.

Apart from bad cops, a large part of how people act is influenced by they way they imagine themselves. If, as we all know, dressing up some wahoo in camo and giving them a "assault weapon" poses a risk for the mental sanity of us preppers, why shouldn't it pose the same threat to cops?

Up here some locals have taken to protesting the acceptance of armored cars and the like. If your small town police department doesn't have a SWAT team, and your county sheriff doesn't have a ESU, it is VERY unlikely that you are going to get a accidental knock on the door from a HRT with a no-knock warrant. And if your Sheriff knows how your community feels about such non-sense he might be very hesitant to sign on to the Feds executing this type of warrants.

Also, as the article notes civil forfeiture laws are bad news and need to be opposed, and again we are the ones to do it. As preppers we are already on the radar of the alphabet soup folks, political involvement is preemption and the best defense. That's prepping, I think.

I did like the Salem reference though as I grew up in old salem...


----------



## Dakine

lotsoflead said:


> *I'm 59 years old. I have a lot of experience to draw from so though it doesn't happen every day there have been enough bad experiences to sour me on the status of some LEO's. Because bad cops don't wear a sign around their neck it means that each encounter is indeed like Russian Roulette because I don't know who is good and who is not.
> *
> 
> I'm 75 and they're all bad when in a group, have you ever seen a cop step in and tell another cop to lay off or lighten up when some thug cop keeps putting someone down or demeaning them. I know some cops that are almost human when alone, but when with another cop, the real person comes out.


Yes. Yes, I have.

I'm riding to work (I used to ride a super sport bike as my only commute) and I'm rolling along, another beautiful morning in SoCal... and there's a bunch of cops on the right side of the road, and a tow truck... my guess is an accident. (bunch = 3 or 4 cars and 3 or 4 bikes) but there was no broken glass, debris or any kind of hazard so I never even thought about slowing down.

One of the cops, (one of the motors units guys!!!) literally jumped out in front of me!!!!! scared the shit out of me, I locked up the brakes and almost did a stoppie trying not to hit him or get run over by traffic in the lane to my left and pulled past him and parked.

He walks up to my all nonchalant and says something like "hello, are you having a nice day?" and I said "I was until you pulled that stunt..."

He asked me "do you know how fast you were going?" and I said "Yes sir, I was going 55"

He asked me "do you know the speed limit on this road?" and I said "Yes sir, it's 55"

And then he SCREAMED AT ME "NO!!!! IT'S 35!!!"
And I replied "NO SIR!!!! There's a SIGN... BACK THERE!!!!"

because I knew what he wanted to do, write me for 55 before I actually passed the 55 sign which was about 100 feet up the road, what he didn't remember was... ehhhh his memory sucks and the 55 zone starts about a half mile back where my sign was...

because I was absolutely insistent and polite, I saw the look on his face... everything was changing and he was not happy about being there anymore...

He yelled out to one of his buddies "Douglas, what's the speed limit here?" and his buddy did the 5-5 with open fingers... and then went back to writing.. I dunno, whatever he was writing, and there were concerned disapproving looks all around by all of the officers...

brainfart officer tried to cover his ass saying "yeah they must have just changed it..." and I was thinking.. "Yeah, SEVEN years ago maybe before I was riding this piece of road???"

but I put my hand out, and he shook it, and that was it... I started up again and took off.

He made a few mistakes that morning, and I'm glad it didn't go bad. Jumping in front of traffic is a no-no, a badge does not make someone impervious to 600 lbs of moving machine+rider. I could have been hit by traffic behind me since I had to make a panic stop, he really did leap right into the lane in front of me...

He tried that stunt in front of his buddies and got the walk of shame after realizing he was being a d-bag. sorry bro... you made it happen, not me 

"they" are not all bad when in a group... but depending on the circumstances, they may be inclined to fall into a habit of automatically assuming the initiating officer was 100% right from the git-go.

If I was a cop in gang land, would I be following my brothers lead first time every time? HELL YES!!!! but when dummy jumps into traffic, his buddies gave the frowny face and harsh looks!


----------



## Geek999

That one fits the idiot category.


----------



## Coastal

What about these guys in Albuquerque? Someone posted this video last night on another forum, they seriously look like untrained militia types rather than professional LEO to me.


----------



## tenntrucker

Another thing to consider, if you are not doing anything wrong a good cop isn't going to bother you. But you still could be harassed my bad cop looking to start something.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Survival Forum mobile app


----------



## Geek999

tenntrucker said:


> Another thing to consider, if you are not doing anything wrong a good cop isn't going to bother you. But you still could be harassed my bad cop looking to start something.
> 
> Sent from my SCH-I535 using Survival Forum mobile app


Or have a run in with an idiot. I'm convinced much of what goes wrong is the result of stupidity. The combination of stupidity with a gun and a badge is a recipe for problems.


----------



## BillS

I fail to understand how the cops here can refuse to admit any cop anywhere is wrong in anything he does. They always blindly defend them no matter what.

I have an associate degree in accounting. I've seen first hand how even CPA's will accept a client's fraudulent data and use it to produce a tax return. And then be willing to sign that return as a preparer and, with that signature, swear that it's complete and accurate. I'm sure any objective person would be the first to admit that there are bad apples in their profession that give everyone in that profession a bad name.

I was a security guard off and on, full or part time for over ten years. I swear that half of the guards stole stuff. Some would take only specific things that they wanted. Others would take anything that wasn't nailed down. I never took a single thing without a permission slip. Even if it was in the garbage.


----------



## PopPop

Coastal said:


> What about these guys in Albuquerque? Someone posted this video last night on another forum, they seriously look like untrained militia types rather than professional LEO to me.


There is no defense for what happened here. This was Murder.


----------



## NaeKid

> Householders, on hearing the door being smashed down, sometimes reach for their own guns. In 2006 Kathryn Johnston, a 92-year-old woman in Atlanta, mistook the police for robbers and fired a shot from an old pistol. Police shot her five times, killing her. After the shooting they planted marijuana in her home. It later emerged that they had falsified the information used to obtain their no-knock warrant.


I just had to look up this info ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathryn_Johnston_shooting



> *Kathryn Johnston (June 26, 1914 - November 21, 2006)* was an elderly Atlanta, Georgia, woman who was shot by undercover police officers in her home on Neal Street in northwest Atlanta on November 21, 2006, where she had lived for 17 years. Three officers had entered her home in what was later described as a 'botched' drug raid. Officers cut off burglar bars and broke down her door using a no-knock warrant. Police said Johnston fired at them and they fired in response; she fired one shot out the door over the officers' heads and they fired 39 shots, five or six of which hit her. None of the officers were injured by her gunfire, but Johnston was killed by the officers. Police injuries were later attributed to "friendly fire" from each other's weapons.
> 
> One of the officers planted marijuana in Johnston's house after the shooting. Later investigations found that the paperwork stating that drugs present at Johnston's house, which had been the basis for the raid, had been falsified. The officers later admitted to having lied when they submitted cocaine as evidence claiming that they had bought it at Johnston's house. Three officers were tried for manslaughter and other charges surrounding falsification and were sentenced to ten, six, and five years.


Wow ... :eyebulge:

Its one thing to say "ooopss .. made a mistake" and another to say "oopps .. how do we cover this up so that no-one ever finds out" ...


----------



## Coastal

tenntrucker said:


> Another thing to consider, if you are not doing anything wrong a good cop isn't going to bother you. But you still could be harassed my bad cop looking to start something.
> 
> Sent from my SCH-I535 using Survival Forum mobile app


Kind of like that Black fellow that had his dog shot when he was trying to video tape an altercation in his neighborhood.


----------



## GlockASP

*murder*



PopPop said:


> There is no defense for what happened here. This was Murder.


I have to agree with this statement 100%.

From what I saw on that video, that was murder plain and simple. 

If I am not mistaken one of the officers had a less then lethal option on him and it was not used.


----------



## Coastal

I don't understand why they couldn't taze the camping guy, or hit him with the bean bags first. Pretty messed up.

How about Ian Birk from Seattle? The guy that shot the Native wood carver?


----------



## Geek999

Coastal said:


> I don't understand why they couldn't taze the camping guy, or hit him with the bean bags first. Pretty messed up.
> 
> How about Ian Birk from Seattle? The guy that shot the Native wood carver?


Knives are illegal in NJ.


----------



## PopPop

GlockASP said:


> I have to agree with this statement 100%.
> 
> From what I saw on that video, that was murder plain and simple.
> 
> If I am not mistaken one of the officers had a less then lethal option on him and it was not used.


They used the LTL on the guy after they killed him.


----------



## *Andi

Coastal said:


> What about these guys in Albuquerque? Someone posted this video last night on another forum, they seriously look like untrained militia types rather than professional LEO to me.


Thanks for posting ... Some how that did come up in my daily news search!


----------



## Dakine

BillS said:


> *I fail to understand how the cops here can refuse to admit any cop anywhere is wrong in anything he does. They always blindly defend them no matter what.*
> 
> I have an associate degree in accounting. I've seen first hand how even CPA's will accept a client's fraudulent data and use it to produce a tax return. And then be willing to sign that return as a preparer and, with that signature, swear that it's complete and accurate. I'm sure any objective person would be the first to admit that there are bad apples in their profession that give everyone in that profession a bad name.
> 
> I was a security guard off and on, full or part time for over ten years. I swear that half of the guards stole stuff. Some would take only specific things that they wanted. Others would take anything that wasn't nailed down. I never took a single thing without a permission slip. Even if it was in the garbage.


That's not true, I dont have a link to it, but I recall a specific post Sentry made about an officer under his command that tried to flash his badge after being pulled over for A. some kind of traffic violation, I think it was speeding, but that's fuzzy memory, and B. NOT having a motorcycle endorsement for his drivers license.

Sentry brooked no shit... and some guy somewhere had a bad day with his boss, and then some discipline on top of it.

So, I mean that's just off the top of my head, whether or not any of the LEO's respond here or not, the basic premise that they ignore or absolve this is not true.

Security guards are not police officers, they do not have the screening, the training or the discipline. I don't see that as being anything even close to an apples and apples discussion and I think it would only be tangents that are quoted that have nothing to do with someones concerns on LEO's. thats just me...


----------



## lotsoflead

Dakine said:


> Yes. Yes, I have.
> 
> and I said "Yes sir, it's 55"
> 
> And then he SCREAMED AT ME "NO!!!! IT'S 35!!!"
> And I replied "NO SIR!!!! There's a SIGN... BACK THERE!!!!"


something I would never do to a cop is call them sir, I don't mind anyone being my equal, but I treat no one as a superior, although I have not spoke to any LEO in over 30 yrs.


----------



## Geek999

I always let the LEO speak first. If he calls me sir or is otherwise respectful, it is an indication that we may get through the exchange without me filing a complaint.


----------



## Turtle

lotsoflead said:


> something I would never do to a cop is call them sir, I don't mind anyone being my equal, but I treat no one as a superior, although I have not spoke to any LEO in over 30 yrs.


Would you mind explaining why you would never call a cop, "sir"? I am rather curious as to your reasoning, as I fail to see how that is treating anyone as your superior. I call anyone who is being polite to me "sir" or "ma'am", regardless of age, rank, or authority.

As a matter of fact, last night my wife and I were going through the drive-through of a Chick-fil-a. The young man at the window was exceedingly polite and friendly, and i made a point of calling him "sir", twice. I remarked to my wife that when I encounter people for whom the bar is usually set low for expectation of polite behavior, I like to be extra respectful, in hopes that positive reinforcement of that behavior will encourage them to keep it up.

I believe that to be a simple matter of basic human decency to be polite to people, regardless of their station in life.

Sent from my iPhone using Survival Forum


----------



## Turtle

BillS said:


> I fail to understand how the cops here can refuse to admit any cop anywhere is wrong in anything he does. They always blindly defend them no matter what.
> 
> I have an associate degree in accounting. I've seen first hand how even CPA's will accept a client's fraudulent data and use it to produce a tax return. And then be willing to sign that return as a preparer and, with that signature, swear that it's complete and accurate. I'm sure any objective person would be the first to admit that there are bad apples in their profession that give everyone in that profession a bad name.
> 
> I was a security guard off and on, full or part time for over ten years. I swear that half of the guards stole stuff. Some would take only specific things that they wanted. Others would take anything that wasn't nailed down. I never took a single thing without a permission slip. Even if it was in the garbage.


If someone could tell BillS to stop blocking anyone with whom he disagrees, he may see that "the cops here" have never blindly defended anyone, especially other cops. We are hard on our own because the bad ones make us all look bad.

Sent from my iPhone using Survival Forum


----------



## Turtle

Coastal said:


> What about these guys in Albuquerque? Someone posted this video last night on another forum, they seriously look like untrained militia types rather than professional LEO to me.


I actually meant to post a link to this the other day, but got distracted by my daughter and, well, she is more important than the Internet. 

The audio isn't working on that video (for my phone, at least) but I read a transcript of the interaction the other day, so I can piece together what happened.

I know that the individual had a history of violence and attacks against police officers, so I have no problem with the advantage of numbers. I understand that he was making threats against them, so I can even understand their desire to weapons at hand in case the guy pulled a gun. Better to be prepared than not, and action is always faster than REaction.

HOWEVER...

Based on that video, I don't see why that was necessarily a "shoot" situation. In my mind, based on the facts that I have, arm-chair quarterbacking, I do not see why they fired on him. He was not displaying any weapons, and verbal threats alone are not a reason to fear for your life. The guy was clearly nuts, so I could maybe see an argument being made for a decision to subdue him to take him in for a mental evaluation as a possible threat to himself or others, but it seems that no attempt was made to subdue.

Seems pretty clear to me that it was a bad shoot.

Sent from my iPhone using Survival Forum


----------



## lazydaisy67

I don't get why having an opinion about, or pointing out that there are bad cops means you believe EVERY cop is bad. Obviously not all cops are bad, but there are a growing number who are and I don't think it's a bad thing to call attention to it. The old saying of "If you're not doing anything illegal, then you don't have anything to be afraid of" is really patronizing. 
There are definitely 'bad guys' out there, but not every single citizen is lying, guilty of something, trying to hide a fugitive, cooking something illegal in their kitchen or transporting drugs. 
I've said it before and I will say it again, most (not every) cops scare me. Not because I'm doing illegal things all day every day, but because I believe that they believe that I am guilty of SOMETHING.


----------



## Geek999

Turtle said:


> If someone could tell BillS to stop blocking anyone with whom he disagrees, he may see that "the cops here" have never blindly defended anyone, especially other cops. We are hard on our own because the bad ones make us all look bad.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Survival Forum


Actually, there have been examples of cops being disciplined, but there has also been a lot of "you don't know unless you've been an LEO" or "you don't know because you weren't there" sort of defensiveness in cases where the LEO behavior would seem excessively violent or unprofessional to any normal person.

The latter arguments come across to the non-LEOs as covering for bad cops, particularly to those of us that are law abiding citizens that have had bad experiences with copsor experienced refusals to investigate complaints against LEOs.

I'd feel better about LEOs if we heard a couple "a SWAT raid for barbering without a license is stupid. Somebody screwed up." Or "Beating up a 84 YO jaywalker certainly deserves an internal investigation." From the LEOs. The absence of such comments is as negative as the defensive comments that are made.

Overall, I would say that LEO commentary on this forum has caused me to think well of some individual LEOs, but it has also lowered my opinion of LEOs in general. When you consider that I am probably the person most often called a "cop basher" or something similar, lowering my opinion of the entire profession says something about the manner in which the LEOs are responding.

So why does this matter on a prepper forum? The answer is that it matters how rapidly we will devolve into WROL when the system is stressed by a disaster. If people don't trust the police, and I certainly do not, then we will collapse into an LA riots or Katrina situation much more easily than if trust in LEOs was high.


----------



## lotsoflead

Turtle said:


> Would you mind explaining why you would never call a cop, "sir"? I am rather curious as to your reasoning, as I fail to see how that is treating anyone as your superior. I call anyone who is being polite to me "sir" or "ma'am", regardless of age, rank, or authority.
> I believe that to be a simple matter of basic human decency to be polite to people, regardless of their station in life.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Survival Forum


 I really don't know why I'm replying to your question but I do not and have not called anyone sir since I left the Army. I don't have to suck up to my friends and certainly am not going to people that I don't know, and I do not want anyone to sir me. just speak flat out, no beating around the bush with a lot of sirs, pleases, thank you. ect.

* I believe that to be a simple matter of basic human decency to be polite to people, regardless of their station in life. *

you have your beliefs and I have mine.


----------



## Turtle

lotsoflead said:


> I really don't know why I'm replying to your question but I do not and have not called anyone sir since I left the Army. I don't have to suck up to my friends and certainly am not going to people that I don't know, and I do not want anyone to sir me. just speak flat out, no beating around the bush with a lot of sirs, pleases, thank you. ect.
> 
> * I believe that to be a simple matter of basic human decency to be polite to people, regardless of their station in life. *
> 
> you have your beliefs and I have mine.


Well, I appreciate your answering my question, as it was honestly asked and honestly answered.

I don't agree with you, but as you say, we all hold our own beliefs, and for our own reasons.

Sent from my iPhone using Survival Forum


----------



## mosquitomountainman

lotsoflead said:


> something I would never do to a cop is call them sir, I don't mind anyone being my equal, but I treat no one as a superior, although I have not spoke to any LEO in over 30 yrs.


I tend to use "sir" and " ma'am" with strangers. It's a little more polite than " hey, you!"


----------



## Turtle

Geek999 said:


> Actually, there have been examples of cops being disciplined, but there has also been a lot of "you don't know unless you've been an LEO" or "you don't know because you weren't there" sort of defensiveness in cases where the LEO behavior would seem excessively violent or unprofessional to any normal person.
> 
> The latter arguments come across to the non-LEOs as covering for bad cops, particularly to those of us that are law abiding citizens that have had bad experiences with copsor experienced refusals to investigate complaints against LEOs.
> 
> I'd feel better about LEOs if we heard a couple "a SWAT raid for barbering without a license is stupid. Somebody screwed up." Or "Beating up a 84 YO jaywalker certainly deserves an internal investigation." From the LEOs. The absence of such comments is as negative as the defensive comments that are made.
> 
> Overall, I would say that LEO commentary on this forum has caused me to think well of some individual LEOs, but it has also lowered my opinion of LEOs in general. When you consider that I am probably the person most often called a "cop basher" or something similar, lowering my opinion of the entire profession says something about the manner in which the LEOs are responding.
> 
> So why does this matter on a prepper forum? The answer is that it matters how rapidly we will devolve into WROL when the system is stressed by a disaster. If people don't trust the police, and I certainly do not, then we will collapse into an LA riots or Katrina situation much more easily than if trust in LEOs was high.


There are some things which I feel should go without saying are bad, and shouldn't require all of the LEOs on this site to affirm in order for it to be understood that we would not accept that behavior.

For example; I believe it has been shown in the past that Sentry is a good and fair man who holds his people accountable for their actions. "Faithful in little, faithful also in much", anyone? If he would not tolerate one of his people driving on an invalid license, why would he tolerate the accidental shooting of an elderly lady and the subsequent attempt to frame her? Any rational, thinking person can see that that is wrong and illegal. Nobody has disputed that. Would it make you feel better if we all simply jumped in say, " yeah! Execute the bad cops!"? Just because we don't all jump on the bandwagon doesn't mean that we don't agree. If someone is posting a question about what to put in their bug-out bag, if someone has already covered everything I would say, why would I bother posting to say, "yeah, me too. ".

We sometimes go on the defensive to explain things which may be unknown by those not in law enforcement. Many stories lack context which we can provide, which would otherwise seem excessive.

Geek (and please know that I intend no offense), I certainly do not think that your opinion is at all indicative of the general opinion of police officers in this country. I encounter a lot of people on a regular basis, and I would say that your stance is in the minority. I don't say that to trivialize your opinion, but I say that to convey that cops are not so universally hated and feared as you might suspect.

Sent from my iPhone using Survival Forum


----------



## FatTire

Anytime I get pulled over, I start out with "Hey Ponch, wheres Jon?"


----------



## Geek999

Turtle said:


> There are some things which I feel should go without saying are bad, and shouldn't require all of the LEOs on this site to affirm in order for it to be understood that we would not accept that behavior.
> 
> For example; I believe it has been shown in the past that Sentry is a good and fair man who holds his people accountable for their actions. "Faithful in little, faithful also in much", anyone? If he would not tolerate one of his people driving on an invalid license, why would he tolerate the accidental shooting of an elderly lady and the subsequent attempt to frame her? Any rational, thinking person can see that that is wrong and illegal. Nobody has disputed that. Would it make you feel better if we all simply jumped in say, " yeah! Execute the bad cops!"? Just because we don't all jump on the bandwagon doesn't mean that we don't agree. If someone is posting a question about what to put in their bug-out bag, if someone has already covered everything I would say, why would I bother posting to say, "yeah, me too. ".
> 
> We sometimes go on the defensive to explain things which may be unknown by those not in law enforcement. Many stories lack context which we can provide, which would otherwise seem excessive.
> 
> Geek (and please know that I intend no offense), I certainly do not think that your opinion is at all indicative of the general opinion of police officers in this country. I encounter a lot of people on a regular basis, and I would say that your stance is in the minority. I don't say that to trivialize your opinion, but I say that to convey that cops are not so universally hated and feared as you might suspect.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Survival Forum


I don't want to pick on Sentry. I belive he is actually trying to do what is right. However, since you bring him up, he is one to use the excuses of "you weren't there so you can't draw conclusions" etc.

When no LEO is willing to say "beating up an 84yo Jaywalker deserves investigation" but we do get a "you can't draw conclusions" then it certainly looks like closing ranks from here, so yeah someone does need to voice the opinion that such an incident deserves investigation and if it turns out to be as it appears then the LEOs involved need to be disciplined in some way.

BTW: We have discussed the 84yo jaywalker and if any LEOs expressed the opinion I just expressed I missed it, leaving me with the impression that the LEOs in general here approve of such conduct.

Is that the impression you want me, and others, to have? That is the impression I get from these dialogs.

Each LEO here is an individual and there are differences from individual to individual. Sentry is one of the better participants, so I apologize for picking on him, but I think this stuff needs to be understood if we are ever going to progress.


----------



## LincTex

FatTire said:


> Anytime I get pulled over, I start out with "Hey Ponch, wheres Jon?"


A lot of the youngest cops would have no idea who you were referring to....


----------



## FatTire

More than one LEO here has stated that we the people lack any foundation to form an opinion on LEO conduct. We simply lack the experience, therefore if we conclude that beating a jaywalker to death, or probing the rectum of a speeder on the side of the road, are things the cops shouldnt be doing, well thats just the uninformed invalid opinion of mere civillians. 

This seems to be pretty typical of those in law enforcement. Most seem to have an 'us vs them' mentality. Cant say I blame em, though. The good cops must close ranks given the system we have. There are too many laws, too much of the 'war on drugs', and too many idiot judges siding with criminals taking away the right of decent folks to defend themselves, the system is just too broken in too many ways, the 'us vs them' mentality, the militarization of police, these are symptoms of a sick and failing system.


----------



## Turtle

Geek999 said:


> I don't want to pick on Sentry. I belive he is actually trying to do what is right. However, since you bring him up, he is one to use the excuses of "you weren't there so you can't draw conclusions" etc.
> 
> When no LEO is willing to say "beating up an 84yo Jaywalker deserves investigation" but we do get a "you can't draw conclusions" then it certainly looks like closing ranks from here, so yeah someone does need to voice the opinion that such an incident deserves investigation and if it turns out to be as it appears then the LEOs involved need to be disciplined in some way.
> 
> BTW: We have discussed the 84yo jaywalker and if any LEOs expressed the opinion I just expressed I missed it, leaving me with the impression that the LEOs in general here approve of such conduct.
> 
> Is that the impression you want me, and others, to have? That is the impression I get from these dialogs.
> 
> Each LEO here is an individual and there are differences from individual to individual. Sentry is one of the better participants, so I apologize for picking on him, but I think this stuff needs to be understood if we are ever going to progress.


I certainly wasn't picking on Sentry; I single him out because I know that he is in a supervisory role and supports my point that we take these things seriously.

Again, i don't think that any rational human being can say that an 84-year-old man needs to be executed on the scene for jaywalking.

HOWEVER....

I don't know all of the facts in that case. I think that a lot of times (not necessarily in this one), the cops on this forum have said something to the effect of, "don't jump to conclusions until we know all of the facts. ". Remember, the shooter at the Holocaust Museum was in his seventies or eighties; that story could be spun so that, at first blush, people would wonder why it was necessary to shoot somebody's grandfather.

There is a well-known case where dash cams from two different police cars show a very different story: from one angle (the last unit on the scene), it looks like police shoot an unarmed young man in front of a convenience store. From the other car, you can follow the car chase, bailout, and see the kid from the front, pulling a gun from his waistband after repeatedly being told to put his hands up. Guess which one hit the news programs first?

So, yeah, a lot of these stories are clearly cut and dried. Shooting Granny and planting weed? Bad. Shooting crazy hiker? Looks bad to me. Sometimes, however, we need to be careful that we are not whipped into a lynch-mob mentality by sensationalistic media. Likewise, we need to be careful that we question the information that is handed to us by our superiors. I once questioned an interpretation of a law and got a policy changed. It happens.

The point is, zealots of any stripe are delusional. Cops that blindly trust only other cops? They have a warped world view. Citizens that blindly hate all cops? They have a warped world view. Most people fall somewhere in the middle... Just be careful not to tread to close to the edge.

Sent from my iPhone using Survival Forum


----------



## Turtle

FatTire said:


> More than one LEO here has stated that we the people lack any foundation to form an opinion on LEO conduct. We simply lack the experience, therefore if we conclude that beating a jaywalker to death, or probing the rectum of a speeder on the side of the road, are things the cops shouldnt be doing, well thats just the uninformed invalid opinion of mere civillians.
> 
> This seems to be pretty typical of those in law enforcement. Most seem to have an 'us vs them' mentality. Cant say I blame em, though. The good cops must close ranks given the system we have. There are too many laws, too much of the 'war on drugs', and too many idiot judges siding with criminals taking away the right of decent folks to defend themselves, the system is just too broken in too many ways, the 'us vs them' mentality, the militarization of police, these are symptoms of a sick and failing system.


I think it is quite a stretch to say that we have ever said that anyone "lack any foundation to form an opinion on LEO conduct. ". Obviously, you, as a human being, have life experiences from which you can draw any number of conclusions and opinions. What we have attempted to do, is correct misconceptions and supply knowledge where there is none.

In some cases, people have come to incorrect conclusions based on limited knowledge. In others, their previously held opinions have colored their judgment of facts. And, yes, in some cases, our experiences as police officers trump whatever opinions an armchair quarterback may have. That is not police arrogance, that is simply the fact of human experience. I would not presume to tell a computer programmer how to install software; such is not my realm of expertise. I would not presume to tell a CPA how to file taxes. The difference is, I acknowledge that I know nothing about these things. If an expert in one of these things were to correct my misconceptions, I would thank them for clearing up my misconception. Unfortunately, many of the times that we have attempted to do this, our responses fall on deaf ears.

I just don't understand why people are so closed to hearing an opinion other than their own and refuse to accept that they may not know everything.

What if we were talking about computer programmers, and I were to say that they're all scrawny white kids under the age of 25 who live in their parents' basements and play World of Warcraft in all of their spare time? What if then, a forum member who happens to be a computer programmer were to say, "no, that is not the case. I am none of those things."? Is my opinion more valid than his? Given that he is one of the chosen subjects and more knowledgable? Am I more of an expert because I knew two guys like that?

Let's all listen to what each other have to say, and try to learn something from one another. After all, isn't that really why we are all on the site?

Sent from my iPhone using Survival Forum


----------



## Geek999

Turtle said:


> I think it is quite a stretch to say that we have ever said that anyone "lack any foundation to form an opinion on LEO conduct. ". Obviously, you, as a human being, have life experiences from which you can draw any number of conclusions and opinions. What we have attempted to do, is correct misconceptions and supply knowledge where there is none.
> 
> In some cases, people have come to incorrect conclusions based on limited knowledge. In others, their previously held opinions have colored their judgment of facts. And, yes, in some cases, our experiences as police officers trump whatever opinions an armchair quarterback may have. That is not police arrogance, that is simply the fact of human experience. I would not presume to tell a computer programmer how to install software; such is not my realm of expertise. I would not presume to tell a CPA how to file taxes. The difference is, I acknowledge that I know nothing about these things. If an expert in one of these things were to correct my misconceptions, I would thank them for clearing up my misconception. Unfortunately, many of the times that we have attempted to do this, our responses fall on deaf ears.
> 
> I just don't understand why people are so closed to hearing an opinion other than their own and refuse to accept that they may not know everything.
> 
> What if we were talking about computer programmers, and I were to say that they're all scrawny white kids under the age of 25 who live in their parents' basements and play World of Warcraft in all of their spare time? What if then, a forum member who happens to be a computer programmer were to say, "no, that is not the case. I am none of those things."? Is my opinion more valid than his? Given that he is one of the chosen subjects and more knowledgable? Am I more of an expert because I knew two guys like that?
> 
> Let's all listen to what each other have to say, and try to learn something from one another. After all, isn't that really why we are all on the site?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Survival Forum




FatTire is paraphrasing not quoting, but I'd have to agree with him about how things come across.

As for the merits of not knowing all the facts, do you think we are all idiots? Of course we don't know all the facts, but when something looks as dicey as many of these cases do, then an investigation needs to occur. If the investigation reveals something different than the initial appearances then it should come out.

Situations like the 84yo jaywalker, followed by the Chief of Police, who also wasn't there and didn't know any more than anyone else, immediately defending the cops in a situation that certainly looks bad, followed by LEOs here going "you don't know all the facts" looks like a coverup to me. That incident needs an investigation and at this point I would no longer trust LEOs to conduct that investigation. I've seen nothing that indicates it is being investigated, but the 84yo has filed a civil suit so maybe more will come out.

If the Chief of Police had said "we intend to investigate" and the LEOs here said "it needs to be investigated" we'd be having a different discussion at this point, but that isn't the way these dialogs have gone.

BTW: thanks for trying.


----------



## FatTire

I guess I just really doubt that the member programmer would insist that the rest of us lack a relevant frame of reference to judge wether or not infecting systems with viruses that result in fatal traffic accidents is wrong. The good programmers wouldnt close ranks with the bad ones...


----------



## Geek999

FatTire said:


> I guess I just really doubt that the member programmer would insist that the rest of us lack a relevant frame of reference to judge wether or not infecting systems with viruses that result in fatal traffic accidents is wrong. The good programmers wouldnt close ranks with the bad ones...


But shouldn't we automatically trust the brave and noble programmers?

(Sorry, I couldn't resist.).


----------



## lotsoflead

FatTire said:


> Anytime I get pulled over, I start out with "Hey Ponch, wheres Jon?"


I make it a point not to get pulled over, with these new school cops since 9/11,actually they started shaving their heads and wearing the dark "shades" about when Nam was winding down, it doesn't much for a conservation to turn into a confrontation. Old school cops from when I was young could make a decision, usually, it was, "go on home".if I need you, I'll see you tomorrow,, today they want to arrest everyone for anything and have to call a supervisor or some sgt. who is in the middle of his meal and the sgt. has to call some DA who was just elected and wants to make a federal case out of everything.


----------



## Turtle

lotsoflead said:


> I make it a point not to get pulled over, with these new school cops since 9/11,actually they started shaving their heads and wearing the dark "shades" about when Nam was winding down, it doesn't much for a conservation to turn into a confrontation. Old school cops from when I was young could make a decision, usually, it was, "go on home".if I need you, I'll see you tomorrow,, today they want to arrest everyone for anything and have to call a supervisor or some sgt. who is in the middle of his meal and the sgt. has to call some DA who was just elected and wants to make a federal case out of everything.


Most of that behavior has come about as a result of our society becoming so overly litigious. It comes down to a matter of liability: if we stop someone for swerving, decide that they may have had one too many but they are probably okay, next thing you know, they run a bus full of orphans and nuns off the road and it's the officer's fault because he "made a decision" and told him to "go on home". It's one big game of CYA.

Case in point: this actually happened to me. I make contact with a vehicle sitting on the side of the road on a stretch clearly marked "no stoping any time". Nice young couple, trying to find the airport to return their rental car and get on their plane back to California. I ask for the driver's license, he looks sheepish, and says, "I actually left it in California." I ask the girl if she has one, she hands it to me, I go back to the car to run it and the driver's info to be sure he has a valid license. Well, my guy on the radio says that NCIC is running slow, not pulling a response out of California. I know that these two are running late for their flight, so I say screw it, tell them to switch drivers and be on their way. About ten minutes later, I hear back that the girl's is valid but the guy's is suspended. I tell them, too late, I cut them loose. My idiot lieutenant hauls me into his office, demanding to know why I didn't hold them long enough to get an answer and cite him. I told him, "officer's discretion. I made the call. " This started the trend of why my lieutenant hates me, by the way.

So, I got in trouble for making that call. In reality, it could have been something really serious. He could have had a warrant out for armed robbery. I had no way of knowing, and not following procedure can get people hurt. In the end, it was my call to make and I stood by it.

Sent from my iPhone using Survival Forum


----------



## FatTire

lotsoflead said:


> I make it a point not to get pulled over, with these new school cops since 9/11,actually they started shaving their heads and wearing the dark "shades" about when Nam was winding down, it doesn't much for a conservation to turn into a confrontation. Old school cops from when I was young could make a decision, usually, it was, "go on home".if I need you, I'll see you tomorrow,, today they want to arrest everyone for anything and have to call a supervisor or some sgt. who is in the middle of his meal and the sgt. has to call some DA who was just elected and wants to make a federal case out of everything.


Just to be clear, that was a joke, I Havent been pulled over in a decade or more...


----------



## Geek999

Turtle said:


> Most of that behavior has come about as a result of our society becoming so overly litigious. It comes down to a matter of liability: if we stop someone for swerving, decide that they may have had one too many but they are probably okay, next thing you know, they run a bus full of orphans and nuns off the road and it's the officer's fault because he "made a decision" and told him to "go on home". It's one big game of CYA.
> 
> Case in point: this actually happened to me. I make contact with a vehicle sitting on the side of the road on a stretch clearly marked "no stoping any time". Nice young couple, trying to find the airport to return their rental car and get on their plane back to California. I ask for the driver's license, he looks sheepish, and says, "I actually left it in California." I ask the girl if she has one, she hands it to me, I go back to the car to run it and the driver's info to be sure he has a valid license. Well, my guy on the radio says that NCIC is running slow, not pulling a response out of California. I know that these two are running late for their flight, so I say screw it, tell them to switch drivers and be on their way. About ten minutes later, I hear back that the girl's is valid but the guy's is suspended. I tell them, too late, I cut them loose. My idiot lieutenant hauls me into his office, demanding to know why I didn't hold them long enough to get an answer and cite him. I told him, "officer's discretion. I made the call. " This started the trend of why my lieutenant hates me, by the way.
> 
> So, I got in trouble for making that call. In reality, it could have been something really serious. He could have had a warrant out for armed robbery. I had no way of knowing, and not following procedure can get people hurt. In the end, it was my call to make and I stood by it.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Survival Forum


This gets back to the idea of "knowing all the facts". Everyone, including LEOs, make judgement calls based on incomplete information, routinely. You made a call and it turned out to be wrong, though ultimately no damage was done.

Sometimes those judgement calls can wind up with somebody dead and for that reason we need people with better than average judgement as LEOs. With our 84yo jaywalker the LEO claimed the old man pushed him. Somehow I find that less than credible. More likely the 84yo tapped him on the shoulder to get his attention, or maybe the 84yo just tripped. The LEO then makes a judgement call that he is in a violent confrontation, rather than recognizing the situation for what it is.

That would be bad enough, but now we have the NYPD Chief of Police in an apparent coverup (more bad judgement at best) and a widespread sense that as a random individual walking down the street you can be beaten up and arrested for no apparent reason.

The right response is first investigate, then if the LEO has made a bad judgement deal with it appropriately. In your case it sounds like your boss was right to criticize, but is making another bad judgement by not recognizing that you see that and letting it go.

Unfortunately, what we see is a beating of an 84yo jaywalker, with no investigation, blatant coverup, and the jerks responsible are back on the streets to do it again to some other sucker. Judgement that appalling is incompatable with the job.

Then we come on this forum to have some other forum member saying we can't make a judgement call because we don't know all the facts? Who made LEOs into gods where they get to beat or shoot people with impunity based on a snap judgement, but we can't have an opinion and express it on the Internet based on imcomplete facts?

I think you get it, but I'm not 100% on that. I am not as confident of any other LEO on the forum. I think most are in the "protect their brother cop no matter what asinine thing he's done" mode. That's the hole that keeps getting deeper.

BTW: will you at least agree that 84yo jaywalker case deserves a serious investigation? So far I don't think any LEOs here have agreed to that. You did make a comment about not executing a 84yo jaywalker, but the guy is still alive as far as I know and suing NYC fir $5 million. Personally I hope he gets it.


----------



## tenntrucker

Funny, but sometimes true.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Survival Forum mobile app


----------



## Turtle

More like:









Sent from my iPhone using Survival Forum


----------



## Dakine

Geek999 said:


> Actually, there have been examples of cops being disciplined, but there has also been a lot of "you don't know unless you've been an LEO" or "you don't know because you weren't there" sort of defensiveness in cases where the LEO behavior would seem excessively violent or unprofessional to any normal person.
> 
> The latter arguments come across to the non-LEOs as covering for bad cops, particularly to those of us that are law abiding citizens that have had bad experiences with copsor experienced refusals to investigate complaints against LEOs.
> 
> I'd feel better about LEOs if we heard a couple "a SWAT raid for barbering without a license is stupid. Somebody screwed up." Or "Beating up a 84 YO jaywalker certainly deserves an internal investigation." From the LEOs. The absence of such comments is as negative as the defensive comments that are made.
> 
> Overall, I would say that LEO commentary on this forum has caused me to think well of some individual LEOs, but it has also lowered my opinion of LEOs in general. When you consider that I am probably the person most often called a "cop basher" or something similar, lowering my opinion of the entire profession says something about the manner in which the LEOs are responding.
> 
> So why does this matter on a prepper forum? The answer is that it matters how rapidly we will devolve into WROL when the system is stressed by a disaster. If people don't trust the police, and I certainly do not, then we will collapse into an LA riots or Katrina situation much more easily than if trust in LEOs was high.


I dont agree...

first, I think it's unreasonable to assume or even wish that people we know are LEO on this forum to respond to posts that are negative or positive about... LEO in general or even in specifics...

I have the benefit of a lot of free time and I still dont read half of the forums and posts I'd like to, I think it's impossible to assume that someone I want a reply from is magically going to see the thread and reply. And maybe they saw the thread and said to themselves.. I'm not getting sucked into this, I'm gonna go play with my kids...

I'm good with that... know what I mean?

Also, I don't think this being a prep forum means anything one way or the other on WROL when it comes to faith in your immediate and local LEO... if we suddenly transition from "today" to a WROL... the cops are outnumbered by like 1000:1 at best, and someones faith in LE in general is not a valid model to subscribe to...

because I hypothetically generally trust or distrust LEO is not going to help keep me and my family/friends/group/neighbors any safer, my ability to stop a thug trying to kick in my door will keep my family safe. Trusting the LEO has nothing to do with what is happening on my porch when they are busy trying to figure out how many are able to even respond to the rally point much less combat crime...

See what i mean? it just doesnt fit. Yeah I get you dont feel you need them to rescue you, neither do I... I just don't see that it's relevant in perception of LEO trust to safety and how fast we decline in WROL... the thugs dont care if you trust LEO or not, they are going hunting...

right?


----------



## Dakine

FatTire said:


> I guess I just really doubt that the member programmer would insist that the rest of us lack a relevant frame of reference to judge wether or not infecting systems with viruses that result in fatal traffic accidents is wrong. The good programmers wouldnt close ranks with the bad ones...


Sure... except me and my buddies aren't riding around in Inglewood/Watts/Crenshaw/Rampart/you-pick-it!!! at midnight pulling over a car where the driver is speeding, swerving, and the plate doesn't match the car make/model. Or maybe the plate does match and the owner is convicted felon wanted on ???

We don't have air support and pull people over and say... do you realize you missed a semi-colon!!!

Because what we do... we review log files, we respond to cyber crimes, we call the FBI, well... we call our boss who calls his boss who calls his boss, and he calls the FBI (I've been part of this a couple times)... we make a new firewall rule and block all of .ru or all of .ch or all of whatever... and then we see if the bot army died or we still have a problem, and then we go back to sleep because tomorrow morning is now closer than it was when we first tried that 

None of that involved a foot chase, a fist fight, a knife fight, a gun fight or any other physical confrontation with people who generally do NOT G.A.F.

See what I mean?

So just to review... the guy in the cube next to me is doing dodgy stuff? yeah, if I think he's exposing my company to risk I'm going to drop a dime on him RTFN... the guy in the seat next to me when I'm dealing with those *******es listed above on a daily basis...

I'm really glad I'm not in that position to be making those kinds of decisions with the consequences they involve, and I truly feel horrible for people that are good that are put into that position through no fault of their own.

life is imperfect


----------



## FatTire

Ive said several times that I thinks its necesary for cops to think the way they do given the way the system is... you know, several decaf brands taste just as good as the real thing....


----------



## Geek999

Dakine said:


> I dont agree...
> 
> first, I think it's unreasonable to assume or even wish that people we know are LEO on this forum to respond to posts that are negative or positive about... LEO in general or even in specifics...
> 
> I have the benefit of a lot of free time and I still dont read half of the forums and posts I'd like to, I think it's impossible to assume that someone I want a reply from is magically going to see the thread and reply. And maybe they saw the thread and said to themselves.. I'm not getting sucked into this, I'm gonna go play with my kids...
> 
> I'm good with that... know what I mean?
> 
> Also, I don't think this being a prep forum means anything one way or the other on WROL when it comes to faith in your immediate and local LEO... if we suddenly transition from "today" to a WROL... the cops are outnumbered by like 1000:1 at best, and someones faith in LE in general is not a valid model to subscribe to...
> 
> because I hypothetically generally trust or distrust LEO is not going to help keep me and my family/friends/group/neighbors any safer, my ability to stop a thug trying to kick in my door will keep my family safe. Trusting the LEO has nothing to do with what is happening on my porch when they are busy trying to figure out how many are able to even respond to the rally point much less combat crime...
> 
> See what i mean? it just doesnt fit. Yeah I get you dont feel you need them to rescue you, neither do I... I just don't see that it's relevant in perception of LEO trust to safety and how fast we decline in WROL... the thugs dont care if you trust LEO or not, they are going hunting...
> 
> right?


When we have one of these threads and half a dozen LEOs do answer but the answers all boil down as defending what appears to be eggregious behavior and not one says investigate the matter, then I think we have a sample of LEO opinion.

What I have seen on this forum causes me to trust LEOs less than before and as you know I don't trust LEOs even as much as the random guy on the street.

As for WROL, nothing breaks down immediately. How quickly you would abandon the job will vary, but let's say we are 3 days in. LEO shows up at the door. What does that homeowner do?

1000:1 ratio means nothing if 999 trust cops. Of course if the bulk of the population distrusts cops you are in real trouble.


----------



## lotsoflead

*first, I think it's unreasonable to assume or even wish that people we know are LEO on this forum to respond to posts that are negative or positive about... LEO in general or even in specifics...
*
I think there are people here and other forums that are LEO but do not advertise it, what could be the reason for getting on a forum other than a cops forum and tell your occupation unless you're looking for high fives or thumbs up every time you make a post, or you want to intimidate people into not disagreeing with you.


----------



## Turtle

lotsoflead said:


> *first, I think it's unreasonable to assume or even wish that people we know are LEO on this forum to respond to posts that are negative or positive about... LEO in general or even in specifics...
> *
> I think there are people here and other forums that are LEO but do not advertise it, what could be the reason for getting on a forum other than a cops forum and tell your occupation unless you're looking for high fives or thumbs up every time you make a post, or you want to intimidate people into not disagreeing with you.


.... Or you are trying to share information and perspectives which other people may not have? Or you see no reason to hide what you do for a living because you are not ashamed of it?

I don't see any reason why most people would hide their chosen profession. Though I firmly believe that I work to live, not live to work, but a person's chosen line of work does say something about themselves.

I'm sorry that your world view is so negative, LotsOfLead. Things are not as bad as you fear.

Sent from my iPhone using Survival Forum


----------



## Geek999

lotsoflead said:


> *first, I think it's unreasonable to assume or even wish that people we know are LEO on this forum to respond to posts that are negative or positive about... LEO in general or even in specifics...
> *
> I think there are people here and other forums that are LEO but do not advertise it, what could be the reason for getting on a forum other than a cops forum and tell your occupation unless you're looking for high fives or thumbs up every time you make a post, or you want to intimidate people into not disagreeing with you.


The fact is they do respond and some of us actually listen to what they have to say. If they don't respond, then they don't respond. That's their choice.

I daresay that many of the "cop bashing" threads are started by cops who are trying to post something positive about cops and the thread then goes where it goes.

For those who didn't notice, I just agreed with Turtle.


----------



## lotsoflead

Geek999 said:


> The fact is they do respond and some of us actually listen to what they have to say. If they don't respond, then they don't respond. That's their choice.
> 
> I daresay that many of the "cop bashing" threads are started by cops who are trying to post something positive about cops and the thread then goes where it goes.
> 
> For those who didn't notice, I just agreed with Turtle.


you can have the police forum, I'll come back when it's about survival and not your life as a cop.


----------



## Geek999

lotsoflead said:


> you can have the police forum, I'll come back when it's about survival and not your life as a cop.


In case you haven't figured it out. I am not a cop.


----------

